2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the

Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 7, Number 3

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M204 — Stream Diversion Amendment Act, 2009

M. Sather

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Olympic spirit in Comox Valley

D. McRae

Remembrance Day and war veterans

B. Simpson

KidSport B.C. program

G. Hogg

J. Horgan

Activities of 4-H in B.C.

D. Barnett

Early childhood programs in Revelstoke

N. Macdonald

Oral Questions

Access to influenza vaccines for paramedics

S. Simpson

Hon. K. Falcon

J. Brar

A. Dix

Economic benefits of Olympic Games

J. Kwan

Hon. C. Hansen

B. Ralston

Comptroller general report on TransLink and B.C. Ferries

H. Bains

Hon. S. Bond

M. Farnworth

Grizzly bear population on north coast

G. Coons

Hon. B. Penner

Petitions

D. Black

J. Brar

D. McRae

L. Krog

A. Dix

R. Chouhan

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 21 — Ambulance Services Collective Agreement Act (continued)

C. Trevena

D. Thorne

D. Donaldson

J. Kwan

S. Simpson

S. Herbert

M. Mungall

D. Black

J. Horgan

S. Hammell

R. Austin

Speaker's Statement

Use of exhibits in debates

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development

Hon. M. Polak

M. Karagianis

S. Herbert

[ Page 2015 ]

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2009

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

R. Cantelon: It is indeed my pleasure and privilege to introduce over 80 guests joining us in the gallery today. They are the constituency assistants for the Liberal caucus. They're a group of hard-working, dedicated people who are committed to providing service to the constituencies in which they live.

They've been here for a day and a half to compare notes and commiserate and learn better how to address the many varied needs — and they are varied — over a wide range of queries that they get in their offices, to learn better how to support and serve the constituents. Let's give them all a very, very warm welcome.

[1335]

J. Horgan: I have a number of introductions to make as well today. Joining us in the gallery is a friend of mine, Ann Noble, who is participating in the parliamentary procedure workshop here in the Legislature, where public servants are learning about the legislative process — how cabinet works, Treasury Board, and so on.

Also joining us today to observe the debate on Bill 21 are two paramedics from my constituency, Nora Lowden and Tanya Bellagente.

Would the House please make all three of these women welcome.

Hon. M. Polak: Today in the gallery I am joined by my brother, Carl Inkman, and his son, my nephew, Elijah Needham. Would the House please make them welcome.

K. Conroy: Today it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce Leo Gerard, the international president of the United Steelworkers. Leo has been a friend of ours for over 20 years and a great supporter of both my husband Ed's and my political career.

I think this last year Leo lived every political junkie and sports fan's dream. He was very involved in the election of Barack Obama and continues to be one of the few Canadians who is consulted by the president's office.

Living in Pittsburgh, he has been involved in charity work with the Pittsburgh Steelers and was very happy to celebrate with the team as they won the Super Bowl. But every Canadian hockey fan's dream would be when he celebrated with Mario and the Pittsburgh Penguins and their win of the coveted Stanley Cup.

As a Canadian son of a union miner, who calls Sudbury home when he isn't in Pittsburgh, Leo is recognized internationally for his work in many different areas, including social justice, the environment and, of course, issues that affect working people.

His passion about the environment and his commitment to ensure a better world for his kids, and now grandkids, has led to an unusual but very successful alliance with the environmental and union movements in both the U.S. and Canada.

As international president, Leo has championed alliances with unions throughout the world, including Germany, Austria, Brazil and Mexico. His international work has culminated in the creation of the first global union, Workers Uniting, with Unite the Union, the United Kingdom's largest labour organization.

This year he was recognized for his contributions to social justice and was awarded an honorary doctor of laws degree from the University of Guelph.

Would the House please join me in welcoming Dr. Leo Gerard.

D. Hayer: It gives me great pleasure to introduce 66 grade 5 students visiting from one of the best schools in Canada, Surrey Christian middle school, which is in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead. Joining them are four teachers — Erica Fernhout, Grace Entenule, Kelly Blackmore and Jackie Hofstede — as well as 15 very hard-working parents and volunteers who have taken time out of their busy

schedule to accompany the students here, who are learning how the government works, because one day they will be leaders of this province, and they might be Premier or Prime Minister or MLAs or MPs. Would the House please make them very welcome.

G. Coons: I'd like to welcome and introduce two constituents and friends of mine. Tiffany Fulmer was born and raised in Prince Rupert. She just graduated from UBC with a bachelor of arts and is planning to return to UBC next year, in the education faculty.

With her is her father, Michael Fulmer, who recently retired. He's in Victoria to receive his 35-year service award from the province of British Columbia. He became a lawyer in Prince Rupert in 1971 and is the serious-crime prosecutor for the north. He's been involved in more than 40 murder trials, the last major trial being a first-degree murder with no body, with a conviction that was upheld in the Supreme Court of Canada — a major accomplishment.

The assistant commissioner of National Security Criminal Investigations, Bob Paulson, sums it up: "Michael has a distinguished career. I have learned a lot from Michael not just about the law and the rules of evidence but about courage, professionalism, duty, tenacity and, most importantly, right and wrong."

[ Page 2016 ]

Please make Tiffany and her father, Michael, welcome.

L. Reid: Mr. Speaker, on your behalf I would like to take this opportunity to welcome a group of public servants seated in the gallery. They are participating in a full-day parliamentary procedure workshop offered by the Legislative Assembly. The workshop provides a firsthand opportunity for the public service to gain a greater understanding of the relationship between the work of their ministries and how that work affects this Legislature. Would the House please make them very welcome.

[1340]

B. Routley: It is indeed a delight to welcome to this House Debra Toporowski, my constituency assistant, and her mom and family: Ethel Jack, Linda Wong and Cassandra Joe.

Ethel Jack is a member of Cowichan Tribes, and she's here to measure up some people for Cowichan sweaters. Being an equal opportunity employer, I'm happy to invite anyone that's interested to drop by if you'd like to be measured up for a beautiful Cowichan sweater.

G. Hogg: We are joined in the House today by four athletically challenged individuals who are here to talk to us about KidSport. They are compassionate, caring individuals who understand the opportunities that are provided to youth through sport. Would the House please welcome Paul Varian, the CEO of Sport B.C.; Rick Christiaanse, the vice-president of Sport B.C.; Bart Given, the director of marketing and communication; and Pete Quevillon, the director of KidSport and the gentleman who has perhaps the worst jumpshot of all of them.

Would the House please make them welcome.

R. Cantelon: I wanted to pass on a message from the Minister of Education. I spoke with her yesterday. She's recovering well at home. She sounded bright and cheerful and wishes to return soon to work and appreciates all the messages of support and encouragement that she's received from members of the House.

Hon. S. Thomson: In the gallery today are 11 leaders and members of the South Malahat 4-H District Council, led by their president Erin Campbell. I'm very pleased to have them in the gallery today for a proclamation proclaiming today as 4-H Day in British Columbia. I'd just like to read the proclamation.

WHEREAS agriculture producers and land are vital to the health and well-being of British Columbians; and

WHEREAS the sustainability and viability of the industry is paramount to its success and ability to feed future generations; and

WHEREAS a key concern across the sector is succession planning and ensuring new entrants; and

WHEREAS British Columbia 4-H groups work to engage more than 2,300 youth across the province in agricultural practices and education; and

WHEREAS 4-H programs and volunteers create awareness of the importance of agriculture to all British Columbians; and

WHEREAS 4-H programs help to develop community awareness, leadership abilities and new skills through 24 projects for youth ages 6-21; and

WHEREAS 4-H has demonstrated an ability to engage British Columbia youth in agriculture for over 95 years; and

WHEREAS Our Lieutenant Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Executive Council, has been pleased to enact Order in Council 903 on October 11, 2002; NOW KNOW YE THAT We do by these presents proclaim and declare that November 4 th , 2009, shall be known as "B.C. 4-H Day"

I'd like the members to make all the representatives from the 4-H program welcome in the House today.

Hon. K. Falcon: Today is the 15th annual national Take Our Kids to Work Day. Although I don't have any kids to take to work today, I am working on that, as you know, Mr. Speaker.

Fortunately, some good friends of mine, John and Lesley Vickerstaff, have loaned me their daughter Kennedy Vickerstaff, who is like a daughter to me too. She's a wonderful young lady. She's here today in the gallery, and I would like the House to please make her welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL M204 — STREAM DIVERSION

AMENDMENT ACT, 2009

M. Sather presented a bill intituled Stream Diversion Amendment Act, 2009.

M. Sather: I move that a bill intituled Stream Diversion Amendment Act, 2009, be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

M. Sather: This bill amends the Water Act to ensure that a water licence granted to divert water from a stream for agricultural purposes will maintain the minimum flow of water required to protect fish or wildlife. Farmers must have water to grow their crops. However, we must ensure that fish and wildlife are given adequate protection in the process.

We are all aware of the recent tragedy of diminished salmon stocks. This bill will assist in continuing legitimate agricultural production while protecting fish and wildlife.

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

[1345]

Bill M204, Stream Diversion Amendment Act, 2009, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

[ Page 2017 ]

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

OLYMPIC SPIRIT IN COMOX VALLEY

D. McRae: Today is an exceptionally special day here in British Columbia. Today we count down 100 days until the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Last Monday the Comox Valley hosted the 2010 Torch Relay. It was so inspiring to see members of my community join together in celebration and support of our torchbearers and athletes. At first sight of the torchbearers, you couldn't help but feel an overwhelming sense of pride and honour to be Canadian. I want to say thank-you to the Comox Valley spirit committee and the hard work they have done to help our region realize the sport, social and economic potential the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games bring to British Columbia.

I want to say thank you to Susan Kelsey, who chairs the Comox Valley spirit committee. As a former Olympian and medal winner, she has the experience, the energy and the passion to help the community realize the potential the games could offer.

I want to say thank you to Mount Washington. They were quick to realize that their facility has similar elevation, temperature and snow conditions as the venues in Whistler. They worked hard with non-profit groups such as the Comox Valley Economic Development Society to attract public and private investment to the ski hill. They saw that the Olympics could be a catalyst to bring teams to train here and build a national and international awareness of what the hill offers for both downhill and Nordic activities.

The Comox Valley sent community, business and political leaders both to Torino and Beijing to build relationships. I'm pleased to say that for their hard work, it has paid off. At least 12 teams, over 400 athletes, their coaches and the attached media are coming to the Comox Valley prior to the Olympic Games. Their teams and their nations' media will raise national and international awareness of British Columbia and the Comox Valley to heights never before felt possible.

Our local spirit committee has done so much. We are now in the final push to take advantage of the greatest marketing and inspirational vehicle in the history of humankind. I ask the House to join me in thanking the Comox Valley spirit committee for what they have accomplished in the past six years, for what they have done is a truly lasting legacy.

REMEMBRANCE DAY AND WAR VETERANS

B. Simpson: In 1974, I was leading a group of young soldiers when one of my squad tripped a wire, causing a gas canister to explode. As we all scrambled to get our gas masks on, we came under attack from sniper fire, and I yelled at everyone to get into the ditch at the side of the road.

I vaguely recall diving through the air while trying to get my gas mask on and my rifle up to the ready position. My more vivid memories are of being shaken awake by one of my squad members and severely reprimanded by my training officer because I had banged my head on a log and knocked myself unconscious during the action, leaving my squad leaderless.

Every Remembrance Day I reflect on this event in my brief time in the Canadian navy. I think about the thousands of veterans for whom such an event was not an exercise. The gas was not white smoke but a deadly and debilitating toxin, and the bullets were not made of rubber and shot over their heads. They were projectiles aimed to maim and kill.

For too many young men and women, their first experience of combat was their last. The survivors lost friends, lost their leaders and forever lost their innocence as they put their lives on the line for the values we hold dear and, unfortunately, we now too often take for granted.

Next week on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month we will once again remember the dead and honour our living veterans and the men and women who are still in harm's way on foreign soils. As MLAs we will have opportunities to help our constituents reflect on the role our military played and continues to play in protecting democratic rights and freedoms. We will also have opportunities to deglorify war and violence in the minds of our young people who see war through the lens of a video game.

But every member of this House can best show respect for our veterans by ensuring we jealously guard and protect the freedoms and rights they fought for. In their honour, we must be forever vigilant in this House and fight against anything that would undermine our democratic institutions.

[1350]

KIDSPORT B.C. PROGRAM

G. Hogg: An 11-year-old boy wrote this letter:

Dear KidSport:

Thank you very much, KidSport, for supplying me with hockey gear. I love the game of hockey, and I think it is an awesome program. I have two older brothers in hockey, and we all play around. My mom has two jobs so that we can stay in hockey. She works really hard, so this is a good thing for her and for us.

P.S. I made the peewee rep team.

Sincerely,

Trevor

The KidSport motto is: "So all kids can play." Since 1993 it has been providing support to financially disadvantaged

[ Page 2018 ]

kids so that they can do just that. From its inspired and humble beginnings right here in B.C., it has grown to 177 chapters across Canada. This year KidSport will assist over 6,000 kids to get into the game.

Those who dream of scoring a goal, hitting a home run, taking one for the team or just making new friends will be given that opportunity through KidSport.

Benefits such as setting goals, working hard, learning from others, sharing and staying positive despite adversity — these are just some of the skills learned every day in sports venues across our province through the process of sports.

The lessons enable us to make healthy lifestyle choices, to meet challenges and to work together. Sport skills are life skills, and KidSport is leaving a human legacy of community

chapter volunteers in 40 B.C. communities, chapters that will support many kids who will be inspired by the Olympics.

I ask this Legislature to congratulate and thank KidSport, its volunteers and its sponsors and to encourage all communities to become KidSport communities so that all kids can play.

J. Horgan: I rise to join with my colleague from Surrey–White Rock to endorse and speak in favour of KidSport B.C. I do it for Peter, who is in the crowd, the executive director. For the record, I don't think the member for Surrey–White Rock could get his jumpshot over top of me even if he had a stair to stand on. But I'll leave that.

As we prepare for the Olympic Games 100 days from now with the coming together of elite athletes from around the world, it is very important that we remember there are children in the communities right across B.C. who don't have the resources to play every day. I was one of those kids. As a young child I wasn't able to play hockey or lacrosse until later in life. I played games that you had shoes for, like basketball or soccer, where you had a pair of boots. That was the extent of the expenditure that we could make in our house.

In 2005 the Victoria Foundation established that one in five children in the greater Victoria area live below the poverty line. That's why it's so important that in 1993, in that decade of a previous government, B.C. Sport established KidSport so that all kids could play, so that those less fortunate could have access to team sports, so that they could learn the benefits of cooperation, determination, personal sacrifice and taking one for the team.

I know I join with my colleague from Surrey–White Rock again in urging all members of this place to go back to their home communities, look up the local

chapter of KidSport, see what they can do to promote and advertise this great program that provides every kid in the community an opportunity to enjoy the benefit and value of sport.

A hundred days away from the Olympics, a real legacy for the kids of British Columbia living below the poverty line would be massive investment in KidSport. I encourage all members to follow my lead and the lead of my colleague from Surrey–White Rock and do just that.

ACTIVITIES OF 4-h IN b.c.

D. Barnett: Today, as the minister has said, we celebrate 4-H Day in British Columbia. Since 1914, 4-H has been about young people, parents and other interested adults working together for the benefit of youth, family and community. Some 2,350 youth across B.C. are developing leadership abilities, new skills and learning something about themselves.

The 4-H has some 24 different projects and four age groups: Cloverbuds, six- to eight-year-olds; junior members, nine- to 12-year-olds; senior members, 13- to 19-year-olds; and special projects for 20- to 21-year-olds. Fourteen 4-H members from British Columbia have been awarded 4-H scholarships totalling over $24,000 to assist in their post-secondary education.

In the Cariboo-Chilcotin we are proud of our 4-H organizations — Williams Lake, Lone Butte and the Canim Lake band to mention a few. Parents, 4-H leaders and community members have come together to assist our young people in their endeavours.

[1355]

From raising a steer — a sale in Williams Lake brings a great price — to pride and the opportunity to learn about their animals, to respect and social development and marketing skills. To those 4-H'ers who take public speaking, grow vegetables, knit or do one of the many opportunities for 4-H youths, you are all achievers. To the volunteers, leaders and sponsors of 4-H, you are to be congratulated.

I will leave you with a 4-H pledge that I took from a 4-H website. It says: "My head to clear thinking, my heart to greater loyalty, my hands to larger service and my health to better living for my club, my community and my country."

EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAMS

IN REVELSTOKE

N. Macdonald: Revelstoke has much to be proud of, but recently an exceptional accomplishment made news across British Columbia. Using the measurement called the early learning development instrument, Revelstoke was recognized as doing the best job in the province in preparing children for kindergarten.

Revelstoke is a community with a population of 9,000 and is situated 200 kilometres from a major centre. It is a community whose citizens rely on each other to make things happen. This top-place ranking is a true indication of the strength of this community.

Tracy Spannier is the director of the Revelstoke Early Childhood Development Committee, which consists of 22 community partners. The committee meets regularly to coordinate early childhood programs and talk through the best ways to overcome challenges.

[ Page 2019 ]

This coordinated effort begins at birth, when the public health nurse delivers to new parents a package which contains a list of services and information, a children's calendar and a directory of child care options. Child development in Revelstoke continues with a full range of preschool services including resource libraries, parenting workshops, play groups and an amazing CCRR office.

Providing this level of support for young children takes time and resources and a strong commitment from people who are passionate about early learning. It recognizes Revelstoke's strong belief that investing in children is the wisest investment we can make.

Tracy Spannier sums it up very nicely when she said: "You don't get a result like this without having families that are really involved with their children and being able to access programs and services. Revelstoke is a great place to raise kids."

I ask the House to join me in congratulating Revelstoke's accomplishment and to recognize all partners in the Early Childhood Development Committee in Revelstoke.

Oral Questions

ACCESS TO INFLUENZA VACCINES

FOR PARAMEDICS

S. Simpson: Mr. Speaker, the Health Minister has been telling us that the reason he's used Bill 21 to try to force a contract on paramedics is to deal with the H1N1 pandemic. However, we now know that the government doesn't have a coherent plan at this time for those front-line paramedics to get vaccinations themselves.

Elizabeth Grant is one of 22 child and maternal critical care paramedics who work every day with late-trimester pregnant women, premature babies and children with serious health conditions. Yet there is no coherent plan for her to get vaccinated. While she's at Children's and Women's Hospital every day, they wouldn't vaccinate her because she's not a direct hospital employee. Meanwhile, the Ambulance Service runs some limited clinics that don't work for many paramedics' schedules.

My question to the minister is: how can British Columbians have confidence in his ability to manage H1N1 when he can't get together a plan to vaccinate critical health personnel like Ms. Grant?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member should know that the decisions made, in terms of who are the priorities in terms of the health sector for receiving vaccinations, thankfully, are not decisions made by politicians but are in fact decisions made by health professionals under the leadership of our chief provincial health officer.

You know, Mr. Speaker, the paramedics provide very important services. We know that. So do firefighters. So do police officers. So do a whole range of folks right across the public safety system and the health system.

But it is the medical health officers that are determining what the level of priority should be for those in the health profession. At this point they are looking at those that work in intensive care units, emergency departments, and those that are dealing with mothers and prenatal care. I have to continue to be guided and will be guided by the direction of those very experienced medical health officers in British Columbia.

[1400]

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: The minister's trying to tell us here that people like Ms. Grant, who deal with critical health care issues every day — with pregnant women, with babies, with children — are not essential health care workers. Is that what the minister wants us to believe?

Meanwhile, in the Comox Valley, Bill Coltart along with other part-time paramedics have been told that they're not considered emergency health care workers either, and they're not eligible for any priority vaccination. Does this minister have any explanation for the inept manner in which so many paramedics aren't getting access to vaccinations when they are the front-line health workers who should be?

Hon. K. Falcon: Yesterday it was the NDP member for Surrey-Fleetwood determining what the priorities of H1N1 vaccinations should be. Today, apparently, the member for Vancouver-Hastings has picked up the mantle and decided that he knows a lot more than the medical health professionals in this province about how to undertake a mass immunization program.

We have always been very clear. This is the largest vaccination program in the history of the province. By the end of this week fully 20 percent of the population will have been vaccinated. They are the most at-risk populations that are most at risk of severe health or possibly even death. They are also making decisions about which health professionals and which order in which those health professionals will receive vaccinations.

I appreciate that the member for Vancouver-Hastings wants to take it upon himself to become the expert in making those decisions. I disagree with that. It is the chief provincial health officer and medical health officers across the province appropriately making those decisions, and I will continue to back them as they make those decisions.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a further supplemental.

S. Simpson: What I would like is for the Health Minister to show one shred of leadership when it comes to this issue. Critical health care workers — no support for them at all, no support at all.

These workers provide essential services.

[ Page 2020 ]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

S. Simpson: These workers provide essential services. This government, this minister have a responsibility to show some leadership, but there are no plans for Ms. Grant, no plans for Mr. Coltart or many of their colleagues to get the vaccinations they need to be able to do the job on behalf of British Columbians.

How is it that front-line ambulance paramedics have become an afterthought for this government when it comes to H1N1?

Hon. K. Falcon: There could not be a starker contrast between the NDP opposition and this government in terms of how to handle this. There could not be a starker contrast, because if you listen to that member, what that member is saying is that politicians should insert themselves and interfere with the appropriate oversight of a national pandemic.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, the members are getting excitable again.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: They call this leadership. I call it interference. It's inappropriate. We are going to allow the proper medical professionals to lead and oversee this vaccination program. That's what they're doing.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Brar: My message to this minister is very simple. Stop hiding behind the provincial health officer. Stop hiding. The people of British Columbia are looking for leadership.

[1405]

Again to the minister: can the minister explain why this government does not have a coherent strategy to vaccinate paramedics and other health care workers against the H1N1 flu virus?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'd be interested in hearing what medical school the member opposite went to that apparently informs him to such an extent that he wishes the government to actually overrule decisions made by medical health professionals. I would be interested in hearing that.

What I can tell you is that it is the medical health professionals that are looking at the fact that we don't, at this point, have unlimited supplies of vaccine. What they are doing with the supplies of vaccine that have been made available through the federal government and their manufacturer is making sure that those are distributed in priority. Priority means that not everybody gets it at once. That means that even in the health care sector, they will prioritize based on those they believe need to get the vaccinations first and then move along the chain of health care professionals.

That does not mean that the paramedics are not important, that firefighters or police officers are not important. They're all very important. But the important issue here is that we stand beside and behind our medical health professionals as they make those decisions in the best interests of public health.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member has a supplemental.

J. Brar: My other message to this minister is this. Queue jumping is not acceptable to the people of British Columbia. That's what we are asking. Hockey players are being given priority over groups like paramedics and other health care workers who are designated to be at higher risk for H1N1. We hear that a minor professional hockey team has got drive-through access to the H1N1 vaccine, and this government is not ruling out NHL players receiving it before designated high-risk groups.

This does not follow national guidelines of who should be receiving the vaccine at this stage. So again to the minister: can the minister tell this House why British Columbia is not following the agreed upon national protocols for the H1N1 vaccine?

Hon. K. Falcon: I, too, saw that media report. I'm very concerned whenever I hear there's any example or case of a group that is not taking their time and waiting in line, as other healthy British Columbians are, while those with chronic health conditions are being dealt with.

I spoke to the chief provincial officer about that situation that the member mentions — a professional minor hockey team. He will be speaking directly to the physician and trying to understand what the medical rationale was for providing vaccinations to a sports team before those that are at risk, and we'll wait to get that information before we can comment fully on it.

[ Page 2021 ]

A. Dix: The issue with Elizabeth Grant is that she is eligible to get the vaccine, but the B.C. Ambulance Service isn't properly organized to get her the vaccine. That's the issue with Elizabeth Grant.

The issue with the hockey team is…. Last night the minister responsible, the Minister for Healthy Living, was asked directly: "Should hockey players go to the front of the queue?" The answer to that question, by the way, is no. But what was her answer? "I believe that what is important is that those who need access to this vaccine to mitigate the possible spread will be looked at by our health experts." In other words, an incoherent response.

Clearly, from what Dr. Kendall says…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: …professional hockey players are not at the front of the list. Now, the Alberta government dealt with the situation with an investigation, and it's already taken action with respect to the vaccination of the Calgary Flames.

[1410]

Will the Minister of Health launch an investigation today to restore confidence that those who should be getting the vaccine first get the vaccine first?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member might be surprised to find that we're in agreement on the issue and the principle that of course professional sports teams should not be getting vaccinations before those that are at risk. But one of the things I said to the member opposite is that it is important we make sure we have all the facts before we jump to a conclusion.

I have spoken to the chief provincial health officer, who will be speaking directly to the physician that made that decision to make sure that that physician has a medical rationale for making a decision like that.

But let's be clear. The member for Surrey-Fleetwood talked about standards. There are not only national standards; there are B.C. guidelines that are also in place that state very clearly that at-risk populations are to be vaccinated first. It does not include, generally speaking, professional sports teams unless there's a medical rationale, and at this point, I don't know that. When I get that, I'll share that with the member.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

A. Dix: Now we're making progress. We've moved from the position of the Minister of Healthy Living last night to the position of the Minister of Health today. So we're making progress on that line so that we can be clear about this.

The question is very straightforward with respect to the Ambulance Service. In this case Elizabeth Grant is waiting to get that vaccine. I think the minister and I probably would agree that she should get that vaccine. I think, clearly, she meets the criteria set out by Dr. Kendall and the other medical health officers. I think that's pretty clear.

Will the Minister of Health investigate today why the B.C. Ambulance Service is not ensuring that Elizabeth and other ambulance paramedics like her get the vaccine?

Hon. K. Falcon: I've already answered this question on a number of occasions. I'll answer it for the member again.

These decisions and how the vaccinations are being rolled out and undertaken, including with health professionals, are being undertaken under the direction of a nationally and internationally recognized individual. That's Dr. Perry Kendall.

Now, I recognize that the members opposite want to be wannabe physicians for a day. But the reality is that these decisions are best overseen by medical professionals. That's exactly what's happening. I support them as they do that.

It does not mean that the individual that you cited, or paramedics generally, are not important. It just means that in an era of limited vaccines, they're trying to do it in a manner that is rolled out thoughtfully, safely and appropriately, and I back them up on that.

ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF OLYMPIC GAMES

J. Kwan: Just last week the Minister of Small Business backed off of the government's previous claims around the economic benefits of the games. He lopped $6 billion off what the Finance Minister was telling British Columbians they could expect to see as the economic spinoff before the election.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. Why the change?

Hon. C. Hansen: I was listening intently to the member's question, but I didn't quite get the point of the question. Perhaps she could restate it for me.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm restating my first question for the minister, and then I have a supplemental. Let me just repeat for the minister.

Just last week the Minister of Small Business backed off of the government's previous claims around the economic benefits of the games. He lopped $6 billion off of what the Minister of Finance was telling British Columbians they could expect to see in economic spinoff before the election. The question to the Minister of Finance: why the change?

[ Page 2022 ]

Hon. C. Hansen: We know that the Olympic Games are going to be a huge economic stimulus for British Columbia. We know that already it has resulted in the creation of thousands of jobs in British Columbia. We're going to see thousands more jobs created as we count down the next 100 days to the games.

[1415]

We will see tens and tens of thousands of jobs in British Columbia that will be created because of the profile that we get as a result of hosting the games in February-March of next year.

There have been several economic analyses done. Some of them look at the direct benefits of the games. Some look at the more broad benefits of the games, including indirect spinoffs, and they are literally in the billions and billions of dollars.

Mr. Speaker: Based on the fact you did repeat the first question, I will allow the member a supplemental.

J. Kwan: Well, British Columbians want the games to be successful, and on this side of the House…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, just take your seat for a second.

Continue, Member.

J. Kwan: …the meaning of success includes the concept of honesty, transparency and accountability. Last February the public affairs bureau started to back off from the $10 billion figure for economic impacts of the games, yet the Finance Minister continued to use that figure. He even used it in his pre-election budget speech.

All British Columbians deserve to know the truth. Whether it's the government's plan to distribute Olympic tickets, the actual cost of the Olympic Games or the calculations of the impacts of the games, this government is quick to hide the truth.

Why did the minister give British Columbians one set of numbers before the election and another set of numbers after the election?

Hon. C. Hansen: The fact of the matter is that the Olympics are going to generate billions and billions of dollars of economic activity for the province of British Columbia. Now, I know that there is some frustration on the part of the official opposition that the Olympics are the making of a huge success story for British Columbia.

We know that the Olympics are going to launch British Columbia into the next decade by putting this province on the world stage and by attracting the world's interest in terms of a tourism destination, in terms of an investment destination, in terms of a place where people and skilled workers from around the world are going to want to come and live and raise their families in the decades to come.

The Olympics are going to produce billions and billions of dollars of economic benefit for this province. On this side of the House we support that, we're proud of it, and we're going to make it the biggest success ever.

B. Ralston: The Minister of Finance speaks about billions and billions of dollars, but my question demands a little bit more precise answer from a finance minister. In his budget speech on February 17 he spoke of a $10 billion economic impact of the games. Last week the Minister of Small Business spoke of a $4 billion economic impact of the games. Now, simple math — that's a $6 billion downgrade.

Can the minister explain that difference? I think that's the question that British Columbians are asking.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. We're not going to start until….

Hon. C. Hansen: As I mentioned earlier, there are several studies that have been done that look at the games from different perspectives. But if you look at just the spending budget of VANOC itself — about $1.7 billion — the vast, vast majority of that is coming from non-taxpayer sources. Just that infusion of $1.7 billion of money into the B.C. economy is a big chunk of the direct benefit.

[1420]

Now, you can add to that the amount of money that the various corporate sponsors are going to be spending in this province.

What they have paid into VANOC as their sponsorship rights is just basically the cost of admission. You'll find that most of those corporate sponsors have significant budgets that they're going to be spending in the province of British Columbia during that period of time.

You could look at it from another perspective, in terms of all the spinoff benefits, in terms of the economic activity that's going to be generated through our restaurants, our hotel industries, our hospitality sector and our taxicabs which are all going to be reaping the benefit of the 250,000 visitors that will be coming to this province.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: Last week the Minister of Small Business said the games would have a $4 billion economic impact. The minister's own public affairs bureau — he's the minister responsible for it — told their officials to use the figure of $4 billion.

[ Page 2023 ]

The minister seems to be dancing all over the place in terms of coming up with a figure. How does he explain the difference between the $10 billion economic impact he spoke of in the budget in February, the single most important economic document the government lays before the public, and what the minister said last week of $4 billion — a $6 billion difference?

Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, I'm surprised that as the opposition critic for the Ministry of Finance, he's not aware of the responsibilities of the Minister of Finance, which does not include the public affairs bureau.

Secondly, if you look at all of the reports that are coming out by the leading Canadian economists, they were actually forecasting that in 2010 British Columbia is going to be in either first or second place in terms of economic growth in Canada.

When you read the various analyses that those economists have put forward, they flag the fact that we are hosting the Olympics next year as one of the reasons why British Columbia is going to lead Canada in terms of economic growth.

When you actually reflect on the fact that just today Moody's Investors Service came out with a report reconfirming British Columbia's triple-A credit rating…. In Moody's statement today they said this: "The province's track record in managing fiscal pressures and the significant debt reduction achieved in recent years has put British Columbia in a strong position to face current fiscal challenges."

The addition of the Olympics will help that.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT

ON TRANSLINK AND B.C. FERRIES

H. Bains: That's not the only information this government is hiding from the taxpayers. The Minister of Transportation has had the comptroller general's report into TransLink and B.C. Ferries since October 30 but is still sitting on the report. This report is not the personal property of this minister or of this government.

My question is to the minister. Will the minister commit to releasing the comptroller's report into TransLink and B.C. Ferries today?

Hon. S. Bond: This government is very proud of its record on transportation and infrastructure in British Columbia, and we're happy to talk about it any single day.

The member opposite is correct. The comptroller general has finished her work. She has done an exceptional job. We've committed to make it public, and I can assure the member opposite that, in fact, the release of that report is imminent.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[1425]

H. Bains: The minister commissioned this report back in July. She has had the final report for over a week now. If she won't table the report today, I ask the minister again: what does she have to hide? Why can't she release the report when the House reconvenes after next week?

Hon. S. Bond: We are very pleased with the work that the comptroller general has done. We made a commitment to release the report publicly, and I can assure the member opposite that we have had…. Actually, I think it was last Thursday that we received the report from the comptroller general. We look forward to releasing it in the very near future.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Farnworth: The minister looks forward to releasing the report imminently. Will she confirm that she will at least release the report before this House rises on the 26th of November?

Hon. S. Bond: Absolutely, yes.

GRIZZLY BEAR POPULATION

ON NORTH COAST

G. Coons: The grizzly bear is perhaps the greatest symbol of the wilderness. Its survival will be the greatest testimony to our environmental commitment. That's the rhetoric we get from this government. But biologists are sounding the alarm about steep declines in the number of grizzly bears in the Great Bear rain forest. Even ministry staff, like Tom Ethier, call the trend "worrying."

The situation is serious. A survey of the Kimsquit drainage of the Great Bear rain forest saw nearly 55 percent fewer bears than average and 65 percent fewer cubs.

My question is to the Minister of Environment. What is his ministry doing to protect grizzly bears in the Great Bear rain forest in light of worrying declines in the number of mother bears with cubs?

Hon. B. Penner: Yes, at my direction the ministry did conduct an aerial survey to evaluate the bear populations on the north coast. It did find that compared to the historical average, the numbers are lower this year, although they're the same as they were last year.

If you look back historically, going back ten or 20 years of those surveys, there are periods where the bear population decreases, and then it increases. There are natural variations over the years in the bear populations on the north coast.

I can say this. This side of the House, this government, has done more to protect grizzly bear

[ Page 2024 ]

populations than any other government in B.C. history, including just a few months ago closing another 470,000 hectares on the midcoast and north coast to grizzly bear hunting. That's a record that our government is proud of.

[End of question period.]

Point of Order

J. Rustad: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan was using a prop that is offensive to the members of this side of the House, and I ask that the member apologize for his actions.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, I'll take it under advisement and investigate the matter.

D. Black: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

D. Black: I present the House with a petition signed by several hundred people in New Westminster opposing the HST.

J. Brar: I seek leave to present a petition as well.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

J. Brar: I present the House with a petition signed by 553 people opposing the HST.

D. McRae: I seek leave to present a petition from the Comox Valley.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

D. McRae: I have a petition from the residents of the Comox Valley asking that the Vancouver Island Health Authority please reconsider the decision to cut funding to all crisis lines on Vancouver Island.

[1430]

L. Krog: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

L. Krog: I present a petition signed by hundreds of people opposing the HST.

A. Dix: I'd like to present a petition that hundreds of people have signed in the last two days in support of ambulance paramedics in British Columbia.

R. Chouhan: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

R. Chouhan: I have hundreds of people signing this petition from the Kamloops area concerned about the availability and level of ambulance services in their community.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call Committee A, Committee of Supply — for the information of members, estimates of the Ministry of Children and Family Development — and in this chamber, continued second reading debate on Bill 21.

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 21 — Ambulance Services

Collective Agreement Act

(continued)

C. Trevena: I would like to speak on Bill 21, the legislation in front of the House, second reading. I would like to add my voice to it. During the election campaign and beyond the election campaign, I talked to many paramedics and said that I would speak about their concerns that I think are the concerns of many people.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

My colleagues on this side of the House have talked about the various aspects of this bill: the impact on free collective bargaining — rights which are hard fought for and should be protected — and whether or not this is a move to change the format of the Ambulance Service and, in effect, to privatize the Ambulance Service.

I would actually like to just talk about what it's like to be a paramedic in a rural community. I was speaking earlier today with Keli Doak, who is a paramedic from Port Hardy. She's in the middle of a 62-hour shift. How this happens — a 62-hour shift — is that she picked up her pager on Sunday evening, and she did ten hours on a pager Sunday evening. Then it's 14 hours in the station and then ten hours on the pager and 14 hours back in the station. So she is effectively running 62 hours on call, ready to go and work in her community.

She loves being a paramedic. She wants to work in a community. She wants to be able to carry on working in a community. She has two other jobs to make it possible to work in her community. Her average pay last

[ Page 2025 ]

year, she worked out, with the on-call pay and other pay, was $4 an hour. That's why she has to work in other jobs to maintain what she really wants to do.

Keli has spent $14,000 this year to upgrade her skills to work as a paramedic, and she wants to be able to commit that she can carry on. It's been $14,000 of her own money. I know that in various professions, people are expected to pay for their education. But when the recompense is so slight, it is particularly onerous for paramedics.

Keli is at home at the moment on her pager, which she says is fine. It's something that she accepts because she wants to be a paramedic and wants to carry on. But as she says, she can't do her gardening and can't get very dirty because she might be out on call. She couldn't start doing any painting because, again, of what's going to happen if she's on call. She can't put a roast in the oven or start any baking because she's on call. She's willing to accept this because of being a paramedic.

[1435]

Keli is not alone. There are many other people in rural communities who are living this sort of lifestyle, who are trying to make a career of it.

The other concern that Keli has and that I think many other paramedics have is that as an EMR she is able to do only a certain amount of work and only certain levels of care in an emergency situation. Many other people, particularly in rural areas, aren't emergency care. They are just drivers. Often you have somebody coming to pick you up who is only qualified to deal with certain levels of care. You have an EMR and a driver working together.

It's somebody coming in to pick you up. They don't know what the level of need is. As it has been described to me, if you have an EMR and a driver or two EMR people working together and picking somebody up who's had an allergic reaction, there is a really good chance that they're not going to survive. This is not for want of trying.

This is really the issue of recruitment and retention — recruitment and getting people more qualified, and being able to retain them in the service, retain them in rural areas, keep them working.

This is just one example. This is just one person. I was talking to many people and continue to talk to many paramedics around my communities across the constituency. Whether it's in Alert Bay, where we're talking about an island…. We're talking about having to pick people up, get them on the ferry and across if they need to leave the island.

Similarly on Malcolm Island, Cortes and Quadra or in Zeballos where you've got a 43-kilometre logging road or out in Port Alice where you've got a very winding former logging road, now paved. It's a community that gets fogged in. Tahsis — 63 kilometres just to Gold River and then beyond.

All these communities expect care and have paramedics who want to provide care, who want to make a career of it and want to contribute to their communities. A number of them said: "I'm so lucky I'm a paramedic. I love going to work. I love getting up in the morning to go to work."

But they're paramedics who are getting burnt out, can't continue and can't continue at the level of pay and who are, frankly, very, very concerned about Bill 21 and about what it means — what it means in the long term. As I think everybody is aware, Bill 21 is only taking us through until the end of March, so they are uncertain what is going to happen in April.

As I said, I wanted to tell the House the story of Keli as an example of other paramedics across rural communities and say that it's because of people like Keli and many other paramedics who we meet many times and on whom we rely and who, if we are in need in an emergency, we hope would come to us. We can't take our paramedics for granted and should really treat them with the respect and support that people who are putting such an amount of time and such an amount of commitment into our communities deserve.

With that, I'll take my seat.

D. Thorne: I rise today to make a few comments on Bill 21, the so-called Ambulance Services Collective Agreement Act. I wish I could say that I was pleased to rise today to speak to this, but that would be untrue. I am not pleased at all to have to rise because I'm not pleased at all with this legislation.

This government, by forcing back-to-work legislation on striking paramedics who are currently working under essential services order, is undermining the first principle of collective bargaining, which is respect and trust between the two parties. By taking this unprecedented and heavy-handed approach, this government is not only undermining the right of paramedics to collective bargaining; they are detrimentally impacting on future collective bargaining overall in this province.

Bill 21 calls for a retroactive one-year deal with a 3 percent wage hike. This legislated collective agreement will expire on March 31, 2010. This bill is unprecedented in how it is interrupting the collective bargaining process.

[1440]

The membership of CUPE 873 is currently voting by mail-in ballot on the government's September 28 offer, with results expected this Friday, November 6, 2009. These paramedics have been on strike since April 1 for better staffing levels, wages and an independent industrial inquiry commission to address the critical condition of ambulance services in British Columbia.

This move is unprecedented because it marks the first time in Canadian labour history that a government has forced public employees to accept a collective agreement while the union is in the middle of voting on an offer from that same government. With public sector bargaining

[ Page 2026 ]

coming up in 2010, this heavy-handed move by the government has damaged the possibility of any meaningful collective bargaining process for the rest of the public sector.

I wonder if pressure from VANOC has encouraged this legislation. The Ambulance Service apparently was canvassing other Canadian EMS agencies, looking for volunteers for the Olympics, but the message that was delivered to those out-of-province paramedics from these paramedics was to decline invitations to participate to prevent them crossing a picket line.

This message is clear. The B.C. government could have appointed an independent arbitrator and settled the paramedic strike months ago. Instead, they chose to drag their feet and are now imposing a settlement even as ambulance paramedics are voting on that same offer. The essential services order has protected the public from withdrawal of ambulance services, so that really was not at issue.

All this bill will do, as I have said, is inflame the labour relations climate just months before public sector negotiations and will further damage a health care system that is already reeling from many, many cuts by this government. The government will have to go back to the table with the paramedics on April 1, but with this heavy-handed approach, they're setting these negotiations up for failure.

Just a little bit of background on how we got to this terrible position that we are in today. In December 2008 the CUPE Local 873 entered into bargaining with their employer in advance of their collective agreement expiring on March 31, 2009. In March 2009 the union requested a mediator from the Labour Relations Board. This appointed mediator determined at that time that the parties were too far apart to be assisted by mediation.

In mid-March another independent mediator met with the parties, and on March 25 the employer tabled a proposal for a one-year contract. At this point bargaining ceased. The union went on strike on April 1.

Since the strike began, paramedics have been subject to essential services orders that have required them to provide 100 percent of pre-hospital care, which compels them to work overtime in excess of what their collective agreement requires. These orders have had the effect of severely limiting any pressure that could be brought to bear by the union.

This has continued. I'm not going to read out all these facts. I think we're all after…. My colleagues have spoken on this many times. We know that the employer has rejected every offer at the bargaining table and that meetings between the parties in June failed to resolve the dispute, and we have ended up where we are today.

The B.C. Ambulance Service provides public ambulance service in B.C. under the authority of the Emergency and Health Services Commission of the provincial Ministry of Health. In 1974 government legislation was enacted to create the first ambulance service. It was formed in response to the growing concerns about the conditions that were then present in the ambulance industry of the day.

Emergency pre-hospital medical services were then supplied by a mixture of commercial operators. Some operated from funeral homes, some were partially subsidized by many municipalities, some were based with volunteer fire departments, and some existed on paid subscriptions from the public.

The competition between ambulance companies was intense. Standards were not uniformly observed, and effective patient care was often an afterthought. Today the Ambulance Service employs approximately 1,100 full-time paramedic and dispatch personnel, 2,200 part-time staff and around 100 provincial support personnel. The provincial call volume is around 5,300 calls annually, ranking the B.C. Ambulance Service as one of the largest ambulance services in North America.

[1445]

The Ambulance Service leases dedicated air-ambulance aircraft from provincial carriers, with around 880 air evacuations annually. There are about 144,000 to 150,000 patient transfers between medical facilities by ground ambulances. The Ambulance Service is intended to bridge the major regional disparities in both geography and population densities across this province.

One challenge that faces the Ambulance Service is a structural change caused by decisions made by this government. By closing hospitals, the distances that ambulances had to travel throughout the province were lengthened. By reducing the numbers of acute care beds in hospitals as well as not providing the 5,000 long-term care beds that were promised for seniors care, the number of acute care beds that were available in the hospitals decreased. Now we have ambulances turning up at emergency wards and backing up because there is no place to discharge patients into the hospital system.

Therefore, with the ambulance system being responsible for that patient until they are turned over to the hospital, we end up with backlogs of the ambulance system waiting to discharge patients while they cannot return and do their major function, which is one of initial response as well as transporting the patient to where more extensive care can be provided.

Another challenge is one of the disparity between the urban and rural geographies. That raises the issue of training and the retention of licensed paramedics across the province of British Columbia. There are three categories that exist among stations — remote, rural and urban designations. In a remote designated station, the paramedic is paid a $2-per-hour pager call-out until his or her service is activated, and then he goes on full-scale payout.

When one looks at the literally thousands of dollars that a paramedic invests in order to get their training, to remain on the job when you're receiving a $2-per-hour

[ Page 2027 ]

pager call simply does not work. Therefore, the paramedic leaves the rural area and goes to where they can get more full employment within the system, or they simply leave and go to the public system industry or what have you, where they will receive a much more stable and larger remuneration.

For example, there are three remote designated stations in the Cariboo — in Clinton, Alexis Creek and Anahim Lake — and there are three rural designated stations — in Ashcroft, 100 Mile House and Williams Lake. These paramedics stationed at the rural designation station receive a $10-per-hour call-out, and upon receiving a call, they go to full scale. Remote stations are often out of service or have reduced service because the paramedics do not stay in those areas for obvious reasons.

There are not enough to operate them seven-24. For example, in August 2007 the Alexis Creek station was completely out of service for an entire month. That, in essence, left an entire corridor between Williams Lake and Bella Coola out of service and on reduced service, as well, for extended periods of time.

It's equally important to be aware that with rural settings at the stations that require a call from outside of their areas, it often adds an additional one hour of travel time before they even begin travelling. There are cases in which ambulances from 100 Mile House have been required to go into the Chilcotin to respond. This has put an additional two hours of call-response time to get to the area where the ambulance is required. This issue of training and retention is a challenge that exists, and it exists and is felt primarily in the rural parts of the province of British Columbia.

Another challenge is the fact that the communications system is often unreliable. Presently, communications are provided through dispatch centres in Vancouver, Victoria and Kamloops. The Kamloops dispatch station in 2005 was identified by the Ambulance Service as requiring significant upgrades, and the entire system required communication upgrades in order to integrate the communication between these three dispatch centres.

[1450]

In 2007 the same Kamloops station suffered a malfunction and was taken out of service for a period of time. With it being out of service, it has now been relocated to a temporary location. It's time for the province to address communication, and this is part of the package that needs to be addressed when we talk about the problems in the ambulance system.

There's another challenge that I'd like to draw attention to. It is around the Lower Mainland ambulance stations, which are often in poor condition and with staffing that is not always adequate.

I'd like to just read one story here from the wife of a paramedic. They were living in Prince Rupert, but they ended up moving to Coquitlam for the following reasons. Actually, they were living…. He was hired in September 2002 — Mr. Schwenning — to work part-time in a small Vancouver Island community about a two-hour drive from their hometown.

Because of the two-hour pager wage, he did not make enough money to quit his full-time job. So he worked Monday to Friday at a sawmill and then drove the two hours to the BCAS station to put in his Saturday and Sunday shifts. On weekends when he did not receive a call, he would end up making $48 for the whole weekend. Subtract his gas and his food costs, and he would come home Sunday night in the red.

After two years and additional training, he was able to transfer to the station in his own hometown. Although he still only made $2 an hour on pager, he was at least able to be at home with his family. He was able to quit his job at the sawmill because shifts became busier, but he had to work 29 shifts a month with the BCAS in order to make ends meet.

It was not until March of 2007 that he had enough seniority to get a full-time position on the Lower Mainland, which meant being paid a regular wage for his whole shift and benefits. Part-time paramedics do not get benefits before they have served for six years, Madam Speaker.

The Lower Mainland job meant commuting from the Island until the family decided to move to Coquitlam, my own hometown. But the Ambulance Service in Coquitlam was so understaffed that Kristy's husband usually came home at the end of 12 hours without having even had a meal break. He invested 18 months and thousands of dollars to further his paramedic career.

His wife's comment to me was: "I wonder why he would stay working for an employer who just doesn't seem to care about him. The answer never changes," said Kristy. "He loves his job and he is good at it too."

Looking at these statistics and looking at all of the different issues, I looked up some of the comments that have been made in Hansard by some of the members on the opposite side, and I'd just like to read those out.

The member from Mission a couple of years ago had this to say about paramedics:

"I want to talk about the individual members, the individual paramedics, that are out there working in British Columbia. I want to speak just for a moment about the leadership that John Strohmaier, the head of the paramedics union, has shown, in advancing what I consider to be a really important program that the paramedics of British Columbia are doing on a volunteer basis, and that is running CPR training in high schools throughout British Columbia."

I'm just reading little excerpts. The member carried on, saying: "I know that some time ago I worked with…John to set up a program…and it seemed to me that it would be a wise thing for us to be able to say" that we have this training for people in case they have a heart attack while they're visiting British Columbia, because we have the most people trained in CPR. "I think that's a…laudable goal, and it's one that I know the paramedics are working to try and accomplish."

[ Page 2028 ]

I also think that I would agree with the member that that was and probably still is a very laudable goal, but volunteer work and paid work — your job — are two very distinct things. Even though paramedics are known for the volunteer work that they do, we shouldn't be expecting them to be working in a job that has a call-out and wages that make the job. When you look at some of the facts and figures that I've read into the record here today, it makes it seem like they're doing volunteer work a lot of the time, when actually it's a paid job.

I'd like to just read comments that the member for Nechako Lakes made a year or so ago in the House.

[1455]

"There was no question that the Ambulance Service in this province is critical. It's critical to the health care system, but more importantly, it's critical to anyone who needs the service.

"My family had an issue this summer and had to call 911 and had to have an ambulance…. I can tell you.… When you're waiting a minute, it seems like an hour. But…within five minutes…the ambulance was at the door…. I have to tell you, Madam Speaker, that the professionalism" that they have shown and they continue to show "is second to none. It is absolutely phenomenal."

"When we talk about ambulance services and paramedics and the services they do provide…. "

One of the things is that paramedics provide an unbelievable service in there as well.

"One of the previous speakers talked about seeing ambulance parked at hospitals. It just so happens that we actually have paramedics now in hospitals, helping to provide treatment directly in the service."

I think that it goes without saying that both sides of the House consider paramedics to be one of the most important services and one of the best-delivered services in British Columbia at this time and absolutely essential to all of us. I think the difference probably comes down to the way that we look at providing the service, how the service gets provided, as opposed to some of the members on the other side.

I am going to close today by just quoting some facts and figures here about response times and how we need to work on trying to meet the benchmark, where 90 percent of critical calls are covered within nine minutes — critical calls which would include chest pain, cardiac arrest, shortness of breath and other life-threatening emergencies.

In 2007 and 2008 this benchmark was only reached 52 percent of the time and only in urban and metropolitan areas. In remote and urban areas this benchmark of nine minutes is almost never met.

Just looking through this list here, some of the longest response times were up to 24 or almost 25 minutes in Agassiz, 14 minutes in Alert Bay, 32 minutes in Alexis Creek, 30 minutes in Anahim Lake, 12 minutes in Barriere, almost 39 minutes in Bella Bella, 27 minutes in Big White.

I could go on and on. Boston Bar, 20 minutes; Bowen Island, almost 19 minutes; North Burnaby, 11 minutes; Chase, ten minutes; Castlegar, 11 and almost 12 minutes. The numbers are staggering in Clearwater and Clinton — almost 25 minutes and 20 minutes.

It is obvious that we're understaffed in the Ambulance Service. It is obvious that the system is certainly in crisis, if not in chaos, and this latest move by the government to impose this and to not deal with the members, the paramedics of British Columbia, in a decent way and impose a settlement like this in the middle of a vote that is unprecedented across the country is rather horrifying to me.

I don't have a huge labour relations or union background myself, but let me tell you that what I have learned since I have come to this House has not been happy for me. It's not been good news. I don't think we treat working people in this province very well in a lot of instances, and I have no doubt that this is one of them.

D. Donaldson: I rise today to speak against Bill 21. I oftentimes try to keep a positive attitude in this Legislature, and I have risen before to speak in favour of bills and parts of bills that this government has introduced in this sitting.

[1500]

I try to keep my words moderate at all times and try to work on a collaborative basis. But the only way I can typify this bill is to say that it's a vile bill. The reason it's vile to me and to people I know who are paramedics and to people who need these kinds of services in the north and in the remote rural regions that I represent is that it shows no respect for democratic processes like collective bargaining, and it shows no respect to paramedics, especially those servicing the rural areas that I represent.

I want to talk a little about the challenges that are faced by the paramedics in my constituency, in the rural areas. I have five or six communities that have on-call volunteer paramedic ambulance services, and we're talking over a huge geographic area. Highway 16 alone is at least 150 kilometres that these paramedics cover, and then there's Highway 37, all the way up to the Yukon border. So the distances are enormous that they're expected to cover, and the situations that they encounter can be horrific.

These are isolated areas, highways, where once the paramedics arrive, if there's a terrible accident or situation, they're faced with stabilizing and dealing with the patient but then also spending perhaps a couple of hours transporting them to the closest hospital. You can only imagine the kind of stress that they're under in dealing with a critically ill patient for over a couple of hours — perhaps even more, if the road conditions are as bad as they can be this time of year and at other times of the year.

Those are the kinds of situations that they're faced with up where I live. Compared to other areas of the province, I have to say that in the rural areas we see the paramedics and the Ambulance Service as a really critical part of our health care system, as our response system to health emergencies. That's because there are only two hospitals in that

[ Page 2029 ]

entire area that I mentioned, so the options of going for care in other areas — transporting yourself on your own to hospital, for instance, or accessing other areas of the health service system — just aren't there.

In fact, we have no acute care facilities in our hospitals in my constituency. What happens is that the paramedics end up working very closely with the doctors in those hospitals and clinics in trying to stabilize the patients, and they often get flown out to other areas of the province that have more in-depth services around acute care.

Then the paramedics are faced with not only dropping off the patient and getting the patient stabilized in a clinic or hospital but waiting and picking up that patient to drive them again to another hospital, where they get further stabilized, and then they get flown out, perhaps, or transferred to another hospital. Conceivably, the paramedic could be dealing with the same patient over and over. It creates even further stress on an already stressed system.

I talked about the horrific situations. Also, the reality in small communities — and some of the members on the other side will know this because they come from smaller communities — is that we often know the paramedics, and the paramedics often know the people in the community. So it's not just that they're picking up an anonymous patient; they could be picking up a friend, a relative, a friend of a friend.

Those extended family and extended friendship situations aren't recognized under this bill or in how we're dealing with the rural situation, because that's an even more stressful situation.

What happens is that the paramedic then goes home. It can't just easily be dismissed, and it causes stress throughout their lives and other aspects as well. I'm just trying to paint the situation that we face in rural situations.

In fact, I've used and have been the recipient of the paramedic and ambulance services on a couple of occasions — not in a serious situation, I hasten to add, but in playing hockey. I had the unfortunate experience of dislocating a kneecap in playing hockey in a recreational league. I don't know if any of the members have had a dislocation of a joint, but it's not a fun experience.

[1505]

I wouldn't know, but I've been told…. I don't know, but I suppose if a woman has experienced that…. Some liken it to the pain of going through childbirth. I don't know, obviously, what that pain might be like, but I know what it feels like to have a dislocated kneecap, and there's not the same joy at the end of the process as there is in childbirth. That's for sure.

I've had the experience of the paramedic service where I live in Hazelton pick me up and attend to me in that situation. They were extremely professional — incredible service. Unfortunately, I went back to playing hockey within a year and dislocated the other kneecap, so I don't play hockey anymore. I just wanted to let the House know that and let the paramedics in my area know that.

They had to come and pick me up on the second occasion. On that occasion I wasn't even in as good a mood as I was on the first. In a state of pain, you often say things that you aren't too proud of later on. So I took some gifts the next day to the Ambulance Service station in my area and just said: "I'm sorry." But this is the kind of thing that they face — people they know that they don't expect to get that kind of reaction from, because in small communities we all know each other.

I wanted to continue on that theme of respect or lack of it. We've had a number of letters come in on this bill from paramedics. Here's one paramedic who writes…. They were watching the Hansard TV channel a couple of days ago or perhaps yesterday. Their comment was:

"Why didn't a single Liberal MLA, particularly those representing rural areas, stand up to speak for their constituents? How shameful it is that they ducked their heads between their legs when the issue was spoken of."

This paramedic goes on to say:

"I moved to B.C. in 2007, and I have already started applying for paramedic positions in other provinces. B.C. is the most expensive province to live in, yet it has the lowest minimum wage and the lowest regard for their paramedics. I invite my paramedic brothers and sisters to do the same thing. The Liberals have made B.C. a sinking ship, and I have no intention of sacrificing my family's future."

This just demonstrates what one paramedic feels is the lack of respect that this bill introduces.

It's not just one paramedic. We're hearing this over and over again. He alludes in this letter to leaving the province. We've had young paramedics where I live go through the training at their own expense, pay for it, in trying to make this a profession. Then they find that because of the situation in rural areas, they're unable to even pay for that training — they take out loans to go for that training — or to make a livelihood once they get that training.

They end up moving to bigger centres where there are more calls. We end up losing the younger people especially from our area, who are getting trained up. They're using it as an experience, a training ground, and then moving to other centres.

As my colleagues and as the paramedics point out, training and retention are significant factors in this bargaining session they're having, or they were trying to have, with the government. To have the Minister of Health, when he introduced this bill, say that he was going to look into the special situation in rural areas just isn't good enough.

It has to be laid out more, and that's not in this bill. It's not good enough for the Minister of Health to skip on that in this bill. It doesn't address many of the issues that we're hearing from paramedics.

I wanted to also read, on the theme of respect…. This is from a paramedic that I know — completely unsolicited, I might add — a letter that he wrote. I think it goes a

[ Page 2030 ]

long way to explain the kind of horrific situations that paramedics face, in my constituency anyway.

[1510]

"Just a quick note to let you know that as a paramedic, I feel that the province is really letting us down with Bill 21. For the most part, I just don't think that people know what we really have to do in our job — stuff like picking up dead bodies, young and old; continuous risk of injury, disease; and cleaning up behind people's health mishaps. In my three and a half years of being a paramedic, I have seen things that I would not wish on anyone. We do the job and work hard at it.

"Then the government slaps us in the face by telling us that we should feel happy to work for $2 per hour and is interested in forcing us to do so. Who works for $20 to $24 per day in Canada? Why does this government treat the people responsible for saving lives of our fellow British Columbians this way? Has any one of the people in the Legislature given CPR to a dying baby? Do they know what the job entails? It would be a good idea to educate themselves before treating us so poorly.

"Say no to Bill 21 this week."

I think that letter outlines just some of the horrific conditions that are faced by our rural paramedics and also alludes to and describes well the on-call wage of $2 an hour that paramedics in my constituency have. We still don't know what the minister has in this bill around that $2-an-hour on-call wage. I'm not sure if the 3 percent applies to that, which would mean they would be making $2.06 an hour. I think that would not add to the retention of paramedics or the recruitment of new paramedics, in my area especially.

Many of the paramedics in my area…. It's a rural area, so not everybody lives in town. In fact, the town that I live in is only 350 people. Many of the paramedics come from further distances away, 30 kilometres or more, to come to the station. It means, oftentimes, that when they're on call, they want to be closer, so they spend time away from their families at the stations. And they're compensated for that by being paid $2 an hour.

I want to talk a bit more about the democratic institution of collective bargaining. If this is a situation that the government felt was so dire, as dire as it is, then an independent arbitrator could have been appointed long ago and helped to settle this action. That would have been a fair thing to do, especially considering how these jobs are typified as emergency services. Introducing this bill is going to inflame — it can't do anything but inflame — the labour relations climate just months before we go into public sector negotiations and further damage the health care system that's already reeling from the cuts that we've seen.

I have another letter from another paramedic I know. I saw this fellow just recently when I was back in my constituency. We were at the video store, and I bumped into him. I asked him how it was going. He let me know a few things. Then I was happy to see that this week he's written me a letter. I think the letter also addresses the whole issue of respect for the democratic process of collective bargaining. He writes:

"I've never written to my MLA before, but I'm moved to do so now to express my thanks for your and the NDP's support of the B.C. paramedics and for your opposition to Bill 21.

"I spent the afternoon at the ambulance station watching the Legislature debate this bill and had to fight down my growing sense of outrage over what the Premier and the Minister of Health and the Liberals are doing. We have been simply fighting for recognition, respect, our own dignity, and now to have this government turn to such a draconian tactic is demoralizing and disgusting.

"That they would stoop to such a level is not surprising, as for months now the Liberal government has treated us vindictively, ignoring any opportunity to add something positive or constructive into the negotiating process and ignoring the public support that the vast majority of British Columbians have been expressing for us and our cause. I fear that this bill will not end this dispute but rather inflame it to a point that there could be dire consequences as a result.

[1515]

"How can it be that paramedics can, on the one hand, be labelled essential by the government while, on the other, be treated like something to be scraped off the bottom of a shoe? The hypocrisy of this bill is sickening.

"Once again, my sincere thanks to you and those in the Legislature who are voicing their opposition to this irresponsible and hateful legislation."

He signs it "Sincerely," then his name and then: "A paramedic looking for another line of work."

Again, it's the respect that's not being shown or felt, not just for the paramedics but the democratic institution that's involved in this, called collective bargaining, which is a democratic right that we've had our veterans, our relatives and people we know fight for in the world, to retain that kind of right. We reflect on that as we approach Remembrance Day. They oftentimes sacrificed in the largest way possible — giving up their lives — to ensure that we have something called collective bargaining and the democratic right to that.

I would like to wrap up just by reiterating that I have the utmost contempt for this vile bill. It shows no respect to the paramedics and to the democratic institution of collective bargaining. It doesn't lay out the situation faced by our rural paramedics, doesn't talk about what we can do to resolve that situation, and therefore, I speak in opposition to it.

J. Kwan: I rise to speak to Bill 21, what I would call the back-to-work legislation for the paramedics in British Columbia. I have to say, Madam Speaker, I've been around the Legislature for quite some time now, and every time the government wields its legislative hammer to order the workers back to work, it still does shock me.

Let us just review the situation here with respect to the paramedics and what's happened to date. I went back to look at the Hansard Blues on November 3, 2009, where second reading began on this bill — Bill 21, the Ambulance Services Collective Agreement Act, so the government calls it. The Minister of Health did not once mention the VANOC request — a letter which the minister received, information that the minister received — and that it was at VANOC'S request that the strike end before the 2010 Olympics, therefore letting VANOC be

[ Page 2031 ]

the organization to decide how collective bargaining should take place in British Columbia.

In his guise, what the Minister of Health did was to instead blame the crisis of the health care system on H1N1. It was only after the minister was exposed, caught red-handed, that he finally admitted that one of the reasons why we're in this Legislature today debating Bill 21 is because the government wanted to grant VANOC'S wish. I guess the government wanted to showcase to the rest of the world, when they come for 2010, that British Columbia is unblemished.

If the government wants to showcase that, they could actually have done that in a number of ways. They could have actually shown goodwill in the collective bargaining process. The government could have acted to try to end the impasse.

What is causing the impasse? Let's be clear about that and put that on the record. In June of 2008, a committee of paramedics and managers recommended that staffing levels be increased by 96 hours per day in the Lower Mainland and an additional 24-hour ambulance in each of the four different areas. This was to address the current shortage.

[1520]

There is a tremendous shortage of ambulance services all across the province of British Columbia. Instead of actually dealing with that critical issue, what did the government do? The government added 20 full-time paramedic positions, enough for one 24-hour ambulance service and two additional 11-hour shifts per day. That's 46 hours in total.

Imagine that, for a moment. At a time when we have a critical shortage of ambulance services, the government does not have the wherewithal to ensure that we have appropriate services across the province of British Columbia. It does not have the conviction to ensure there are enough resources in the system to support the health care needs of British Columbians.

I've heard it so many times now from the Minister of Health in this very House. He got up and waxed eloquent and made false promises to British Columbians by saying that health care will be delivered to you where you need it and when you need it. Well, if that's the case, why wouldn't the government meet the Ambulance Service's request, the paramedics' request of ensuring that there be appropriate staffing levels — staffing levels that are required for all the stations across British Columbia so that British Columbians, when they're in a health care crisis and have to call 911, actually get the service that they need?

That is the critical issue we face with this government in our health care delivery. And guess what. They turn a blind eye. They couldn't give a hoot about what the real issues are. Instead, they try to cast false images of the issues at hand. They try to erase it. They try to hide behind some other issue.

In this instance, the Minister of Health is on the record suggesting that the whole problem we face with this piece of legislation — why we're here today — is because of the H1N1. And get this: we just heard in question period today on the H1N1 situation that the government has done nothing to ensure that the paramedics themselves actually get the immunization shots.

These are front-line workers who are going out there to deal with the sick and the people who are in health traumas and health crisis. They travel from one end of the city to the other end of the city, and they face these situations. They're exposed to all sorts of illnesses and disease along the way, yet the government does not see fit to ensure that paramedics get the immunization shots for H1N1.

Then the government goes on to blame…. "Oh, but we have a crisis here because there's H1N1." The Minister of Health goes on to say: "And paramedics are calling in sick."

Oh, really? You think? These are the very people who are exposed to disease — front-line people. You would think that they'd be one of the first sets of people to go and get the shots. When we as citizens in our community fall ill, are in a crisis situation and have to phone 911, those workers are first protected so they can do their job to provide the assistance to those who are in need.

Why wouldn't the government act on that? It is mystifying to me. It defies logic. It makes no common sense.

The Ambulance Service is running limited clinics that don't work for the paramedic schedules. How difficult would it be to sort that out, for the government to say: "Wait a minute. We need to sort that out to make sure that paramedics get to the clinics to get their shots"?

But no, not this minister. He says that's not a priority for him — couldn't interfere. That would be political interference. Well, I would say that ensuring that the paramedics and the front-line health care workers get their shots so that they can do their jobs is absolutely essential for a health care service in British Columbia.

[1525]

I live in Vancouver. I represent a riding called Vancouver–Mount Pleasant. I have the fortune, of course, of having very good services from the paramedics in my community, and so do my constituents. But let me just say: let us not be under any illusion that they are not under stress each and every single day.

Imagine if you were a paramedic and when you get called to show up somewhere…. You're not being invited to go to a party; you're not being invited to go to a happy situation. Each and every single call that comes through for a paramedic, all throughout the province of British Columbia, means that a paramedic would be faced with a trauma situation. Somebody is in critical distress. A family is in critical distress. Somebody has experienced a car accident. Who knows? They may face death on the other end — right there, staring them in the face — and they have to act.

[ Page 2032 ]

Imagine the test of that each and every single day. That is your job, every moment, and you never know what's coming on the other line each time the phone rings. You just don't know. When you get into your ambulance car and you're on the dispatch and driving fast and furious trying to get to the destination to see how you can help, you just don't know if it's a case where it's a domestic violence situation and somebody has been critically injured. It could be a stabbing wound or any such thing.

You don't know if it's a woman or a child or a baby. You don't know if it's a senior who's worked all their lives to support their family and in their golden years, all of a sudden, has suffered some ill health — cardiac arrest, any number of those things.

Imagine the stress of that on paramedics. Thank goodness for them doing their job because they do it well and do it with passion. They do it because they believe in it. Shouldn't we as legislators come together and say: "Thank you for the work that you do because without you, we cannot as a community survive; without you, we as individuals cannot survive and we as families cannot survive"?

In my riding — let me just give this piece of information for members of this House — it is absolutely shocking the amount of work that they do. Between 2008 and 2009 the paramedics in Vancouver Cordova station, which is in my riding, answered 25,306 calls. That's 25,306 people in distress with a major health crisis on their hands, and they showed up each and every time to assist.

As I said, you never know what you would face on the other side. You never know. It could be an overdose in my riding, someone who literally is on the cusp of dying. It could be a major wound from some sort of dispute. It could be from natural causes, some sort of heart attack, some sort of illness. You just don't know, and they show up at the scene to see what they could do.

I have to say a big thank-you to the paramedics because I believe they saved the life of my husband, who works in the Downtown Eastside. Last summer my husband had the unfortunate experience of having…. At the time we didn't know, but it was that his heart suffered a viral attack. It might have been there for some time, and it didn't act up. But he was at work one day, and all of a sudden, he collapsed.

Thank goodness the paramedics were called. They attended to him. They revived him, and I believe they saved his life. I really believe that. It was shocking. He was a healthy man. He is a healthy man — still with us, thank goodness. They acted, and they acted fast. They made the interventions.

The nurses there at the time, as well, responded by saying that had there not been this immediate intervention, they didn't know if he would have made it. It was a very strange experience. We didn't know what caused it, and for a long time the doctors were befuddled. But I have to say it was good fortune for me and my family because at that time I was pregnant with our second child. By good fortune, the paramedics arrived in time for him and for my family.

[1530]

They make a heck of a difference. They make a difference for all of us, and we feel it each and every day. I have to say I feel it each and every day, and I thank the spirits above for watching over and for the good work that they do.

Here we are today fighting for the dignity of paramedics, for the good work that they do. Why do we have to do that? Why do we have to stoop to this level, where we strip paramedics of their dignity, of the government forcing them back to work, where they don't have the right to collectively bargain?

It's something that all workers should have the right to do, something that the UN holds up as one of the principles of a democratic society that we should honour. But in this province, in British Columbia, under this government's leadership, time and time again the government breached that principle and ripped the workers of those rights.

It is shameful, each and every time I have to get up in this House and respond to the government's back-to-work legislation, because they know that they have the power to wield the legislative hammer on the heads of workers. That's what the government is doing. There is no reason why we're here today. If the government was genuine in the belief in wanting to settle the agreement, the bargaining process, the government could have ensured that they put the mechanisms in place.

They could have addressed the very issue that concerns paramedics, and that is their workload. They could address the very issue. Yes, it is about pay, about recognizing their work and the value of that work and what it means to British Columbians.

Let us remember that the paramedics actually did not get a raise when this government got into office back in 2001 in that round of bargaining, because that government at that time claimed that they couldn't afford it. They couldn't afford it. They went and actually threw a bunch of money out the window with tax breaks for big corporations, but they could not give a raise to paramedics, and they froze their wages. That's the truth of it.

I have to say that I find it astounding that we're here in this debate. And guess what's going on: the middle of a vote for the paramedics themselves. The government put an offer on the table. The vote is taking place right now, folks, and we don't even know what the outcome of that vote is going to be.

Then the government goes: "Oh well, who cares? I'm going to bring forward back-to-work legislation, and I'm going to wield the legislative hammer anyway. Who cares if you accept the offer or not? Who cares if you reject the offer? That's totally irrelevant."

[ Page 2033 ]

There's sincerity for you — eh? Do you think that's a real, sincere approach, when the government puts an offer on the table, and the people who have to review that offer and then vote on it — the membership themselves, who make the determination on whether or not they're going to accept that offer…? The government doesn't even give them time to do that.

They say: "Oh well, we're just going to bring in legislation anyway. It doesn't matter what you really think." That's really the mentality of this government all along, isn't it? That's just a false game of pretence from this government all along. They have no intention of bargaining earnestly at the table. They have no intention of being honourable in this process, because why on earth would you bring forward legislation before the membership even gets to vote on it?

It is absolutely the worst display and the most disgraceful display of the government wielding their legislative hammer. This is the first time in the history of British Columbia where the government brought forward back-to-work legislation at the time when a vote is actually taking place. It is unprecedented.

I wish that I was standing here talking about something happy that's unprecedented that this government is doing. For example, when Dave Barrett, the former Premier of the province of British Columbia — an NDP Premier, I'm proud to say — brought forward the whole notion of paramedics for the province of British Columbia.

[1535]

Instead of celebrating the work of paramedics, instead of thanking them for their work each and every day, instead of recognizing the risk that they take and sometimes the high-risk situations that they put themselves in, the mental stamina that they must endure, the challenges that they face on the road each and every day, we are here from the government side wanting to hammer these workers on their heads and to say no to them with their collective bargaining rights.

I am just absolutely shocked that the members from the government side are silent, and they're not standing up for their paramedics in their own community. I just received a letter — November 4. So it's a very recent letter. It was addressed to the member for North Vancouver–Seymour. It was copied to me and copied to the Premier.

I suspect that the member for North Vancouver–Seymour would not put this letter on the record. So let me just take that opportunity to do that and challenge her to rise up to represent the paramedics in her own community and challenge every single member from the government side to rise up to represent their paramedics in their own community and get up to thank them for their work and say to this government that it is unacceptable how this government's treating them.

This letter reads:

I received a letter explaining to some degree just what is taking place in B.C. with our Ambulance Service. I've been trying to grasp just what is going on here and have come to the conclusion that the democratic process is at stake here. I do believe that our paramedics are worth every penny — firemen, policemen, etc. They expose themselves and their families to all sorts of different germs and diseases as well as being placed in personal harm when encountering individuals with drug and mental health problems. They have to use diplomatic skills, as they don't have Tasers.

I could really get going on this topic. Drug and mental health problems — our government closes facilities and expects these unfortunate individuals to care for themselves somehow. Now, with the 2010 Olympic Games around the corner, they want to hide what a mess they have created. Please let our government understand that Canadians like myself feel "collective bargaining" is a Canadian right, that it must not be taken away.

Thank you,

C. Ferguson

This is the individual's point of view, not from my riding, and I put this letter on the record because I want to challenge the government MLAs to do the right thing.

It is not that difficult to reflect on the work of the paramedics and what it means. It's not that difficult to see the history of where they've been in the collective bargaining process and what this government has done. It's not that difficult to see through the thin veil of pretence and insincerity of the approach which this government put forward, the pretence that they want to say that they want to treat paramedics fairly, the pretence of saying that they respect the work of paramedics, the pretence of saying that they want to ensure that health care is delivered when British Columbians need it and where they need it.

If the government really stands by those words, then they would withdraw this bill today. If the government truly honoured the work of paramedics, they would withdraw this bill. They would get back to the bargaining table. They would ensure that there are meaningful discussions at the table. They would ensure that there are resources at the table to ease the workload.

They would ensure the paramedics and understand that they would get sick. Yes, they do. Like all humans, they're not super-humans, but they're pretty close to that definition in my account, I must say. But they're not immune from diseases and exposure to diseases. They get sick, and they should be treated as such, as priority cases in getting the H1N1 when we have a pandemic going on in British Columbia, so that they can do the work and treat all of us who might be in distress.

I am just absolutely stunned that we're here today in which the government has caused the chaos and the situation in the paramedic situation.

[1540]

Now, the government wants to put forward a good face to world visitors for 2010. I understand that VANOC and all their folks were kind of shocked when the IOC

[ Page 2034 ]

came and saw: "Oh, dear. The ambulances all have On Strike in big red letters on them." Oh, that is not very good when the world comes to visit.

Well, there's a fix for that, actually, for the government, and a lesson for the government to learn. They could actually negotiate with the paramedics to end the strike, listen to the paramedics — to what they have to say.

I wonder how many of the government MLAs have actually gone out to visit a paramedic station or have sat down to talk to one of the paramedics and asked them their point of view — what it is that they're going through, what their challenges are and how it is that the government can end this impasse.

I wonder why the government, on the one hand, says…. "Oh," the Minister of Health says, "I've asked the Minister of Labour to get on with it, to fix the structural problems." Why did the government wait until now to fix the structural problems? Why didn't the government act one month, two months, three months, four months, a year, two years ago?

Did they not know that there was a crisis in the paramedic situation? Did they not know there was a major shortage in terms of workers in the area, that they needed more workers? Did they not know that? Did they not know that in some communities people rely only on volunteer paramedics?

Imagine if you lived in the community and you relied on a volunteer paramedic and that volunteer responds to your call when you need it and the government doesn't see fit to say: "Hey, wait a minute, we have some challenges here. In some areas of our community, they're not getting the services that they need, and there are some structural issues here that we need to address." Why wouldn't the government…?

If the government had foresight, they would have acted on these issues and challenges beforehand, not wait and wait and hope for the problem to go away — and not use the legislative power, the big legislative hammer, that they know they can wield at any point, and not just depend on that. That does not bode well for labour relations for British Columbia.

The government may actually think that you can settle this situation at this moment in time, but think about the damage that is done for future years. Think about what kind of message you're sending to the workers of British Columbia. The government could have chosen a different path. They could have chosen a different course, and they refused to do that.

The government says they don't have the money to do that, but they have the money for a half-billion-dollar retractable roof. It is about priorities — isn't it? It is about what we deem to be essential and absolutely important for us to put taxpayers' hard-earned money toward.

The government speaks loud and clear with each of their choices each and every day. They can buy Olympic tickets with a distribution plan for these Olympic tickets that nobody will see. They will spend money on that, and they won't tell you what the plan is. But they won't put resources into the health care system to alleviate the stresses in the health care system. They won't put resources into the paramedic system to ensure that health care is, indeed, delivered where you need it and where they need it — the words of the Health Minister even during this session of the Legislature.

I have to say that the paramedics have faced in my community a 30.05 percent increase in volume between 2002 and 2009. I'm sad to say that I expect the volume of calls in my community will continue to go up. Why do I say that? Why do I make that prediction? Because under this government, we've had the worst child poverty rate for five years in a row. We continue to have the worst child poverty rate across the country.

[1545]

In my riding I happen to represent one of the poorest neighbourhoods in all of Canada. People are living in poverty. People are living in trying circumstances. People are just struggling day by day to survive — people who suffer tremendous traumas — and the paramedics attend to their calls no matter what.

With the calls and the increase likely to continue to demand services from the paramedics, it is high time for the government to do the honourable thing: negotiate with them, solve the structural problems. The government can act today. They could actually take this legislation off the table, get back to the bargaining table and make sure that we have a healthy relationship with paramedics so that health care could be delivered to all British Columbians.

S. Simpson: I'm glad that I have the opportunity to stand and to add my voice to the debate over Bill 21. It saddens me that we have to do this. It saddens me that the government made this decision to bring this legislation in at this time. But so be it. We will move on and make our voices heard on this side of the House regarding Bill 21, the Ambulance Services Collective Agreement Act.

What we know, of course, is what this bill does. It's back-to-work legislation that essentially forces a contract…. Well, maybe back-to-work isn't the proper term, since the paramedics are under essential services and are essentially operating at about 100 percent full service as it is.

But what this does is it imposes a contract on the paramedics at a time when what the government should have been doing was finding a way to find a fair resolution to this dispute. Instead, they've taken the heavy-handed approach of imposing this collective agreement at this time, and this doesn't resolve the question. We know that, because this will be back before British Columbians again in a few short months once the Olympics are out of the way.

Sadly, of course, we do know that the real purpose behind this was to deal with the question of the Olympics

[ Page 2035 ]

and to get those On Strike signs off ambulances before the world arrives in February.

I believe that the Health Minister, who introduced this legislation, believed that they'd found a quick fix to get them through their problem of the next few months, clearly without much thought or thoughtfulness about what the implications of this are long term — to impose Bill 21 at this time. What those are….

It's a situation where you're taking one of the most valued and critical essential services that we deliver in this province, the B.C.

Ambulance Service and the paramedics who deliver that service across British Columbia, and you're saying to them that we don't have respect — that the government side of this House doesn't have respect and value for what they do, that the government side of this House doesn't have value for a collective bargaining process and doesn't respect it, that the government side of this House is prepared to use a legislative hammer to deal with a matter that should be seen as being more delicate than that and should be seen as trying to find ways to rebuild the Ambulance Service rather than to drive it further into despair.

That is exactly what Bill 21 will do.

We all know that paramedics perform a remarkable service in this province. They are the people that you call when somebody has a heart attack. They are the people that you call when somebody has a stroke. They are the people you call when the question of saving a life is at hand. They are the people who come. They come in sometimes very challenging situations.

The member for Mount Pleasant spoke about her constituency, and I've certainly spoken to a number of paramedics who work the Downtown Eastside and who work my area in East Hastings. I know the challenges that they face in order to accomplish and to do their job. But the government, clearly, doesn't find that important, because the government will turn its back on that and turn its back on the people who deliver those services.

[1550]

Part of the challenge here is that the government has chosen not to listen to those voices, to not listen to the people who deliver those services — the paramedics. Part of our challenge here, as members of the opposition, is to provide those voices and to more clearly make sure that those voices are heard.

What I want to do at this point, because it is important that those voices be heard, is…. I've received — as have many members; I'm sure all members have — correspondence, e-mails, letters and such from paramedics since the introduction of Bill 21, raising their concern. I want to read a letter into the record from one of those paramedics, who is a constituent of mine and who wrote me this letter yesterday.

"I am one of your constituents and also an advanced life-support flight paramedic with the B.C. Ambulance Service. I am writing to express my grave concern for the future of paramedics in this province. I have worked for the B.C. Ambulance Service for 14 years, first as a part-time paramedic in rural areas of the Okanagan and then for the last 12 years as a full-time paramedic based in the Lower Mainland.

"The absolute contempt with which the B.C. government has treated paramedics has reached new heights with the introduction of Bill 21. The morale of paramedics is at an all-time low, and this bill will do even more irreversible damage to our once proud service.

"Paramedics have continued to provide dedicated, life-saving services to the citizens of B.C. throughout this dispute and have simply asked for a fair process through arbitration. We have been denied the right to strike by the Labour Relations Board, and no alternative, independent process has been offered to resolve this dispute.

"The B.C. Ambulance Service is held together by its paramedics, but it is in dire straits. As an advanced life-support paramedic, I am deployed by both ground and air to some of the sickest patients in the province. There are currently just over 200 advanced life-support paramedics in B.C. to serve a population of approximately four million citizens. At night we currently have just one dedicated adult critical care evac crew for the entire province.

"We respond 365 days a year, through all types of weather, via air, land and sea. At times, multiple critical calls for service must be held, sometimes for hours, waiting for the only team to become available.

"In terms of the risks we face as paramedics, we have had multiple line-of-duty deaths, including an air-evac crash that killed the entire crew, as well as the more recent Sullivan mine tragedy.

"Last year I discovered firsthand the inherent risks of this job. I was in the back of an ambulance attending to a critical trauma patient with communicable diseases. Our ambulance was T-boned at approximately 70 kilometres an hour by a driver who failed to yield the right of way for us as we proceeded with lights and sirens through an intersection.

"I was thrown across the ambulance with an open needle in my hand. I was off work for six months with several ruptured discs in my spine and had to undergo a series of spinal injections and rigorous rehab. I am 33 years old and will feel the effects of this accident for the rest of my life.

"The B.C. government has systemically allowed the B.C. Ambulance Service to deteriorate. Stations are in disrepair or simply nonexistent. Some stations are now motels, care homes, trailers, bus garages — or, in one case in North Vancouver, a former crack house.

"Paid training has been cut. To become an advanced life-support paramedic, candidates must accrue five to ten years of experience at the primary care level, then take an unpaid leave of one and a half to two years to complete the training. On top of that, the course itself costs approximately $15,000. The total cost to a paramedic, including unpaid leave, is about $150,000.

"I fear that Bill 21 is the death-knell of the B.C. Ambulance Service. This was once the world-famous B.C. Ambulance Service. Other systems from around the world used to model their system after ours. No more. Paramedics have attempted to hold the system together for years, but without government support there is only so much we can do.

"We have held out in good faith for the past four years after extending our last collective agreement in the hopes of fixing the Ambulance Service. The B.C. government has ignored us during good economic times and bad, breaking promises to consult with the front-line workers to find solutions to the challenges we face.

"I invite any member of the House to spend a night shift or two riding along with myself or my colleagues and to see firsthand the job we do.

[1555]

"How any member claiming to represent the interests of British Columbians could vote in favour of this bill is simply beyond

[ Page 2036 ]

comprehension. It is the ultimate slap in the face to paramedics and will do nothing to solve the dispute, as the minister has stated. In fact, all it will do is further inflame tensions, permanently damage the B.C. Ambulance Service and demoralize our members, causing many of our bright up-and-coming paramedics to leave this profession."

That voice of a long-time paramedic I think speaks for what I have heard from paramedics across this province. It speaks to the disappointment that they have in their elected representatives on the government side who have turned their backs on them. It speaks to the concern they have for the jobs they do and the demise of this service, a service that is built on the quality and commitment of the paramedics, a service that clearly does not have the respect of the other side if they're prepared to introduce this form of legislation.

The other thing that I've heard from members of the public and from paramedics who have been watching this debate as it's unfolded…. I've had a number of people say to me: "How come no members from the government side get up to defend this legislation? How come no members of the government side have the courage of their conviction to stand up and say why they're going to support Bill 21?" Instead, they sit silent.

It doesn't matter who it is, whether it be the ministers…. Why hasn't the Minister of Labour stood up and spoken to this legislation? Why haven't members? Why hasn't the Premier spoken to this legislation in the House? They haven't spoken to it because, in my view, they know it's indefensible. They haven't spoken to it because they know that no fair-minded legislator could support this. Nobody who believed in balance, nobody who believed in our paramedics and respected the work they do could support this. That's the reality, and that's why the silence on the government side is deafening. That's why it's deafening.

There is a solution here. We know that the members of the paramedic service have asked for binding arbitration. The reality is that when you provide an essential service, which this service clearly is…. When you provide that kind of service, when you put it in place, when it is an essential service where quite rightly you do not allow people to withdraw those services, then you have an obligation. You have an obligation as government to put in place the processes to ensure fairness.

That process in this kind of a situation, after a significant period of negotiations, where no resolve could be found, is to have a form of binding arbitration from an independent third party that brings a resolution, a resolution that's fair. But this government — and through this government using their agents, the B.C. Ambulance Service — rejected the notion of third-party binding arbitration. They have rejected the idea that a thoughtful, informed third party should make the decision about these critical questions of this collective agreement.

I suspect the reason is because they know full well — again, whether it's the Premier or the Minister of Labour or the Minister of Health or any of their colleagues on that side — that paying somebody $2 an hour to sit on a pager wouldn't stand up to that third-party arbitration. There would be a resolution that would treat those people more fairly. That resolution would be found. An independent arbitrator would find that solution and put it in place, and the government isn't prepared to do that.

The government is perfectly happy to continue to exploit those workers with the $2-an-hour pay rate. They're perfectly happy to do that, and that's indefensible, which is one of the reasons why we'll get none of those members getting to their feet — to this point in time anyway — to defend this piece of legislation.

[1600]

We need very much to find a solution here that is fair. The government has chosen not to do that. We need to have a solution that looks to build the Ambulance Service, not diminish it. This legislation diminishes the Ambulance Service. This legislation diminishes the view of paramedics. Certainly, from the government side, it does that. That's not acceptable.

We can talk to people across this province. I read into the record a letter from a longtime paramedic who is one of my constituents, but it's certainly not just the paramedics. That's for sure. I have a letter from another of my constituents, who is not a paramedic. She says:

"As one of your constituents, I would like to thank you for the NDP's support for the B.C. paramedics and their bargaining process. I know a number of paramedics and know th