H0303pm 04

H0303pm 04

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

4th Session, 37th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Monday, March 3, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Volume 12, Number 4 THE HONOURABLE CLAUDE RICHMOND, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

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

Greg Halsey-Brandt Deputy Premier and Minister of Education ....................................................................................... ..................................Hon. Christy Clark Minister of Advanced Education................................................................................................. ...........................................Hon. Shirley Bond Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations.............................................................. .................... Hon.

Geoff Plant Minister of Children and Family Development.................................................................................... ..............................Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of State for Early Childhood Development.............................................................................. .................................Hon. Linda Reid Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services......................................................................... .................. Hon.

George Abbott Minister of State for Community Charter........................................................................................ .................................. Hon. Ted Nebbeling Minister of State for Women's Equality ......................................................................................... .................................... Hon. Lynn Stephens Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise ................................................................................ ..................................Hon.

Rick Thorpe Minister of State for Deregulation ............................................................................................. ............................................ Hon. Kevin Falcon Minister of Energy and Mines................................................................................................... ....................................... Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of Finance ............................................................................................................ ....................................................... Hon.

Gary Collins Minister of Forests ............................................................................................................ .................................................. Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Health Planning .................................................................................................... ............................................ Hon. Sindi Hawkins Minister of Health Services.................................................................................................... ................................................ Hon.

Colin Hansen Minister of State for Mental Health ............................................................................................ ...................................Hon. Gulzar S. Cheema Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care ............................................................................. Hon. Katherine Whittred Minister of Human Resources.................................................................................................... ............................................Hon.

Murray Coell Minister of Management Services................................................................................................ .........................................Hon. Sandy Santori Minister of Provincial Revenue................................................................................................. ................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ................................................................................ ..................................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Skills Development and Labour...................................................................................... .............................Hon. Graham P. Bruce Minister of Sustainable Resource Management and Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries ..................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of Transportation..................................................................................................... .................................................... Hon.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONTENTS Monday, March 3, 2003 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Introductions by Members....................................................................................................... ............................................... 5149 Introduction and First Reading of Bills ........................................................................................ ......................................... 5150 Fisheries Act Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill M201) J.

MacPhail Statements (Standing Order 25B).............................................................................................................................. .............. 5150 Northern caucus committee activities R. Harris Work of volunteers V. Anderson Film and television industry growth J. Nuraney Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ......................................................... 5151 Qualification for disability benefits J. Kwan Hon. M. Coell J. MacPhail Central Park Manor J. Nuraney Hon. K.

Whittred International Financial Centre recommendations for business in B.C. L. Mayencourt Hon. R. Thorpe New hospital for Fraser Valley R. Hawes Hon. C. Hansen Government action on sea lice in fish farms J. MacPhail Hon. J. Murray Petitions ...................................................................................................................... ............................................................... 5153 J. MacPhail J. Kwan L.

Mayencourt Budget Debate (continued) ............................................................................................................................... ........................ 5154 R. Hawes Hon. G. Plant H. Bloy D. Hayer K. Stewart K. Manhas B. Suffredine Hon. M. Coell L. Mayencourt P. Sahota Motions on Notice.............................................................................................................. ...................................................... 5182 Committee of Supply to sit in two sections (Motion 91) Hon. G. Collins

5149 MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 The House met at 2:04 p.m. Introductions by Members R. Harris: It's my great pleasure today to introduce someone who's certainly no stranger to these buildings or to a lot of people that have been here for some time. H e ' s a g o o d f r i e n d o f m i n e . H e ' s d o w n i n V i c t o r i a meeting with ministers, working on behalf of his com- munity — Mayor Len Fox from Vanderhoof. He's joined by his CEO, Joe Ukryn. Would the House please make them feel very welcome. [1405] J. MacPhail: I have two sets of introductions now and one later, if I may.

First of all, I'd like to welcome Suzanne Connell with the Georgia Strait Alliance and Theresa Rothenbush with the Raincoast Conservation Society. They are here today, representing the Coastal Alliance for Aquaculture Reform, to watch this after- noon's proceedings. Would the House please make them welcome. It's a great day in the Legislature today, and that's because our interns have arrived at our caucus. I want to read to you the first memo that they received. This went: "Morning, everyone. Just so you all know, our group of interns for this session arrived today. Excel- lent.

They are Cloe Rowbotham, Cara McGregor and Hayden Lansdell. They are currently setting up in room 356 — way, way up there. They're in the process of getting hooked up, but I'm told they have com- puters, Internet and phone numbers, but no phones. Ah, the joy of being an intern." Welcome on board, you guys, to the little caucus that could. B. Penner: Earlier today I had a chance to field some difficult questions from a number of political science students — 23, in fact — who are visiting us here today from Western Washington University in Bellingham. They are joined by their professor, Dr. Butch Kamena.

I ask that the House please give them a very warm welcome. S. Brice: Today in the House is a guest of mine, Jamie Boyd. Jamie is a first-year student at Lester B. Pearson College of the Pacific. She is going to be in this legislative chamber and these buildings for the week. I ask the House to make her welcome. J. MacPhail: My third introduction is to welcome a constituent of the east side who is joining us today, Phil Traynor. He's an active community participant, and he's watching the proceedings today. Please welcome Phil Traynor. Hon. G.

Abbott: I'd like to welcome to the House today two former constituents, Brent Loshney and Connie Kaling. They had to leave the beautiful Shuswap to go to Alberta to look for employment op- portunities. They have heard, however, about the new era of employment in British Columbia. They're back, and I'm sure they'll all enjoy great success here. I'd like the House to make them welcome. Hon. G. Hogg: A ministerial assistant in the Minis- try of Children and Family Development, Valerie Ham- ilton, tells me that a friend of hers is here today, some- one she describes as a very old friend.

This old friend is Tamera Morrison, who works for the Public Service Employee Relations Commission in Kamloops. Would the House please make Tamera welcome. D. Hayer: It is with a heavy heart that I address this House today. As many in this chamber are aware, early last week tragedy again struck my family. On Monday evening, one day after my son Alex's nineteenth birth- d a y , t h e r e s u l t o f a r o u t i n e b l o o d t e s t r e v e a l e d h e i s suffering from an advanced form of acute leukemia.

He was immediately admitted to Vancouver Gen- eral Hospital and is now in the leukemia and bone marrow transplant unit of VGH. Fortunately, his spirits are high. One of his biggest concerns is the number of classes he's missing in his first year at Simon Fraser University and time away from his new part-time work at Staples. My wife, Isabelle; my children Sonia, Anthony and Katrina; our mothers Baldev Hayer and Consuelo Mar- tinez; our families and I want to thank all those who have offered their prayers and best wishes.

We most especially want to thank the exceptional caregivers at VGH, all those wonderful doctors and nurses and sup- port staff whose work and abilities go far beyond the call of duty. I cannot say enough about their profes- sionalism, their skills and most of all their caring atti- tudes. We are truly blessed in this province to have such people caring for us and our loved ones in times of grief. I also want to thank all the members of this House, my colleagues, who have gone out of their way to ex- press their sympathy and their support for me, for my family and for my son Alexander.

Together we will fight this cancer, and we will win. [1410] Hon. R. Thorpe: Our wishes are with the member and his family. Last Thursday, en route to my constituency, I was diverted in Vancouver to the North Shore. On February 27, Thursday, at 11 p.m., my wife and I were blessed with the arrival of our first grandson, Eben. The par- ents, our daughter Richa and Kris, are doing well. Eben weighed in at only 4 pounds 11 ounces, but the nurses say he has vigorous lungs.

We would like to thank all of the nurses, the doctor and the staff in labour deliv- ery, special nursery care and maternity at Lions Gate Hospital for their care and attention. I would ask that

5150 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 the House please welcome my grandson, Eben, to Brit- ish Columbia. Introduction and First Reading of Bills FISHERIES ACT AMENDMENT ACT, 2003 J. MacPhail presented a bill intituled Fisheries Act Amendment Act, 2003. J. MacPhail: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. J.

MacPhail: This bill amends the Fisheries Act to prohibit the use of a new licence to fish farms unless the operation is a closed containment facility, meaning a solid or impermeable wall container which prevents escape of those fish or the transfer of bacteria, viruses, parasites, waste and other pollution into the surround- ing marine system. The bill is not retroactive, in the sense that it does not impose the standard of closed containment upon existing operations, nor does it im- pact existing licences in any way. A moratorium on the expansion of fish farms was lifted last fall.

Even before that time, and especially since then, the science has increasingly supported the princi- ples of caution that motivated the moratorium. Scientific study and evidence show that the threats of colonization and viral outbreaks are extreme. Also, we have learned that the transfer of sea lice has caused the decimation of wild salmon runs and that the waste released into the ecosystem by conventional open-pen farming is devas- tating to all adjacent forms of aquatic life. Even as we speak, scientists in the Broughton Ar- chipelago are finding young pinks and chums covered in sea lice.

It is time to move forward. Here in the Pa- cific Northwest we have entrepreneurs like Maricul- ture, Agrimarine and Future SEA, which have already seen the environmental and economic advantages of closed containment as well as the sustainable jobs that alternative technologies provide. This bill acknowledges that success and says British Columbians want to be part of that vision. With that, I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M201 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. Statements (Standing Order 25

B) NORTHERN CAUCUS COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES R. Harris: Since the last election there has been a change in the way British Columbia politics have been conducted. The north now has a voice. I have the pleasure of serving as the chair of the northern caucus, appointed by the Premier to bring a northern perspec- tive to Victoria to ensure that northern concerns were not ignored when it comes to legislation and to provide access to the highest levels of government. I'm here to say that it's worked. The B.C. heartlands economic strategy is a reflec- tion of the importance of northern and rural B.C.

The commitment of more than $600 million to repair north- ern and heartland roads is proof of the importance we as government put on ensuring that the entire province benefits from economic renewal. The Premier will establish the mayors council to help create an efficient and effective B.C. Rail that works for all communities, which is clearly an ex- ample of responding to the needs of northern B.C. As a northern caucus, we all support and encourage the development of containerization in Prince Rupert. This is a project that is pan-northern in its benefits.

The north wants to be a full partner, and we have been given the tools to accomplish that.

The elimina- tion of PST on machinery, the raising of the luxury tax threshold on vehicles, forgivable loans for medical pro- fessionals who practise in the north, the results-based forest practice and the 20 percent flow-through for shares for mining are all just some of the examples that we are, in fact, making a difference. [1415] Let me finish by saying I believe that the nine MLAs that make up the northern caucus are a strong voice for our region and are proud to be part of a government that is making investments back into the north again. WORK OF VOLUNTEERS V.

Anderson: I wish to publicly say thank you to a very important and very large segment of our society. These are those who are the first force in our communi- ties, who have built the social life we all share. They're the volunteers who have been our Canadian pioneers, unsung and unpaid. They have voluntarily shared their time, their possessions, their friendship and their hos- pitality. They are our community volunteers, neighbour sharing with neighbour. These are the quality builders of our communities of all ages and backgrounds.

They are what we call the volunteer sector, alongside the private sector and the public sector. Some would call them the third force, but I prefer to call them the first force in our community-building, for without them, our society would not have the strength it does. They are the leaders, the members, the servants of our com- munities' support system. In B.C. they are formally represented by the members of the volunteer bureaus across the prov- ince and now by the newly organized Voluntary Organizations Consortium of B.C. I thank them for their caring and sharing in their devotion to com- munity service.

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5151 FILM AND TELEVISION INDUSTRY GROWTH J. Nuraney: As many members in this House know, British Columbia has become a world-class destination for the international film and television industry. It now generates over a billion dollars in revenue, and it is therefore important that we support and encourage its development. These companies come here because of our tremendous diversity ― diversity in geography and diversity in our people. We have developed a strong base of highly skilled labour in this regard and also the acting ability to meet all needs.

Our ability to be flexible and to accommodate the needs of this industry has also contributed to its success. My own community in Burnaby has benefited greatly from this thriving film industry. We are now home to more than half the film space available. Together with m y c o l l e ag u e f ro m B u rnab y - Ed m o nd s , I 'v e had t he o p - portunity to visit some of these leading-edge studios in Burnaby. I have spoken to the people who work in this industry, and one thing I keep hearing is that the indus- try and the local studios are poised for growth.

All they needed was a tax system that would help attract more production in British Columbia. In this year's budget, the Minister of Finance announced tax changes designed to accomplish this goal. This will promote the growth and add incentives for regional television, film projects, digital animation and visual effects. These changes in incentives will no doubt in- crease the activities in this very significant sector of our economy, and we will indeed see this industry reach new heights to the benefit of all British Columbians. Oral Questions QUALIFICATION FOR DISABILITY BENEFITS J.

Kwan: The Minister of Human Resources said this morning that 16,000 disability review forms have been received and approximately 4,000 are still out- standing. The minister has cut another $255 million f r o m h i s i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e b u d g e t t o m e e t t h i s y e a r ' s budget target. How much does he expect to save as a result of the disability review? Hon. M. Coell: The success we're having in finding people employment in this ministry is finding that people who were once not finding jobs under the pre- vious government are now finding jobs.

The actual budget for temporary assistance, which are people who are on employment, is going down at a high rate. The rate for people on continuous assistance, which is those on supplemental and disability, is actually going up since we were in government. [1420] We're finding that the savings that are being made with putting people into employment — and success — are vastly improved over the previous government. I think you're going to see people with disabilities con- tinue to increase, although they may be at a slower rate than under the previous government.

There still will be an increase in people collecting disability assistance. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question. J. Kwan: The fact is that as a result of this process, thousands of the most vulnerable British Columbians have been put under enormous stress, and close to $3 million has been spent paying doctors to fill out the forms. If the minister can't say how much money he expects to save to meet his budget target, can he tell us just what is the purpose of the exercise?

What was he thinking when he put enormous stress on the people who are suffering from disability? What was occurring in his own mind? Hon. M. Coell: I think the member probably re- members when the Legislature debated the new legis- lation for income assistance in the province. I said many times that people with disabilities will get the support they need. Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please. Let's hear the question. J. Kwan: Let's be clear.

When the minister an- nounced he would be sending some 18,000 to 19,000 British Columbians a 23-page form asking them to jus- tify their benefits, he did it to cut his budget. He as- sumed there was fraud. He assumed thousands of dis- abled people must be cheating the system. What he's found out…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, hon. members. Order, please. Please proceed. J. Kwan: What he's found out is that their disabili- ties are real. The minister maintains he has received several thousand completed forms, no doubt some returned as early as October and November of last year.

Can he tell this House how many of the submit- ted forms have proven to be ineligible? Hon. M. Coell: The fact is that 6,000 new applica- tions are in process right now. About 10,000 reviews are in process right now. I think if the member wanted to go back and read Hansard, she would find that we said we wanted to open up that category, and we spe- cifically included mental illness. I think you'll find, if she goes back…. Interjections.

5152 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. M. Coell: I think the member should go back and reread the debate, and she might have some an- swers to her questions. J. MacPhail: When this minister started the disabili- ties review, he told advocates in the community that he expected 9,000 would be off the rolls. He did it. He put people through extreme angst with a 23-page review, and now he won't admit that he didn't expect to achieve anything. Last week…. Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. J.

MacPhail: Last week we asked the minister about a man who took his own life after receiving a letter from the minister telling him his benefits were in doubt. After he took his life, the minister told the coro- ner that his benefits were secure all along. Why did the minister not tell the coroner the truth — that this man's eligibility was being reassessed? Hon. M. Coell: I think the fact is that the member is not willing to go and have a look at what she said in estimates and what I said in estimates about how we wanted to make sure that people with disabilities got the help they needed.

We wanted to make sure that where people could work, we would help them to work. Where they couldn't work, we would make sure they had the third-highest rate of income assistance in Canada. Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question. [1425] J. MacPhail: You know, these are real lives that we're dealing with. They're real people. Somehow the minister can't answer straightforward questions. I think maybe it's because the minister can't suck and blow at the same time. This man who took his own life believed that his benefits might be cut, because that's what the letter intimated.

He got a letter from the min- istry telling him just that. Again to the minister: how would the minister know if this man's benefits were secure even before the man in question had sent back his form? Is it because, as many suspect, this whole process has been a sham from the beginning? Can he please tell us what moti- vated the minister to send out these forms if all along he just wanted to put more on the benefits? Hon. M. Coell: The government wants to make sure that funds go to people who are eligible. We had a new piece of legislation with a new definition.

What we did, and what we're in the process of doing, is mak- ing sure that people are eligible for the benefits they're going to receive. I think the fact that the members have not listened for about a year…. They should go back and possibly reread… Interjection. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. Hon. M. Coell: …what I've said. The only people who have said that there are going to be huge cuts are them. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please, hon. members. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. CENTRAL PARK MANOR J.

Nuraney: My question today is to the Minister of State for Intermediate, Long Term and Home Care. We have an extended care home in my riding called Cen- tral Park Manor, which received notification from the Fraser health authority that it will be closed in the next 12 months. There are 97 residents in this facility. My question to the minister is: what process is going to take place to make sure that there is enough consulta- tion and a smooth transition for these 97 residents? Hon. K. Whittred: As we move to modernize long- term care to ensure its sustainability, safe, appropriate care is in fact our priority.

Central Park Manor is an old building, and it has been determined to no longer be adequate for today's complex needs. We know that transition is important to all citizens. It is particularly important to seniors. That is why the health authority will be working within policy guidelines, with families and with residents over the next 12 months to ensure that they have a safe and uneventful transition to their new homes and that all of their new homes will be suitable to their needs. INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL CENTRE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUSINESS IN B.C. L.

Mayencourt: My question is to our newest grandfather in the chamber, the Minister of Competi- tion, Science and Enterprise. Fifteen years ago we cre- ated the International Financial Centre in Vancouver, with a mandate to establish B.C. as a global competitor in the financial marketplace. Due to excessive regula- tion and high taxes under the previous government, B.C. dropped to the bottom of the list in Canada in be- ing able to attract that private sector investment.

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5153 A recent report by the International Finance Centre suggests that changes to provincial legislation may be in order, in order to improve B.C.'s global standing. Will the minister please tell us what steps he's taking to improve the ability of the International Financial Cen- tre to attract business to British Columbia? Hon. R. Thorpe: I'd like to thank the member very much for the question that…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. Let us hear the answer. [1430] Hon. R. Thorpe: Mr. Speaker. I'd like to thank the member for the question.

It does affect many of his constituents in Vancouver. I met on February 5 with the chair, Ron Bozzer, and the new president, Bob Fairweather. We are looking at ways, as we are charged by the Premier, to make sure that British Columbia stays competitive, that we attract investment and create jobs here. One area was the recent taxation policy changes to the film industry. One of the areas we're looking at is making Vancouver a film distribution centre. There are many other ways.

I've asked the Interna- tional Financial Centre to work with the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association and the In- vestment Dealers Association to bring forward to me a report by May 30 that wil l lis t a number of options in which we can enhance competitiveness in British Co- lumbia, creating more jobs in your riding and all other ridings in British Columbia. NEW HOSPITAL FOR FRASER VALLEY R. Hawes: Last month the province released a re- quest for expressions of interest to build a new hospital in Abbotsford. This will be one of the first hospitals in Canada to be built through a P3.

It's finally going to get built after a lot of false promises from the previous government. To the Minister of Health Services: what assurances can he give to my constituents and the resi- dents of the Fraser Valley that this privately built facil- ity will offer the same level of health care services that are currently provided at publicly run hospitals throughout British Columbia and that the fearmonger- ing of the HEU is unfounded? Hon. C. Hansen: Truly this is excellent news for the residents of the Fraser Valley, who have been given empty promises by the previous government for an entire decade.

They are finally going to get their long- overdue new hospital. I can assure the member that this new public-private partnership is going to result in better value for the taxpayers of British Columbia. It's going to result in a state-of-the-art facility to serve the residents of the Fraser Valley, and it will provide the kind of high-quality public health care we know we're capable of in British Columbia. This is good news.

It will be equal to or better than anything we have seen in this province to date, and I can assure you that the residents of the Fraser Valley will see top-notch public health care provided by that facility. GOVERNMENT ACTION ON SEA LICE IN FISH FARMS J. MacPhail: This morning we learned that the smolts going through the Broughton Archipelago are at least 50 percent covered in sea lice. Last week the Min- istry of Water, Land and Air Protection allowed for the use of Slice, a neurotoxin.

They refused to accept the recommendation of laying fallow all of the fish farms i n t h a t a r e a d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d o f t h e p i n k a n d c h u m s a l m o n r u n . T o t h e M i n i s t e r o f W a t e r , L a n d a n d A i r Protection: will she now admit that the choice her gov- ernment made to deliberately not fallow all of the fish farms has led to another detrimental destruction of the pink salmon run? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: We are concerned about the pink salmon in the Broughton. The wild salmon are our number one priority. Interjections. Mr.

Speaker: Order. Order, please. Let us hear the answer. Hon. J. Murray: That's why we had a conference of experts two weeks ago to discuss this exact issue. We are taking very progressive action. We are fallowing a number of sites. We are increasing our monitoring ca- pacity. We are treating any infected fish. The Depart- ment of Fisheries and Oceans is out monitoring the situation as we speak… Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Hon. J. Murray: …so that we can take appropriate action that is based on science. [End of question period.] Petitions J.

MacPhail: I rise to table a petition signed by 5,716 British Columbians who call upon the B.C. Liberal gov- ernment to rescind all cuts to B.C. Pharmacare, to make public all hearings related to the broader review of Pharmacare — a review the government is conducting only to protect the profits of the pharmaceutical indus-

5154 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 try — and to ensure that seniors are included in a genuine review. [1435] Interjections. J. MacPhail: That's what the petition says. J. Kwan: I rise to table a petition signed by 840 Brit- ish Columbians who hold the Liberal government ac- countable to the people of B.C. for the destruction of the social safety net, the public education system and the health care system. They point out that this will result in widespread suffering among seniors, women and the disabled community. L.

Mayencourt: I rise to present a petition signed by 7,200 residents of my community calling on the gov- ernment to replace the Robson Street liquor store. Mr. Speaker: Any further petitions? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, hon. members. Orders of the Day Hon. G. Collins: I call budget debate. Budget Debate (continued) Mr. Speaker: The budget debate continues with the member for Maple Ridge–Mission. R. Hawes: I rise today to conclude the comments that I started last Thursday.

I know there are many of us here, especially on the government side, that want to get up today and speak to this budget, because it is indeed very good news for British Columbia. As I said last Thursday, it has shown that our government is on track to balancing the budget and completing the promises that we made in our New Era document, which we filed with the people of this province prior to the election. On Thursday I spoke to changes that we've made to the education system.

I now just want to touch briefly on some of the health care changes that are in this budget and that are continuing, which have been put in place since we were elected. When we were elected, we took over a province that had 52 different health au- thorities — a complete mishmash, a disjointed, non- communicating group, overly bureaucratic, far too much administration. Since then, that's been reduced to six regions to deliver health care in a more efficient manner.

Now, on this side in the government, there have been a number of advances put forward, by the Pre- mier particularly, that allow us a great number of par- liamentary reforms that would allow things like free votes in the House. In fact, dissent is actually encour- aged here. If we are not in complete agreement with where the government's going, we're free to speak to any issue that we wish to speak to. [1440] I have to say I've never been a fan of regionaliza- tion. I was a member of a hospital board in my com- munity that ran a hospital very successfully. It pro- vided excellent health care.

Mission Memorial Hospital has always been referred to by the people where I live as the jewel of the Fraser Valley. Regionalization, when it came into place in the late 1990s under the previous government, kind of destroyed that. The services in our hospital began to erode very shortly after regionaliza- t i o n , a n d m a n y o f u s h a v e o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o w h a t w e called the sucking sound that seemed to be the sound of our services disappearing into Abbotsford. That, actually, to a great degree has continued.

While I'm not a big fan of regionalization, I under- stand there's a road we've begun to go down that's very difficult to step back from. The reduction from 52 regions or different governance bodies in health care to six is a tremendous improvement. While for me personally school is still out — I'm not yet convinced that regionalization was the way to go — I do realize that all of us have to get into the boat and kind of row in the same direction, or we're not going to get anywhere.

I know I have tried in my own commu- n i t y t o c o n v i n c e p e o p l e t h a t w h a t w e n e e d t o d o i s work with the region, work with the ministry and try to get to where it is that we wish, as a community, to a r r i v e . D o w e w a n t o u r h o s p i t a l t o c o n t i n u e t o b e a very important part of our community, a central focal point for our community? A lot of the services have now left our hospital — in fact, it's sort of a shadow of its former self — but in talking to the region, I know what's going to happen.

As those services disappear, new services are going to appear in our hospital and, really, across the health region — services that perhaps weren't there before or that people had to travel quite a ways to get to. W h a t I ' m t r y i n g t o d o i n m y o w n c o m m u n i t y i s work with the city council and those that provide health care services to build a hospital that's going to be fully utilized. It's not necessarily going to provide what was there before, so there will be people who will be upset that services have disappeared.

On the other hand, there will be new services that many people will be very pleased with. There's a balance here, and a lot o f t h a t i s s t r u c k b y t h e r e a l i t i e s o f w h a t ' s g o i n g o n around the world. The way the Health ministry has now taken the political side out of the provision of health care is, I think, a very intelligent way to go. The decision of how health care services should be provided is left to the professionals, who better under- stand how to provide health care. Where services were delivered, how many services, etc., was kind of done on a political basis.

If your riding happened to have somebody representing them that was on the govern- ment side, who perhaps could speak a little louder for their community than another, your community would

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5155 get services — sometimes services that weren't needed. There's evidence of communities around the province that had far more services than they could ever use. Others had far too few, and their people were imper- illed. A lot of that was determined because of the politi- cization of health care. That has stopped. The minister has removed politics and has allowed the management of the health regions to make decisions surrounding health care based on the needs of the regions them- selves.

Instead, what the ministry has done is put in place assessment tools and set standards to which the health authorities must deliver. That's an advance that is unprecedented in this country. I know there are some areas in the United States that have done this, but not to the extent that it's happened here. I'm very p r o u d t o b e p a r t o f a g o v e r n m e n t t h a t i s p r e p a r e d t o make those kinds of advances. A s y o u l o o k a r o u n d t h e w o r l d , h e a l t h c a r e i s i n a terrible state, really, internationally.

This is not an iso- lated event that we're going through in this province, but I think we're a lot further along in the restructuring of health care here than other parts of the world. [1445] I want to speak for a minute about one of the prac- tices that had gone on for far too long in this province, certainly for the ten years that the previous govern- ment was in power. That's around the accrual account- ing that went around health care benefits and costs that were part of union contracts.

If one were to look at the union contracts that health care workers live under, you would find that there are things such as retirement allowances that allow all workers to get paid, on re- tirement, one week's pay for every two years of service once they reach age 55 and have ten years' service. For a retiring health worker with 30 years' employment, for example, that would be 15 weeks' pay, in addition to which there's a 40 percent payout of accumulated sick time. That works out to somewhere around 60 days for those who haven't used their sick time, which is about 12 weeks' pay.

When you combine just those two, you're up to almost 30 weeks' pay — more than half a year. That's a liability that was carried in almost every health institution across this province. None of that was ever accrued. There was nothing set up in the books for these liabilities. There was no accounting for how much could be owed. There was absolutely no way of knowing until we took office, and we have moved to generally accepted accounting principles. That would say that all liabilities like that have to ap- pear in the books of the government.

The government now has to do its books or is moving towards having to do its books by, I think, 2004 in the same way that every business in this province would have to do their books. In doing so, those liabilities have jumped out. It amounts to millions and millions — in fact, I think more than $100 million across the province, perhaps several hundred million dollars. The problem is that the privately operated, non- profit care homes, that sort of thing…. No accrual was done for them and still has not been done for them. They continue to carry that liability on their own books.

Although it's not on the books, they have to fund it. What happened previously was that if some- body retired — or maybe in a year, several people would retire — from a small care home, the non-profit society would pay out whatever it was they had to pay out, would just send a bill to the ministry, and a cheque would arrive to compensate them. There was no ac- counting for any of this.

There was no way of setting what that liability was going to be in your budget, which really is typical of the way government ran here for the last decade — with really no controls, no method of controlling, no knowledge of what was coming. In fact, if it were done in private business…. I would suggest to you that any business who conducted themselves in that manner would not be in business very long. They would long ago have been bankrupt. In fact, we've been driven very close to that point in this province by that last government. We're trying to get a handle on that.

I know the minister is wrestling with it with the health authorities, and they're trying to come up with a way to fund all of this, but it's a huge problem. It's another one of those ticking time bombs that were left to us by that previous government, where we have to try to figure out how to handle what's really a very large problem, and it's not an easy problem to solve. We've allowed the health authorities to contract out support services.

I spoke about that a few weeks ago here in the House — about the HEU contract, its cost to government and the way that it has, over the past dec- ade, become far too expensive. Since I spoke in the House, I have received numbers of e-mails from HEU members who are very upset at the comments that I made. Unfortunately, they were characterized by the HEU itself — their management — as a gender attack on women. I do want to clarify that when I spoke in the House previously, I never mentioned gender. When I speak of benefits that are too high, it matters not to me the gender of the worker.

Benefits that are too high are too high. [1450] I have here quite a compilation of the benefits that are under that HEU contract. When I look through that, I see things like vacation time. Using that as an example, in British Columbia after 14 years of em- ployment, a worker at any level under the HEU con- tract would get six weeks' annual paid vacation. There is no other province in this country — and I have them all here — that would pay that kind of benefit. The closest is Manitoba, which is after 21 years of service, and the rest of them are all over 24 or 25 years.

In this province — seven weeks' vacation after 19 years' employment. No province in this coun- try offers seven weeks' vacation to any health support s t af f . A s y o u r l e ng t h o f s e rv i c e wi t h t he g o v e rnm e nt continues to climb, that seven weeks becomes eight weeks, nine weeks and ten weeks. Every five years it goes up.

5156 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 I see the time is up. I just wanted to make sure that my constituents understand we are working on these problems. We are rebuilding trust in the private sector and in the investment community in this province, which is where the return to prosperity and the ability to pay for these services is going to come from. Our budget, again, is very good news. We are on track, and thank you for the time. Hon. G.

Plant: I am pleased to have the opportu- nity to rise today to speak to and in support of the budget that was introduced a few short days ago by my colleague the Minister of Finance. In general terms, it represents a tremendously successful step forward toward financial responsibility, toward economic pros- perity and toward that new era of hope we promised British Columbians when we were elected in the spring of 2001.

As a minister with responsibility for treaty negotia- tions issues and for justice issues, I wanted to spend a minute or two here this afternoon to talk about some of the things we've been doing in those ministries that government is moving forward on, initiatives that are supported by the budget and also supported by the throne speech which we heard in the early part of Feb- ruary, just a few weeks ago. I wanted to begin by talking a bit about the treaty negotiations office.

It is, from a budgetary perspective, much the smaller portion of my ministerial responsi- bilities, but I think it carries out a very, very important role in helping us move toward economic renewal in British Columbia. When we took office in June of 2001, we did so on the basis of a commitment to conduct a provincewide referendum that would engage the peo- ple of British Columbia directly in providing and ob- taining from them input on principles to guide the province's approach to treaty-making. That referen- dum, as you know, Mr. Speaker, was conducted last spring.

I want to remind members present and all those who may have occasion to be watching this afternoon that we conducted this referendum for a couple of im- portant reasons — at least a couple in addition, of course, to the fact that we had made the commitment and that I think it was good of us to keep that com- mitment. I think it was important that we engaged the people of British Columbia directly in the business of thinking about what they want to achieve from the treaty process.

Wherever we look around the province, this process that has been underway for a decade has involved meetings, has involved consultation, has involved a certain amount of public attention, but for whatever reason, it seemed to us that notwithstanding the best efforts of many people, the public was not engaged in the treaty process. In the long run, the treaty process will not succeed if we do not manage to engage the public in the important work we're doing. The referen- dum, I think, achieved that objective. We had a very vigorous public discussion last spring.

There were well over three-quarters of a million returned ballots, which I think is a very, very good number, given that it was, from a direct democracy perspective, an experimental exercise — the first time that a provincewide referendum had been conducted through the use of a mail-in ballot at a time that was outside the ordinary election cycle and on a basis that sought the input of citizens on eight different state- ments of principle.

It was a new exercise in direct de- mocracy but, I think, a very successful exercise. [1455] We also undertook the referendum exercise because in addition to the need to just have the conversation, we thought it would be important to find out exactly what it is the people of British Columbia wanted us to achieve on their behalf. The eight statements of princi- ple, I think, represent a very useful framework for us as government to take forward as we move through the months and years to come in the treaty process.

It's really important to remind members that the referendum was conducted on the basis that we were committed to the treaty process and that we would use it to reinvigorate the treaty process. That is what we have been trying to do in the months since the referen- dum. We've been moving forward in a number of ways to try to build on the momentum that I think was cre- ated by the referendum, to see if we can actually bridge the gap that exists between and among the positions of the different parties in the process — bridge it enough so we can actually produce some agreements. The treaty process under the B.C.

Treaty Commis- sion has been underway for nearly a dozen years in British Columbia. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent in negotiation expenses, and the outcome that the parties originally intended this process to have — namely, comprehensive settlement agreements — has thus far eluded the participants. While this is hard and difficult work, and it's bound to take some time, it is also time that we start to see if we can produce the very agreements that this process was originally in- tended to produce. We've been doing some things to try to help achieve that outcome.

We've tried to become a bit stra- tegic, frankly. We have looked across the landscape of just over 40 tables that are notionally active. We've asked ourselves whether there are some tables where the promise of success is more real in the short term t h a n p e r h a p s i t i s i n t h e c a s e o f o t h e r s , a n d w e h a v e organized our resources within the treaty negotiations office to ensure that we can bring the maximum con- structive energy to bear on those specific tables. We call those the "breakthrough tables," because that's what we're looking for. We're looking for breakthrough re- sults.

We're looking to achieve agreements, and I think we are on the verge of achieving those agreements. I think we're on the verge of achieving some suc- cess stories in the treaty process in British Columbia, and I'm very hopeful that we may achieve some of those success stories in the year 2003, the fiscal year that is the subject of the service plans the Finance min- ister tabled when he made his budget speech on Febru- ary 18. But we're not going to get the success without

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5157 stretching ourselves a little bit. The challenge, and it's both a challenge and an opportunity, has been to work within the framework that the referendum principles gave us and also to work within the objective of obtain- ing agreements to see what we need to do to bridge the gap between where we are and where we want to be. T h a t w o r k o f b r i d g i n g t h e g a p i s w o r k t h a t h a s t o b e done by all parties. First nations have to step beyond where they have been. Canada has to make some movement, and British Columbia has to make some movement.

That's what negotiations are about. Nego- tiations are about give and take; negotiations are about compromise. We are looking for opportunities to achieve success where we build from the platform of principle that the referendum gave us, but we are also willing to work within those principles to take some new steps and perhaps embark upon some new direc- tions. [1500] We have been speaking about initiatives like revenue-sharing. Members of this House will have heard some reference to revenue-sharing in the throne speech. They will also see it in the budget that the Fi- nance minister tabled.

It's time for the people of British Columbia to realize that we need to work together to ensure that the development of the lands and the re- sources of British Columbia is something that takes place in a way where all of us, aboriginal and non- aboriginal, can benefit from that development. That, in my view and in the view of government, involves opening ourselves up to the idea of revenue-sharing and sitting down at tables with first nations to explore ways in which we can share with first nations some measure of the fruits of success of the economic devel- opment of the lands and resources of the province.

We're working now on developing the framework of principles that makes sure we advance provincial pub- lic interest objectives as we move forward to consider these ideas and that they become effective tools not just for building strong relationships with first nations but for ensuring that we can in f act grow the res ources of the province. Revenue-sharing is one idea we've been working on. We've talked about the idea of comanagement.

We've talked about the possibility of introducing the subject of compensation into the treaty process, be- cause those are issues that first nations have said they want to discuss in the treaty process.

They have said for a decade that these are issues that are important to them in the treaty process, and yet for a decade the governments have said: "No, these issues cannot be part of these discussions." Sooner or later, when you hear somebody say at a negotiation table that they want to talk about something, I think there is a time and a place where the right thing to do is to recognize the importance of the issue and to sit down and see if we can have that discussion about those issues in a way that meets the broad objective of ensuring the treaty process produces agreements that are affordable, fair and equitable, that create certainty, that are final and yet also meet first nations' objectives — which, frankly, are quite similar to our objectives in respect to many of those issues.

We've said we are open to some new approaches on those sorts of issues. We've also said we think it's time to take a new approach to the idea of certainty, to take a new approach to the means by which certainty is achieved as a matter of law through the treaty process. We've said we're willing to explore new approaches to the legal technique of certainty because we think the best guarantee of certainty in the treaty process is not found in the precise words that are set out on a particu- lar page of a long and complicated legal document.

Rather, the best guarantee of certainty in a treaty rela- tionship is found in the relationship itself. If the rela- tionship is working, if the parties to the relationship are getting the benefits from the relationship that they be- lieve they should get when they went into it, then no one is going to be looking for that certainty clause bur- ied deep in the legal text of the document.

The only time people start looking for the certainty clause is when something's not working and when people start to look for a way to get out of the agreement to avoid their obligations because the relationship is no longer functioning. We've said it's time for the government of British C o l u m b i a t o l o o k f o r d i f f e r e n t w a y s t o a c h i e v e c e r - tainty. We need to achieve certainty. The province is at the treaty table because we need to have a measure of certainty over the land and resource base of British Columbia.

We need to have a measure of certainty around what it means — what aboriginal title and rights mean. We need to have a measure of certainty around what Crown rights and title mean. We need that certainty, because the investment community and ordinary citizens won't make investments in the land and resource base of the province without that cer- tainty. We don't have that certainty today. The status q u o t o d a y i s u n c e r t a i n t y . W e n e e d t o m o v e t o w a r d s certainty. As I say, the fundamental objective is cer- tainty founded in a working relationship.

There is still important work for government to do in terms of sitting down and negotiating the language in an agreement that will help us achieve that certainty. What we have said, in specific terms, is that it's no longer appropriate for the province to be at the table demanding that first nations give up their rights — that they cede, release and surrender those rights. That has clearly been an unsuccessful objective on the part of government, and it is probably a wrong-headed objec- tive.

I think we can achieve certainty without demand- ing that first nations cede, release or surrender their rights, and that is what we're working to do at the ta- bles where we're hard at work negotiating agreements. [1505] We've talked a lot about government — how we can move forward with an approach to self- government that respects the very important interests and concerns British Columbians have in ensuring that government relationships are flexible, that govern- ments are financially accountable and that they're de- mocratically responsible to the people whose lives are

5158 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 a f f e c t e d b y t h e m . W e t h i n k w e c a n m a k e p r o g r e s s o n those issues, too, in a way that is respectful of first na- tions interests but also ensures that the broader public interest of the people of British Columbia is satisfied. In the throne speech in particular, there was em- phasis on the need for a new approach to reconcilia- tion — the recognition that there is much to regret in the history of our relations with aboriginal peoples in this part of North America.

While it's probably an unhelpful exercise to think about who may be to blame or not to blame for the history, the fact is that our hi sto ry doe s not le av e u s much to be p roud o f. It's time to acknowledge that reality, and it's time to move forward in a way that says that our objective is to reconcile our differences, to acknowledge the past and to see if we can build a new relationship.

If we move forward in the months to come, both at the breakthrough tables that I've spoken about and also across the province generally, I think there will be opportunities for government to implement that new approach to reconciliation that was spoken about in the throne speech, which I think can be a critically important component of a strategy to achieve success at the treaty table and elsewhere in British Columbia. The budget talks about the economic measures fund. That, too, was also spoken about in the throne speech.

We think this relatively modest investment of $10 million a year on the part of government has a great potential to level the playing field across the province to ensure that first nations have an equal op- portunity to participate in economic development, that they're not held back from their participation in the mainstream economy by the fact that they may not have the skills or the tools in their communities to do business plans or feasibility studies or to participate in economic activities with the level of training and tech- nical expertise that's sometimes required.

I think the economic measures fund is going to prove to be a very useful tool. We are still in the first year of the fund. It looks as though we have now got up and in place something close to $13 million worth of projects. The good news in the throne speech and the budget is that the com- mitment of a year ago of $10 million a year over three years has now been extended by a year. I want to say to people who are as concerned as I am about programs like this that to make sure they work, we are going to be evaluating the results. We're going to be measuring our successes.

We're going to be accountable for the failures, if we have them, but I think that as we undertake that process of accountability, that evaluation, we will find some success stories. We may find a few experiments that did not succeed as much as we had hoped they would, but I know we'll find some success stories, and we can use those success stories as the platform to build fur- ther successes and to ensure that we work together with first nations to enhance the opportunity to create opportunities for first nations to be constructive, full participants in the economic life of British Columbia.

That is the key to the new relationship, in my view. Rather than seeing ourselves on an us-and-them basis, rather than seeing people as being either for or against our future as a province on the basis of assertions of rights and title, it is how we can reconfigure the rela- tionship so that we see ourselves working together to build a bigger economy that will benefit all of us, whether it's in oil and gas or aquaculture or forestry or tourism or ski resorts in Kamloops.

Wherever it is and whatever the initiative, I think we have great opportu- nities to reconfigure our approach to these things and move forward together. [1510] The other area of my ministerial responsibilities is the justice system. That responsibility is shared by a number of different ministries. Of course, the thing that characterizes our justice system more than anything else is the impossibility of describing it as a system in any meaningful way.

Really, our justice system is a collection of independent actors who function occa- sionally interdependently but who are themselves, each of them, within their own sphere, quite independ- ent of the other in ways that are necessary to protect the fairness and impartiality which are essential attrib- utes of our justice system. T h e c h a l l e n g e w e f a c e i s t o e n s u r e t h a t t h a t i n d e - pendence and the values it protects do not become unreasonable obstacles to reform which will ensure that the justice system, in fact, serves the interests of the public it must serve.

We are looking at and have been working on a variety of initiatives that are in- tended to ensure that our justice system meets the goals of being fair, being affordable, being accessible and being effective — most of all, that it be the justice system that delivers justice. Here, I think, is part of the challenge for all of us as participants in the conversation about how to make the justice system work better. When I talk about effi- ciency, people are inclined to hear that as a conversa- tion about budget numbers or how many courtrooms.

Maybe efficiency isn't the right word, because effi- ciency isn't a goal in itself. What efficiency is, is a key to enter the door of a quality justice system. When our justice system is inefficient, when our justice system allows for delay and for unreasonable expense to be incurred, whether by private sector parties or by gov- ernment, that is what gets in the way of quality justice outcomes.

Delay affects the quality of justice, because the longer it takes to bring a matter forward for resolution, the greater the likelihood that witnesses' memories will fail, that they'll no longer be available, that parties will have forgotten that the original reason for the criminal process, for example, is a measure of accountability, which becomes ever more elusive as the months pass and people tend to forget what it was that got the process started in the first place.

From the broad per- spective of how we can make this system work better, how we can start to even introduce into the conversa- tion the suggestion that it ought to be regarded as a system and that we ought to be able to talk about a

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5159 justice system, there are some things we are doing, and there are some things we need to do more of. We have, over the last year, expanded by 14 the number of circuit courts in British Columbia. People who have followed the debate about courthouse clo- sures will, I think, be glad of the opportunity to realize that while it is true that we closed some 24 full-time courthouses in British Columbia, at 14 of those loca- tions we now have circuit court service — the same level of service to the public but at significantly less cost to government.

We are continuing to work in the bylaw reform forums. We are continuing to pursue the issue of two- tiered traffic fines and are hoping to expand the use of video conferencing. We've introduced fax filing. These are minor but, I think, not unimportant tools to help the justice system work more effectively.

Through the justice review task force, we have be- gun an important public discussion about whether or not we can unify the family courts in British Columbia so that the user of the family court system sees one court system and doesn't have to sort themselves out between the superior court or the Provincial Court. This is an experiment that has been conducted in other jurisdictions across Canada with a great deal of suc- cess, and we are moving forward to see if the same experiment can be conducted in British Columbia. We are looking at changes.

We're looking at becom- ing a more constructive participant and maybe a more vocal participant in the discussion about how to im- prove the criminal justice system generally. [1515] Do we still need the preliminary inquiry? British Columbia has argued at the provincial-territorial- federal level that given the extensive requirement of disclosure that now lies on the Crown, an obligation that never existed to that extent a decade or more ago…. Given the extent of that disclosure, there really is no longer any practical need for a preliminary in- quiry in all but the most exceptional cases.

We've argued, and I've argued here on the floor of this Legislature quite recently, that we ought to reform the law of conditional sentencing to ensure that condi- tional sentences are not available for serious crimes of violence. We're looking at ways in which we can accommo- date the demand for increased legal fees by defence counsel in serious criminal cases without overburden- ing the legal aid budget. Frankly, that is as big a chal- lenge as I can imagine. We may have to embrace that challenge. We'd better embrace that challenge if we're going to continue to be able to manage legal aid ex- penditures.

The challenge that I want to leave with members of this Legislature and the public generally on that issue — on the issue of justice reform generally, but in par- ticular on the issue of our criminal justice system — is whether we need to talk about bolder reforms. This morning, for example, in the Vancouver Sun there was an

article by the former Attorney General, a former member of this assembly, Alex Macdonald, who sug- gested that it was time for Canada to move towards a requirement on the part of defence counsel to disclose their case in advance of a trial in a criminal matter. Disclosure is required on all parties in civil cases. There is certainly a long history of reasons why we have not required defence counsel to make disclosure in crimi- nal cases. Maybe it's time we start to look at those is- sues as we grapple with the fact that our criminal jus- tice institutions are becoming more expensive and more complex.

The cases are taking longer. The tech- nology is imposing costs and also creating opportuni- ties. It's becoming a huge and unwieldy creature, and if we don't start to talk about reform in a meaningful way, I'm afraid the public will eventually lose confi- dence in what we're doing. That represents a brief outline of some of the work we're doing in the Attorney General ministry. It doesn't even begin to talk about the administrative justice pro- ject and other things that are important, and I'm sure that during the course of this session there will be other opportunities to talk about those things.

Let me conclude my remarks today by talking about one other thing, which is outside my ministerial responsibilities but is very close to my heart as some- one who lives in the community of Steveston in Rich- mond. There's a place in Steveston called Garry Point Park. It's a wonderful place. It's really in just about exactly the southwest corner of Lulu Island. It sits on the river and on the ocean, and it's a place that most times of the year people visit to walk their dogs or go for a jog or fly their kites.

Sometimes in winters unlike this winter, the firefighters will flood a portion of the park, and the water will freeze and kids will skate. Adults may also skate. It's kind of a neat place. Most of the time it's a pretty quiet place, even though there's lots of activity on the river. It's a place to go and get away from things. It's also been a very special place. Last summer, in the first week of August, on a brilliant warm afternoon a bunch of us were at Garry Point Park watching tall ships sail up the river. There weren't just a bunch of us.

There were actually nearly 125,000 people at Garry Point Park watching tall ships come up the river. It was the largest gathering of tall ships along the B.C. coast in more than a century. Over 400,000 people came to Richmond for that event during the course of the five days of the festival. It was a splendid opportunity to put Richmond and Steveston on the map. [1520] I'll never forget the feeling I had when I stood on the point where I was and looked at the vast crowds of people, who were all having the time of their lives.

No one sitting in Garry Point Park that afternoon was ask- ing themselves tough questions about how much the festival cost, the 2,200 volunteers that were required, the extent to which businesses would or would not benefit from the festival. Everyone was just really ex- cited to be there. E v e r y o n e w a s j u s t r e a l l y e x c i t e d t o b e p a r t o f a n event that made them feel connected to their commu- nity, made them feel connected to their province, made

5160 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 them feel better about themselves. For me, that was the moment at which I became as sold on the Olympics as you could possibly be sold, because, really, the Olym- pics…. You know, we need to know about costs. We need to know all about that important stuff. The mem- bers opposite need to hold government to account for budgets, for expenditures and facilities. We need to know about what they're there for, what good they'll serve, what is a legacy investment and what's not a legacy investment.

All of that is hugely important, but for me at the end of the day, when the Olympics come to British Columbia, it's going to be about making us feel tre- mendously proud to be British Columbians. It's going to be about that moment in the sun whe re we wil l all feel like we're a part of something that's important, where we will all feel valued as citizens. Everything we can do in this chamber to move us toward that day is, I think, work worth doing, and that includes supporting this budget. H. Bloy: It is an honour and a privilege to rise to- day in the House in support of the budget.

This budget is on track for a brighter future for all British Columbi- ans. Our first full budget in 2002 introduced a three- year plan with three goals: to restore sound fiscal man- agement, to revitalize the economy and to put patients, students and people first. This plan is working. We will balance the budget in 2004-05. We have increased the overall educational budget by $143 million over the next three years. We're going to direct an additional $1.3 billion in expected federal funding to meet the health care needs of British Columbians.

We're going to invest $650 million of new dedicated fuel tax revenue in transportation infrastruc- ture over the next three years in the heartlands. We will achieve a significantly lower level of debt than anticipated in the 2002 budget and fiscal plan. We are restoring sound fiscal management. We are keeping spending under control. We are revitalizing the econ- omy — tax changes for growth and diversification, the opening up of B.C. heartlands to economic growth, opening up the heartlands through transportation, re- vitalizing our forest industry and construction to pro- mote economic development.

We are putting patients, students and people in need first. We're preserving the Health Services budget. We're increasing the education funding per student. We're funding leading-edge post-secondary education, and we're supporting families and commu- nities. The opposition says we are ignoring those in need, those that can't support themselves. Our opposi- tion colleagues like to say we're the representatives of the rich. The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant loves to stand up in this House and tell us the pain we are inflicting on low- and middle-income families in B.C. I disagree.

I contend that the track record of the two members for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and Vancouver- Hastings lends itself to hypocrisy every time they speak in this House. The budget presented in this House on February 18 is protecting the members of society that cannot protect themselves and at the same time is continuing the progress we initiated almost two years ago. If I can take you back three years ago, the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant, a self-described social activist for the downtown east side, for all intents and purposes abolished the homeowners grant for people with disabilities.

This member, who on a constant basis criticizes the well-intentioned responsibilities and ef- fective fiscal policies of this government, should take a look back at her days as a minister before getting up in this House and accusing this government of ignoring the poor. [1525] The opposition will try and has tried to accuse this government of hurting those in society that need the help the most. That is an outright lie. This budget, like the one before it, is setting priorities, putting money where it is needed and is, no doubt, on its way to a balanced budget in 2004-05.

I don't want to go back too far in history, but it helps to appreciate the fiscal responsibilities of Minister Collins in his recent budget. I recollect a certain Fi- nance minister three years ago, who signed off on pen- sion plans for two senior bureaucrats worth more than a million dollars together. This former Finance minister responded to questions of his responsibility by stating: "I don't have a clue." Let me tell you, this government has a clue. It knows where it's going. We have a plan to balance the budget and to see that British Columbia regains atop Canada, economically and socially, what it once had.

All our ministers came in under budget for the first time in recorded history. Is that not a worthy accom- plishment? Of course it is. The money saved was redi- rected into programs that British Columbians asked for and needed. We are spending 41 percent of our budget on health care, 5 percent more than the national average. More importantly, more money is being directed at pa- tient care than ever before. We have dramatically low- ered income assistance caseloads. We have increased disability income exemptions. We have increased child care spaces by 50 percent in the coming year.

Now, I would like the Leader of the Opposition to say that these are not constructive and compassionate programs. We are on track for a brighter future; I am sure of it. The dark days of the NDP are gone. Responsibility and accountability are back in this Legislature. Unions are trying to tell us to turn back, to revert to the tax-and- spend decade that sunk this glorious province to the bottom of nearly all economic indicators. The head of the Business Council of B.C., Jock Finlayson, echoes my thoughts about this budget: "The government remains committed to the fiscal target laid out. We strongly support that.

Unions say: 'Roll back the policy.' I say we're just starting to roll forward." I take exception to comments made in this House just a few days ago by a former Finance minister. She said that this is not a stay-the-course budget, and I quote: "…anybody to be drawn into that misleading

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5161 statement is foolish." Well, as one of four million resi- dents of British Columbia, I am offended. How dare the opposition leader, the interim leader of the NDP, insult the intellect of the people of British Columbia and the over 900,000 people who place their trust in the fiscal agenda of this government? I take exception to this comment and rightly so. On May 16, 2001, 57.6 percent of the voters of British Columbia gave this government an unprecedented mandate to fundamen- tally change the way government operates.

We are fulfilling those promises, and this budget highlights those commitments. Finally, I just want to express my annoyance at the repetitive theme within the Leader of the Opposition's speech, which was particularly hypocritical: "Stand up and justify…." Would the Leader of the Opposition like to stand up and justify the fearmongering of fallacies that she constantly spouts in this assembly? Would she like to stand up and justify the exploitation of the Brit- ish Columbia taxpayer throughout the nineties? Would she like to stand up and justify the doubletalk and rhetoric that I hear from her nearly every day?

British Columbia is once and for all back on track, contrary to what the member for Vancouver-Hastings likes to say. I am confident in this budget, confident in this gov- ernment and absolutely confident in the future of Brit- ish Columbia. [1530] I'd like to talk about a little bit of good news in the r i d i n g o f B u r q u i t l a m . I t ' s t h e h o m e o f S i m o n F r a s e r University. Did you know that on top of Simon Fraser University, over the next 20 years will be built 10,000 new residences? It's called "UniverCity." There will also be retail and commercial space.

But that's not all that's happening in Burquitlam. The Olympics are coming to Burquitlam atop Burnaby Mountain at Simon Fraser University. The Olympics — I can envision it. They're going to build the skating oval at Simon Fraser University. It's going to be a magnifi- cent building. It's going to have three ice-playing sur- faces in the middle. It's going to have a long track and a short track. They're going to be presenting gold medals there in 2010. I can visualize it now, and I often do, seeing that first gold medal being put around the neck of a Canadian as O Canada is played.

The Olympics is about sports, but the Canadian Olympic bid is for all Canadians. The real legacy that will be left from the Olympics will be the over 100,000 square feet of re- search and classroom space that will be attached to the skating oval. This comes complete with an endowment fund for the operation of this building. Simon Fraser University is going to become a centre for health and sport excellence in Canada. That is the true legacy of the Olympics in the economic plan of this government of British Columbia. That's the good news from Burquitlam, and there's lots more good news. EBay is coming.

The new laun- dry facilities for the Fraser health authority are coming. Abgenix has just opened a biotech lab next to Chromos. But let's talk about some of the things that the NDP left behind. They left all these problems behind. I just want to mention a few of them: the Lillooet land re- source management committee, the central coast land resource management committee, no energy policy in British Columbia, Burns Bog, Sumas 2 power plant, Skeena Cellulose, Carrier Lumber settlement. I don't think I have to describe each one of these.

Every British Colum- bian has felt the pain from the NDP in ten years by not acting on many of these. Forest land renewal — spending twice as much as it was taking in. Vancouver Trade and Convention Centre — $75 million down the drain. Our Minister Thorpe has just announced the start of construc- tion and bidding on the new convention centre. They left behind fast ferries, a SkyTrain SAR law- suit, the Lions Gate Bridge lawsuit, skyrocketing Phar- macare costs, doctors and nurses shortages across this province. In fact, with the NDP in power, the number of nurses graduating declined every year from 1996.

MSP collections; a virtual ignorance of how business actually works; unfunded child care announcements; Munroe agreement on funded liabilities; mental health plan never in any budget; Forest Practices Code, an extra $1 billion in costs that didn't have to be there; unfunded tuition freezes; Tech B.C.; Surrey Place rede- velopment; Woodwards Building; a $3.8 billion struc- tural deficit; uncompetitive tax rates — those are just a few of the things that the NDP left behind. [J.

Weisbeck in the chair.] The Leader of the Opposition never lets facts get in the way of her outrageous stories, and I'd like to quote some notes from her throne speech. But just before I do that, I would like to say that this is what I dream of for the future of British Columbia one of these days.

I take this from the Vancouver Sun on Thursday, February 27, and I just want to read the title of this: "Alberta Likely to Enjoy $2 Billion Budget Surplus This Year." I'm sure that's the goal of this government. [1535] Just before I get on to the remarks, I would like to c o m m e n t o n t h e I p s o s - R e i d p o l l . T h e d a t e h e r e i s within the last week — February 25: "Eight in ten small business owners say that the provincial government is moving in the right direction with respect to the changes they have made for small business over the last two years.

More than four in ten say that B.C.'s business climate is already in better shape than when the Liberals were first elected. When asked to think two years in the future, 66 percent expect that the B.C. business climate will be in better shape than today. Current taxes, 40 percent, and the economy, 23 percent, top the list of issues which small business owners want B.C. to address." I just wanted to respond to some comments that the Leader of the Opposition, the interim leader of the NDP, made in her throne speech reply. Hers were: "Af- ter almost two years in power, the economy is not well.

The deficit is out of control. More debt is being added to the books than ever before. Our communities are being devastated." I just want to point out the B.C. Liberal government record. British Columbians pay the lowest rate of per-

5162 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 sonal income tax of any province in Canada for the first $60,000 of income. B.C.'s average weekly wage in- creased at more than three times the national rate and showed the strongest increase of all provinces in 2002. Home sales in British Columbia in 2002 totalled more than $19 billion, up 27 percent. B.C. gained almost 78,000 new jobs in 2002, an increase of 4.1 percent and well ahead of the national increase of 3.7 percent. We have introduced balanced-budget legislation. We have a fiscal plan that is on track to balance the budget in 2004-05.

Each ministry came in under budget this year, the first time in at least 50 years. The 2003-04 deficit is $600 million below what was forecast. Again, the member for Vancouver-Hastings had this to say: "Less than two years ago the Premier won an overwhelming mandate on a promise of hope and prosperity, on a promise to restore confidence in the integrity of our political institutions. Not only has that promise not been filled, it's been broken." Well, I want to correct the member for Vancouver- Hastings, and I want to let the member know what we have been doing.

The Premier of this great province has established monthly open cabinet meetings and reactivated all-party committees in the Legislature. As a point, the member for Vancouver-Hastings was a member of the government for ten years, and they had select standing committees that never met — that never met. They did everything, hidden, out of the Premier's office. We have the most open government ever on record in Canada. All government MLAs have taken a voluntary 5 percent pay cut, saving taxpayers over a quarter of a million dollars.

Did you know that we did that, but both NDP members of the Legislature refused to take that tax break? According to public accounts, the gov- ernment caucus finished the first year $1.1 million un- der budget, and total spending on MLA constituency communications was $5.6 million under budget. Cabi- net ministers have 20 percent of their salary held back, only to receive that amount if they meet their personal budget and, overall, only if the whole cabinet makes the budgets of their service plans.

Three-year ministry service plans established pro- viding audited, measurable performance standards; passed real balanced-budget legislation; adopted gen- erally accepted accounting principles for all provincial finances — this is the first province in Canada to do this, and it's about time — restored open tendering on government contracts; established waste-buster web- sites so that taxpayers can identify, report and stamp out government waste; and eliminated the use of spe- cial warrants to prevent government from spending your money without legislative approval.

For most of the last ten years under the NDP, their spending was done by special warrant. The member for Vancouver-Hastings continues to make remarks that are not true: "The Premier has made it clear. He's not going to do anything about campaign finance reform." That was a remark from the member — again, another untruth from the member. We re- pealed the NDP gag law that restricts third-party ad- vertising during election campaigns. We amended the Election Act to eliminate loopholes and disclosures of financial contributors to parties and to include dona- tions from labour. Can you imagine that?

The Leader of the Opposition, the interim leader of the NDP, when she was in government, forgot to count all the money that came from unions. I just find that ludicrous. [1540] Another comment coming from the Leader of the Opposition: "The government has also promised mas- sive reforms to the way we extract wealth from our forests.

Change is necessary, market reforms included, but once again the Liberals are putting the primacy of markets ahead of the needs of communities, tearing up the social contract upon which this province was built, with little thought to the ruined communities they will leave in their wake" — again, more distortion by the member for Vancouver-Hastings. What this B.C. Liberal government has done is in- troduced the Forest and Range Practices Act, beginning British Columbia's transition to a workable, results- based practices code with tough penalties for non- compliance.

It cuts red tape, encourages innovation by skilled resource professionals and holds industries responsible for the outcomes. The Premier and the Forests minister have worked tirelessly to see the softwood lumber dispute resolved. A new working forest policy has been proposed to provide greater land base certainty for forestry and help build a stronger economy. A new forest investment account has been established to focus resources on land-based activi- ties, marketing and value-added growth. Develop a mountain pine beetle action plan.

This government has developed a workers transi- tion program, compensation for taxes that workers inadvertently pay. This government has allocated $20 million to inter- national marketing and forest product development. The Premier has hosted a summit on softwood lumber. Trade missions to China to expand markets for B.C. forest products have taken place. The government has allocated $20 million in research to promote forest stewardship.

The government will be providing $275 million to help forest workers, contractors, industry and commu- nities deal with the changes that must be made — more good news from this government. Again, we have the member for Vancouver- Hastings making false statements. This is another one of them: "Rural B.C. is hurting. A change of name, to the heartland B.C., won't change a thing unless this government takes action. Rural B.C. is hurting. It's hurting in a way we haven't seen since the 1930s" — m o r e o u t r a g e o u s c o m m e n t s b y t h e member for Vancouver-Hastings. The B.C.

Liberal government has created both a northern and a Kootenay caucus to ensure that the heartlands' issues have a strong voice in government. The government has established a $146 million for- est investment account to promote sustainable forest management in British Columbia.

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5163 This government has provided $2 million in fund- ing to the University of Northern B.C. to research and develop a workplan that responds to the recommenda- tions of both reports on offshore oil and gas. This government has announced a new northern health centre that establishes Prince George as an edu- cational centre for doctors. Interior health tele-imaging improves patient care. This government has reduced patient wait times. This government has provided a $58.5 million package of benefits and financial incentives designed to attract doctors to rural areas.

We will be introducing new legislation that will support the opportunities for job creation in coalbed methane in the Kootenays, in the central interior and on Vancouver Island. It just keeps going — m o r e g o o d n e w s f o r B r i t i s h Columbia. I just have to get the truth out there. The government will be providing $275 million to assist B.C. forest workers, communities and companies in moving to a more acceptable, sustainable Forest Practices Code.

The government is working to expand the Cran- brook Airport to open up the Kootenays to increased international tourism to allow those planes from all over the world to land in the Kootenays to enjoy the great skiing they have there. The government will be building a bridge at Nee- dles to open the Kootenays to the Okanagan. The gov- ernment will be building a $670 million upgrade to the Trans-Canada Highway through Kicking Horse Can- yon. [1545] In the next three years we'll invest $362 million in rehabilitating the rural and remote roads infrastruc- ture.

Over the next three years we're going to invest $210 million in rural roads and resource roads and $37 million in roads that are specifically intended to meet the needs of our oil and gas industry. We're going to introduce enabling legislation aimed at encouraging mining and mineral development in British Columbia. Bill 54 removed the red tape and added certainty of access for mineral title holders. The Ministry of Forests eliminated the PST from production equipment for mining and oil and gas. As a result of a thorough envi- ronmental review, the Tulsequah mine was approved.

Bill 38 enhanced B.C.'s natural position as a leader in coalbed methane development. We have appointed a three-member scientific re- view panel to determine if offshore oil and gas re- sources can be extracted in a scientifically sound and environmentally responsible manner, and have created an offshore team that will work with first nations, coastal communities and the federal government to see a thriving offshore industry by the year 2010. This gov- ernment introduced an energy plan to ensure secure and safe energy for British Columbians well into the future.

The energy plan built on four cornerstones: low electricity rates and public ownership of B.C. Hydro; secure, reliable supply; more private sector opportuni- ties; and environmentally responsible and non-nuclear power sources — and eliminated seven of 22 fees, or 31 percent, administered by the Oil and Gas Commission. I could go on forever about the mistruths that are being spread by the member for Vancouver-Hastings, but I want to end on a positive note. This government is on track for a brighter future, and I am proud to say that I can stand here and fully support this government and the budget. D. Hayer: Mr.

Speaker, thank you for the privilege of speaking to this House on this year's budget. It is the second full budget this government has presented to the people that meets all expectations. It's a good budget, it's a prudent budget, and it's shaping the way to the principal commitment this government based its election campaign on: the promise to balance the budget during the first term in office. In effect, if everything goes the way our hon.

Finance minister predicts — and he is o n record as say ing his forecasts are conservative — we will not only balance the budget as early as 2004-05, we will have a modest surplus fol- lowed the next year by an even larger surplus. This is the way a government should be run — prudent fiscal balancing. The people of British Columbia made it very, very clear in 2001 that they wanted a change. They wanted a fiscally responsible government. They didn't want any more deficit. They wanted the government to operate within its means.

As we all know, two years ago this May people made a decisive change through the ballot box. They turfed the last government, virtually deci- mated the ruling party, and they sent 77 new govern- ment members into office. In doing so, they delivered that message of fiscal responsibility to all politicians. Under the guidance of our Finance minister, his team has come up with a budget that not only can we live by, but we can take it to the people and show them that we have done as they asked us in May two years ago.

We have returned fiscal responsibility to the gov- ernment and to this province. [1550] As you know, Mr. Speaker, one of the most amaz- ing things about this budget is the almost total lack of criticism from all quarters. I do not see the media at- tacking or ridiculing the government over this budget. I don't hear the people berating us. That alone tells me that our Finance minister has done the right thing.

He and his team have come up with a document that we can not only live by and base our government plans on, but one that is pulling this province back on the right track for prosperity and hope for the long term. I t i s a b u d g e t t hat i s al s o p ro t e c t i ng o u r m o s t v u l - n e r a b l e i n s o c i e t y . I t i s p u t t i n g m o r e m o n e y i n t o t h e hands of school boards. It is maintaining our health system. It is creating programs that will see our much- stressed transportation system be moved into the twenty-first century.

Another significant effort of this budget is that it is aimed directly at trying to bring down British Colum- bia's overall debt. Because of that debt, over $1.5 billion o f t hi s p ro v i nc e 's re v e nu e s g o e v e ry y e ar i nt o i nt e re s t

5164 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES M ONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 payments. That is our third-highest expenditure be- hind only health and education in government spend- i ng . J u s t t hi n k w hat we c o u l d b e d o i ng wi t h t hat $ 1. 5 billion if we weren't spending it on the debt interest. T h a t s a i d , I ' m v e r y h a p p y w i t h t h i s b u d g e t , a n d I know that many others are too. In fact, right after the budget was prepared, our Premier spoke at a Surrey Chamber of Commerce luncheon at the Sheraton Guildford Hotel in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead.

Over 300 business people, along with some union members, attended that luncheon. The room was full of enthusiasm, and the Premier received a number of standing ovations. I am a former president of the Surrey Chamber of Commerce, and I know many of its members person- ally. After that luncheon, everyone I talked to had nothing but praise for what this government is doing and for the steps it is taking to return to fiscal respon- sibility and prudent spending and bring back economic hope.

To ensure that I've received full feedback on this budget, on Friday, February 21, I, along with my Sur- rey colleagues, convened a post-budget stakeholders meeting in my Surrey-Tynehead constituency office. Beginning at 8 a.m. and running right through to 8 p.m., we met with, listened to and received input from more than 18 of the most prominent groups within Surrey. Many of the organizations and stakeholder bodies are from within my riding of Surrey-Tynehead, but I wanted to know exactly what everyone from through- out the Surry area was thinking.

I think you should know who all these groups are, because they not only represent the complete cross-section of Surrey but are themselves truly representative of groups located any- where in this province.

We started the morning off meeting with the Surrey Chamber of Commerce and followed with representa- tives of the Surrey Teachers Association; members of the BCGEU; the Surrey agricultural committee; the president and members of the Surrey district parent advisory council; Métis Family Services; Simon Fraser University Surrey campus; Whalley Business Associa- tion; Surrey Memorial Hospital; Surrey Memorial Hos- pital Foundation; Fraser health authority; Surrey parks, recreation and culture committee; South Surrey Com- munity Services; Surrey social planning committee; a group called Options — that's a community organiza- tion; members of the HEU; the Indo-Canadian Business Association; Peace Arch District Hospital; and Surrey Community Services Society.

These groups represent thousands of people and stakeholders throughout the province. They spoke elo- quently about their desire and their demand for gov- ernment to be good stewards for the taxpayers' dollars. They told me that to bring this province back to its former economic glory, government must be prudent with its spending. They were also very clear that we must not forget our social responsibilities either. We must ensure that our educational system be- comes the very best in Canada and that our health care services and supply system must be the very best it can be.

Change is never easy, and not everyone agrees with all aspects of this government's steps to be fiscally re- sponsible. We heard their voices too. We heard what everybody had to say — good and bad. I assure you, as I assured them, that I will share all that I heard with my caucus colleagues and this government. [1555] I want to go on record that I believe government is only strong when it listens to and responds to the peo- ple. I think this budget is a response to what people want to see.

They wanted a government that makes sure they can earn some money, feed their families, keep a roof over their heads, have good health care and education systems, and have hope for the future. This government is doing that. Many people have told me that loud and clear. Many are saying that this government needs to stay the course and keep working toward a balanced budget and that surplus, though I am certain they don't want to see government piling up too much surplus. When our government gets to that point, we should ask B.C. voters what they would like to do with these surplus dollars.

As this government demonstrated in the first act after taking office, a tax cut gives people more money in their pockets and lets them spend it the way they see fit. This helps to drive the economy even further ahead, and as our economy grows, we will be putting more money into education and health care, as this government has promised in its New Era docu- ment. That said, I have also been told that the people will support some tax increases, and one in this budget is being supported. That increase is 2.5 percent on school taxes, and most people are supporting it.

They are supporting it because they believe — and they have told us, the government, this many times over the past couple of years — that they want the very best educa- tion system possible for their children and their grand- children, and they are willing to pay for it.

Another tax increase I have heard some complaints about is the 3½-cents-per-litre increase in fuel tax, but when I tell people that all of that money will be spent on transportation infrastructure and will get them to work quicker and home sooner, and commercial and industrial goods can get to markets cheaper, they un- derstand it and they can agree with it. They accept it because they know it will help the economy of the whole province. No one wants to pay more taxes, and no one in this government likes to raise taxes, but we did cut taxes 25 percent across the board as our first act in office.

British Columbians in the lowest two tax brackets now pay the lowest provincial income tax base rate in this country. In fact, I would like to quote the Minister of Finance from comments he made recently on a radio station. The Minister of Finance said: "In the budget, we have done a comparison of different income levels. We have taken all the taxes that you pay in British Columbia: income tax, property tax, tobacco tax, gas tax, MSP premiums. You put all that

MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2003 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 5165 together and get the overall tax level here. They did the same thing for other provinces, and British Columbia actually ranks number one or number two for having the lowest tax burden anywhere in this country. For most of them we are slightly behind Alberta, but for a senior couple with an income of $30,000, we are actually lowest in the country." That tells you that we actually did put money back into their pockets. While this fuel tax may seem like we are taking it back, we are doing something very specific with that money.

We will be fixing roads, making them safer and more efficient and making life easier for people throughout the north, the interior and the eastern part of this province — our heartlands. For too many years those roads have been ignored while their use has in- creased incredi

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0303pm 04
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0303pm 04
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7fdf57cf822ace1f80de4dacb54170ebeb7fd8f5

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