2003 Legislative Session: 4th Session, 37th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2003

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 12, Number 2

CONTENTS

Routine

Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Police Amendment Act, 2003 (Bill 12)

Hon. R. Coleman

Statements (Standing Order 25 b )

Federal government support for hepatitis C victims

R. Hawes

Juvenile diabetes awareness

I. Chong

Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows tourism

K. Stewart

Oral Questions

Qualification for disability benefits

J. Kwan

Hon. M. Coell

J. MacPhail

National sex offender registry

I. Chong

Hon. R. Coleman

Future of liquor stores

G. Trumper

Hon. R. Thorpe

Skeleem Recovery Centre

J. Kwan

Hon. G. Cheema

Tabling Documents

Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre

Expansion, project plan

Throne Speech Debate (continued)

R. Sultan

J. Les

J. Kwan

Budget Debate (continued)

P. Bell

D. Jarvis

T. Christensen

R. Hawes

Royal Assent to Bills

Energy and Mines Statutes Amendment Act, 2003

(Bill 10)

[ Page 5101 ]

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2003

The

House met at 2:04 p.m.

Introductions by Members

Stewart: Today in the press gallery we have a member of my community, the

publisher-reporter of the local Neighbourhood Bugle . His name is Robert

Prince, and seeing him in a suit here today, it was hard to distinguish him from

the crowd. Usually he has the haberdashery of the Crocodile Hunter, and it's

unusual to see him without his taupe shorts on. I would like the House to make

him welcome here today.

[1405]

Hon. R.

Coleman: In British Columbia we are gifted with some of the brightest and

best leaders in policing in the world. Today in the gallery I'd like to

introduce a number of those people who are here as we move forward to

revolutionize policing in British Columbia: Chief Constable Derek Egan of the

Saanich police department; Superintendent Steve Ayliffe of E Division, RCMP;

Chief Constable Paul Hames, Central Saanich police department; Chief Constable

Paul Battershill of the Victoria police department; Deputy Chief Pat Fitzgerald,

Port Moody police department; Kevin Begg, director of police services; Chief

Constable Ian MacKenzie of the Abbotsford police department; Acting Deputy Chief

John Schouten from the Vancouver police department; Wayne Plamondon, manager of

the Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia; Chief Ben Anderson of the Oak

Bay police department; Assistant Commissioner Gary Forbes from the Surrey RCMP;

Superintendent Rick Betker of the Courtenay RCMP; Chief Superintendent Rob

Morrison of the RCMP; Superintendent Ward Clapham of the Richmond RCMP; Chief

Paul Shrive of the Port Moody police department; Chief Jim Cessford from the

Delta police department; Mike Ryan from the Organized Crime Agency of British

Columbia; Debbie Harris from the Ministry of Attorney General; Gary Briggs from E Division, RCMP; Sergeant Bob Gehl from the Victoria police department;

Frank Potter, Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General; Kathy Vidalis

from Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General; Daryl Wiebe from the

Vancouver police department. Would the House please make them all welcome.

J. Kwan:

I'd like to introduce Karen Branscombe and some 20 other family members of the

residents at the Skeleem recovery house and staff from that centre as well. As

members of the House know, the recovery centre is set to close its doors at the

end of February. I'd like the House to please make these visitors welcome.

Hon. R.

Thorpe : I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome some guests to British

Columbia from the sunshine state of Florida. Will the House please welcome Dr.

Elaine Lifton, Dr. John Hansen and Dr. Mary Ellen Bafumo. They are meeting with

the principals of Etraffic Solutions, located in the riding of Saanich South. Of

course Etraffic is an international provider of on-line content and applications

for K-to-12 and adult learning. Welcome to Super, Natural British Columbia.

Hawes: Today in the House there are two constituents of the member for Delta

North who also have some investments in my riding, and they're here to meet with

the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. Could the House please make Pat

Roche and Barry Lasko welcome.

Mr.

Speaker: Hon. members, I have the pleasure of introducing two longtime

friends from Kamloops. It might interest some of the members here to know that

he was a grocer for many, many years, and he's known me since I was this high.

Interjection.

Mr.

Speaker: About that.

Al Perry

and his wife Megan, and they are accompanied by Herb and Marjorie Henri from

Kamloops. Please make them welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

POLICE AMENDMENT ACT, 2003

Hon. R.

Coleman presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Police Amendment Act, 2003.

Hon. R.

Coleman: I move that Bill 12 be read a first time now.

Motion

approved.

Hon. R.

Coleman: Today we revolutionize policing in British Columbia. In the throne

speech, the government made a commitment to expand the police records and

information management environment, or PRIME-BC, across the province.

PRIME-BC is

a crime-fighting computer system that will enhance public safety and improve law

enforcement in British Columbia. It is an on-line shared communication system

that links every municipal police department and RCMP detachment in the province

in real time, within two years.

[1410]

We know

that PRIME-BC works. For the last two years we have run pilot projects in three

B.C. locations: Vancouver, Port Moody and Richmond. The real power of the tool

will come as it goes into operation across the province. With PRIME, complex

cases will be much easier to investigate. Serial killers, gang crimes and

sophisticated thieves who move from one

[ Page 5102 ]

community to the next will be a lot easier to detect, track and capture.

Right now

police departments and detachments use a variety of computer systems and

databases. The amendments I'm introducing to the Police Act today will provide

for the implementation, use, maintenance and good governance of PRIME and will

make it the only information management system in British Columbia — no

borders, no silos, only success in policing.

These

amendments mark the first time any jurisdiction in Canada has taken steps to

implement a provincewide, on-line police information management system. Our

police lead the world in modernizing policing. I don't think I can emphasize

enough how significantly PRIME will improve our ability to enforce the law in

B.C. and make our communities safer. The only unhappy people today are the

criminals in British Columbia. This is what law enforcement asked for. It is

what they wanted. We are giving it to them. We are giving it to them across the

province of British Columbia.

I move that

the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next

sitting of the House after today.

Bill 12

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) FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT

FOR HEPATITIS C VICTIMS

Hawes: Diane Duperon is a registered nurse who lives in my constituency. A

few years ago she began to feel ill. By early last year she was too sick to

continue working. Diane has hepatitis C. She contracted the disease through a

blood transfusion she had in the early 1970s. Unfortunately, her tainted-blood

transfusion predates the date selected by the federal government to compensate

innocent victims such as Diane.

The medical

program authorized for those with Diane's type of hepatitis C is a six-month

course of an interferon-centred drug cocktail. Diane is intolerant to this heavy

dose and can only take half a dose. Thankfully, Pharmacare has agreed, under

appeal, to extend her treatment by a further six months. Private benevolence has

provided a drug not now covered by Pharmacare to help with the severe anemia

brought on by her disease, but she's had no consideration or support from the

There are

numerous innocent victims of tainted blood across British Columbia and

throughout Canada. In selecting a date before which no compensation will be paid

by the federal government, they have effectively turned their backs on many of

these people. I'd ask today that all of us in this House urge the federal

government to recognize all innocent victims like Diane Duperon, regardless of

the date of their blood transfusion.

JUVENILE DIABETES AWARENESS

Chong: This morning I had the opportunity to attend the 2003 corporate

breakfast launch to kick off the fundraising efforts on behalf of juvenile

diabetes. Every year the Walk to Cure Diabetes is held, with the proceeds raised

going to the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, or JDRF as it is often

referred to. Juvenile diabetes, or type 1 diabetes, is a chronic autoimmune

destruction of the insulin-producing cells in the pancreas. It primarily affects

children and young adults in the prime of their lives, without warning, and

leaves them insulin-dependent for life.

Taking

insulin does not cure any type of diabetes, nor does it prevent the possibility

of its eventual and devastating effects: kidney failure, blindness, nerve

damage, amputation, heart attack and stroke. This morning I heard how this

debilitating disease has changed the lives of three young people and their

families here in Victoria. I was touched by their personal struggles, and I am

amazed at their courage. Their zest for life is clear, and their determination

to find a cure, infectious. That is where JDRF becomes so important to their

future. Founded in 1974 by parents with children diagnosed with juvenile

diabetes, they realized the only way to find a cure for this disease was through

the support of research. With over 200,000 Canadians afflicted with juvenile

diabetes, this health charity is dedicated to finding a cure.

[1415]

The

Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation is the world's leading non-profit,

non-governmental funder and advocate of type 1 diabetes research. As they state:

"We are in business to put ourselves out of business." This year the

walk is being held at 31 sites in Canada, four of which are here in British

Columbia. While I acknowledge there are many worthwhile events that all hon.

members participate in during the year, I hope many of them will offer their

support to help raise awareness of this disease and of the research needed to

continue until a cure is found.

MAPLE RIDGE–PITT MEADOWS TOURISM

Stewart: My riding of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows has to be one of the most

beautiful places in British Columbia. I know this, and so does a newly formed,

non-profit tourism organization in our community that aims to get the message

out to everyone else. Tourism Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows is looking to develop

and support our tourism potential. They will work closely with our local

organizations to produce a comprehensive strategy to attract tourists to our

area. I am more than confident they will succeed. Let's face it. They have a lot

to work with in our area.

Maple

Ridge–Pitt Meadows is one the most scenic areas. These two communities offer

an array of outdoor experiences second to none. We are home to nine golf

[ Page 5103 ]

courses, six of them world-class. There are 55 municipally owned parks with

eight major trail systems within them. There are two spectacular regional parks,

one adjoining the tidal Pitt Lake, which is one of only two tidal lakes in the

world. Then there's the famous Golden Ears Park, where you can rock-climb, hike

and camp within miles of the trails, including specialized bike and horse

trails. Alouette Lake is also part of the Golden Ears, a beautiful lake where

you can swim, water-ski, fish, sail, canoe and kayak. In and around my own

neighbourhood there are miles of dikes used for walking and hiking along

watercourses and conservation lands that are ideal for the most popular outdoor

recreational activity in North America: bird watching.

Tourism is

the fastest-growing sector in British Columbia. Last year we hosted 22.4 million

visitors; plus, these people spent $9.2 billion. I'm pleased to see that people

in my community are working to position our communities so we can tap into our

fair share of that market not only for the next two years but in 2010, when we

host the Winter Olympics.

Oral Questions

QUALIFICATION FOR

DISABILITY BENEFITS

J. Kwan:

Thousands of British Columbians living with disabilities are being put through

an incredibly stressful process, tied up in a mountain of red tape, just to

prove that they are disabled. Can the minister please tell this House what

criteria were used to determine which British Columbians on DB-2 were asked to

reapply for benefits? Does there have to be some evidence that upon review, they

may no longer fit under the new criteria? Or were those people just sent the

forms randomly?

Hon. M.

Coell: Thank you for the question. As of today, we have about 10,000 review

forms in process. We've also received about 6,000 new review forms from people

who want to have the designation of persons with a disability. As the member

remembers, last year this government modernized — I would say — income

assistance in British Columbia and changed the definition of "persons with

a disability." We went through a process by looking at our records of all

the people on disability assistance, and the people we needed increased

information on — about 19,000 in the beginning and then 14,000 later — were

sent review forms. Those review forms are coming in now. As I say, we've

received about 10,000, and they are in process. We have about 4,000 more to

come. Our staff are meeting with them individually, phoning them and doing house

visits, so we can make sure all 4,000 of those people have a chance to have

their designation reviewed. But I'm very pleased to see 6,000 new forms come in

— 6,000 new people having the assistance that they need.

Mr.

Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question.

J. Kwan:

I guess that's the new spin for the government. Cutting people off of income

assistance is called "modernizing."

[1420]

This week

the B.C. coroner's office released a report into the tragic suicide of a Burnaby

man. He's one of thousands of British Columbians who received a letter and a

23-page reapplication form. That letter told him that his file needed updating

to confirm his eligibility for disability benefits. According to the new

reports, he became very depressed, and as a result of that, he took his own

life. The coroner's service contacted the Ministry of Human Resources, which

said he was never in danger of losing his benefits. My question to the minister

is this: why was he sent the letter and form in the first place if his benefits

were already secured?

Hon. M.

Coell: I'm sorry to hear of that untimely death. The ministry has done

everything possible to look after people, to make sure that individuals….

There are

tens of thousands of individuals on income assistance and people with

disabilities who receive support from us every month. During this review

process, our staff have looked at contracts with Canadian Mental Health and

others. We are going to do home visits. As I say, 6,000 new people have taken

the opportunity to ask for the assistance they need, and we'll be providing that

assistance. I think you'll find there will be more people on income assistance

and more people receiving disability assistance after this review is done than

there are now and were before.

Mr.

Speaker: Member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary.

J. Kwan:

There had to be some basis to send this man a 23-page form asking him to reapply

for his benefits — some suspicion that he may not be eligible, perhaps — but

following his suicide, the ministry said his benefits were secured all along. In

other words, he was being forced to reapply for no reason whatsoever.

The

deadline for returning these forms is March 15, only two weeks away, and there

are some 4,000 or 5,000 people left who have not yet filed. Can the minister

tell these people why they should file, if the ministry has already decided

who's going to get the benefits and who's going to get cut off? Why bother with

the process? Why bother to make people go through the stress that perhaps they

don't need to go through?

Hon. M.

Coell: The reason for the review was that the files showed that we needed

information on people who had been on DB-2. With the change of the designation,

the change of the criteria, staff went through the entire caseload and decided

that more information was needed on about 14,000 people. At the same time, new

applications were opened up for people to apply for the designation. As I said,

I feel that between now and March 15, most if not all of those applications will

be in process and, I suspect, well over 6,000 or 7,000 new ones.

[ Page 5104 ]

I stood in

the House last spring and said to the member that we intended that there would

be a broadening of the definition to include mental illness. That's exactly what

has happened with the thousands of new people applying. As I believe I said

further to the member at that time, we fully expected there would be more people

on disability assistance in this province because of the changes we made.

MacPhail: There is nothing in the statistics from his own ministry to back

up what he's saying. There are fewer people on DB-2 now than there were before

this government took over. I'm not sure the minister gets the seriousness of

this. We now know from a coroner's report released this week that there's at

least the case of one man who was asked to go through this gruelling process for

absolutely no reason. We also know that doctors are being paid to take time away

from patients to fill out these forms. This minister is paying millions of

dollars to doctors to fill out these forms.

Again, to

the minister: what is the purpose of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars,

up to $2 million, to pay doctors to fill out these forms for their patients if

the ministry has already decided their fate?

Hon. M.

Coell: Actually, the member is wrong. There are 3,200 more people receiving

disability assistance than there were when we took office. The actual budget has

been increased by 7 percent, or $80 million, for people with disabilities in

this government's mandate.

[1425]

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplementary question.

MacPhail: I wonder if the minister actually heard the question. One man, we

now know through a coroner's report, didn't have to fill out the forms that he

was sent, didn't have to do what the directive directed him to do, because when

the coroner contacted the Ministry of Human Resources after the man's suicide,

this minister's staff said his benefits were never at risk. That's what they

told not the man having to fill out the 23-page form but the coroner.

One thing

has become clear. The decision to force people to fill out these forms has been

implemented in a haphazard and mean-spirited way, perhaps the most mean-spirited

way possible, and I think it's safe to say that there are thousands out there

who would say that it's typical of the government and of the way they treat the

province's most vulnerable citizens.

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

MacPhail: Rather than putting thousands of British Columbians — the 4,000

or perhaps 5,000 left — through this kind of pain and anxiety, why doesn't the

minister just admit that the implementation of the program is unnecessary and is

a mess and scrap it before he causes more damage to people's lives?

Hon. M.

Coell: As I said to the member, over 16,000 people have taken the time to

pick up or have been sent a review form, and they have filled it out. Six

thousand new people have applied for this designation. The budget in this

ministry is up $80 million, or 7 percent, since the member was in government. As

I said during the legislative session last year, we fully expect there'll be a

continued increase in people with disabilities, but we want to make sure that

the money that is spent on people with disabilities is spent on those who are

eligible.

NATIONAL SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY

Chong: Sex offenders are released into our communities, some of whom have

refused any rehabilitation or treatment during their period of incarceration.

Many of my constituents believe there should be stricter conditions placed on

sex offenders before they are released into the community. Can the Solicitor

General tell my constituents who decides what conditions will be placed on sex

offenders before they are released?

Hon. R.

Coleman: In some cases it can be as a condition of their parole. In other

cases it can be that where they have done their full sentence and not taken

treatment, they can actually be monitored under the direction of the court. We

actually assess those risks in the communities. We track these offenders when

they come out of jail. We also make public notifications where appropriate to

protect public safety.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head has a supplementary question.

Chong: Last fall the Solicitor General attended a

federal-provincial-territorial meeting in Calgary, where the federal government

agreed to implement a national sex offender registry. Since then, we have not

heard much about what progress has been made in implementing the national

registry. My question to the Solicitor General is: can he provide my

constituents with an update on the status of the federal government's sex

offender registry and how it will protect our citizens?

Hon. R.

Coleman: During the enhancements being done to CPIC right now, we are

working on a national sex offender registry. There are a number of issues in and

around that registry, which we brought to the table in Calgary — basically to

tell the federal justice ministers and other ministers across the country that

failure to meet our needs as British Columbians and other jurisdictions that had

it…. We were prepared to go it alone.

We want a

number of things. First of all, we want all sex offenders on the registry. We

want this thing

[ Page 5105 ]

retroactive so we can track all sex offenders that have committed these

crimes in our country. There is some discussion with regard to that, and some

legislation may be required. We also would like to have some GPS mapping, so

that we can know overall where these people are in communities at any given time

and so we can track it relative to future offences. We want photographic

evidence within there, so that we're able to identify them not just by

photograph but also by location.

[1430]

We have

made it clear to the federal government that it must be a national integrated

system, just like we're integrating information and management in policing in

British Columbia. They should step up to the table and be modern like the rest

of us are in this province, lead the way and get it done so we're globally

moving forward in the same direction on a sex offender registry.

FUTURE OF LIQUOR STORES

Trumper: My question is to the Minister of Competition, Science and

Enterprise. Many people are saying that the province is only partially getting

itself out of the retail liquor sales business. Specifically, it is being said

that the biggest, most attractive specialty stores will remain while smaller

stores will be replaced by expanded beer and wine licence holders, who will

presumably be able to carry more spirits. Therefore, many people in my

constituency feel that smaller communities are being treated unfairly. Can the

Minister of Competition, Science and Enterprise provide some clarity for my

constituents in terms of the future of liquor stores in all British Columbia

communities?

Hon. R.

Thorpe: Our government took our liquor policy and the future of retailing,

warehousing and distribution to an open cabinet meeting on July 24 of last year,

where we declared that it would be a very thoughtful and deliberate process.

That is how we are proceeding. We have chosen not to do what they did in Alberta

and blow the system up overnight. We have decided to go through in a thoughtful,

deliberate manner. What we are going to do as new licences come on stream —

new private sector investment in British Columbia, creating new private sector

jobs in British Columbia — is review, on a community-by-community basis, to

ensure that choice is there for consumers, that service is there for consumers

and that competition is there for consumers.

SKELEEM RECOVERY CENTRE

J. Kwan:

On January 27 the Skeleem Recovery Centre gave notice to shut down operations by

the end of February. The families of these brain-injured residents, and not

mentally ill residents, were consulted about this change and now face losing the

only program that has been available to them to give their loved ones

rehabilitative services to assist them in gaining any kind of independence and

improved quality of life. Why is the Minister of Health Services allowing the

Skeleem Recovery Centre to close when there is a clear need for their services,

the clients with funds attached and a waiting list that people are still trying

to get in?

Hon. G.

Cheema: Let's be very clear. The Cedar Lodge Society, not the government,

made the decision to close this private facility. The provincial health services

authority provided a substantial funding contract, which was more than

sufficient to provide the services needed. The provincial health services

authority has found good placement services for all patients. In fact, we will

not be losing capacity. We are in the process of taking care of patients, but

not taking care of private facilities that have failed.

[End

of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Hon. R.

Thorpe: I rise to table a major capital project plan as required by

section

14 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. As another demonstration

of this government's ongoing commitment to openness, transparency and reporting,

this plan clearly sets out the objectives, costs, benefits and associated risks

of the Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre expansion program. I have said

before in this House that an expanded convention centre is good news for all

regions of British Columbia. Over 100 organizations in the lower mainland,

Victoria and the heartlands of our province support this project.

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

Collins: I call continued debate on Address in Reply to the Speech from the

Throne.

[1435]

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Sultan: I rise to respond to that important moment in the Speech from the

Throne when the Lieutenant-Governor said: "Coalbed methane has huge

potential for the Kootenays, the central interior and Vancouver Island.

Opportunities for job creation in that new enterprise will be pursued with new

vigour, supported by new legislation."

Those of us

with a background in mining and energy applauded. Her message signalled the

government's thrust into a new energy and mining sector with great potential.

Here's what it's all about. In North America we just love to burn oil and gas.

It's relatively abundant, relatively transportable and relatively clean. Until

the 1970s, until something called OPEC came along, it was relatively cheap and

relatively secure. For years, as desert sheiks grew rich on nature's bounty, we

in the West were comfortably cynical about our increasing reliance on Middle

East petroleum.

[ Page 5106 ]

A dozen

years prior to OPEC, one of my professors offered the opinion that it was rather

convenient to pay for America's oil in kind with advanced fighter aircraft for

the Saudi air force, since they became obsolete and crashed so frequently. In

the 1970s near panic replaced that sort of cynicism. For example, the former

chair of the Alberta Energy Conservation Board, in a study which I was guilty of

commissioning, predicted that oil would soon hit the range of $90 a barrel, and

that's U.S. dollars. That certainly got financial institutions' attention. To

resurrect a memorable phrase from this place, the banks began shovelling money

off the back of a truck into oil and gas deals.

In those

wild times I was a senior officer in our largest financial institution, and I

had one hand on the shovel. At the end of the day, oil-patch entrepreneurs

taught financial institutions a lesson or two, and unfortunately for many of the

deals, the energy price spike went away.

Nevertheless,

while wild times lasted, much money also slopped over into energy alternatives:

solar, hydrogen, wind, conservation and coalbed methane. The foundations of the

alternative energy industries, and in particular coalbed methane, were put into

place.

History

could repeat. We're once again disturbed by the reality that much of our

continent's energy comes from far-off desert lands that are increasingly

unstable. We're mobilizing for war. Special forces gather in the Gulf. Prices at

the gas pump have climbed about 25 percent. Home heating bills have climbed to a

point where Canadians wonder whether global warming would be such a bad thing.

Under these circumstances, it's clearly in our interest to enhance both the

quantity and security of Canadian energy supply.

Enter

coalbed methane. Methane is adsorbed as a molecule on the surface of coal

molecules and is released as a gas when high underground pressures are relaxed.

Too much methane carelessly managed can cause lethal explosions in an

underground coalmine, and I have my personal nightmares to live with on that

front. But when energy prices climb and when security of supply becomes a higher

priority, coalbed methane is transformed from a potentially lethal nuisance to

an abundant energy source.

British

Columbia is richly endowed. Across large areas of this province, stick a

borehole in the ground and you'll hit coal seams — some tiny, some immense.

The unique Hat Creek coal deposit, located between Lillooet and Cache Creek, is

hundreds of metres thick. Compare that to the Welsh coalmines of yesteryear,

when brave and grimy coalminers lay on their sides with a pickaxe, hacking their

way into an 18-inch coal seam.

[1440]

As a rule,

when you have coal, you've got coalbed methane, although geological

circumstances are highly variable. It's just a question of how much methane and

whether or not it can be economically extracted.

Our British

Columbia geologists, highly skilled world-beaters in their profession, estimate

we have 90 trillion cubic feet of coalbed methane gas. That's the estimate of

the resource, not all of which may be economically extracted. In fact, if we

ultimately and commercially got our hands on even 10 percent of it, that would

be extraordinary. But if we did, that nine trillion cubic feet of coalbed

methane could supply all of British Columbia's natural gas demand at the current

rate of consumption for about 20 years. It would approximately equal our current

reserves of conventional natural gas. Coalbed methane is simply another form of

natural gas — not identical, but a close approximation.

[J.

Weisbeck in the chair.]

One

hypothetical field on Crown land in British Columbia might involve a $150

million investment, might generate $600 million worth of natural gas over ten

years and might generate close to $100 million of royalty payments to the

government. A hundred million dollars will pay for a lot of health care and

education.

The

resource is scattered around all over the heartlands. Much of coalbed methane is

most easily accessible in the Kootenays, where we find most of British

Columbia's producing coalmines today. Some of it is found on Vancouver Island,

where we have a long history of coalmining up through the Quinsam. We also find

coalbed methane in Peace country, where such names as Bullmoose and Tumbler

Ridge remind us of the vast treasure this province invested in coal.

We find

coalbed methane in the ridings represented by the able and hard-working member

for Skeena, the able and hard-working member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine and

the able and hard-working member for East Kootenay. I could go on. My goodness,

I suspect we could even measure microscopic quantities of this stuff seeping up

from the ground underneath our chairs.

Capturing

it, selling it and consuming it sounds easy, but in practice it isn't. Step

one….

Interjection.

Sultan: Lots of gas.

Step one:

drill into a coal seam, not too shallow and not too deep. Step two: pump out the

water for maybe a couple of years. Step three: capture low-pressure, slowly

flowing gas for what we hope might be 30 years. To make a gathering system

worthwhile, one might possibly drill dozens of wells into a field 15 kilometres

by 15 kilometres square.

This is a

young industry. Technically, our grasp of reservoir technology and recovery

still has a ways to go. Environmentally, there are often wastewater issues.

Economically, we are hard-pressed to estimate costs and revenues with any

certainty. All of this will take time, patience and production experience to

sort out, so let's not get carried away with the royalty arithmetic. We have a

lot to learn on the fiscal side as well.

Furthermore,

unlike conventional natural gas, coalbed methane fields start slow and,

hopefully, stay that

[ Page 5107 ]

way for a long time. Conventional natural gas fields usually start big and

then decline, sometimes surprisingly fast. Look at our own hugely productive

Ladyfern field in Peace country, already suffering from sharp decline after only

a few years.

This

production profile means coalbed methane money must be patient money. The

producer gets his or her investment back slowly. Slow means risk; slow means

caution. Slow means government should try to create certainty at the front end.

What has

British Columbia done to create greater certainty? Well, I did my own research.

I travelled to Calgary to talk to old friends in the oil patch, as well as

newcomers to the business. I've been briefed by our officials. It's reassuring

to report that this government has done a lot of things right.

[1445]

Here's my

report card. Our technical support gets a 10 from industry. Our environmental

support, and this may surprise some people, also gets a 10. Our royalty

structure gets a 10, and our vision gets a 10. So far so good — in fact,

excellent. One would expect energy companies to be storming in here. To a

certain extent they are, but not totally. There was still the little matter of

title; in other words, who owns it?

Of our

estimated 90 trillion cubic feet of coalbed methane resource, an estimated 14

trillion cubic feet, or about 15 percent of the coalbed methane, is tied up in

coal deposits which are owned freehold. The balance of estimated coalbed

methane, the other 85 percent in British Columbia, is tied up in coal deposits

which are owned by the Crown — 15 percent freehold and 85 percent Crown. Those

are important ratios.

Now, we're

so used to the Crown owning all the land in British Columbia — all of anything

beneath the surface and, for that matter, all of the stuff growing on the top

— that the many socialists among us, when informed that 15 percent of any

resource is privately owned, are inclined to ask: how the heck did that happen?

Private

ownership got its start when the railroads punched through the Rockies and also

when a private rail line was built to run up and down Vancouver Island.

Railroads were rewarded with freehold title land and minerals, particularly coal

which, of course, was fuel for the locomotives. Private railroad land in the

Kootenays and on the Island was later carved up and sold in thousands of

individual transactions and then resold again and again. Over 125 years the land

and the coal underneath it developed a very complicated real estate history.

There's no

serious dispute about who owns the coal on that original freehold railroad land.

The freehold landowners are also invariably the freehold coal owners. It's their

private property. The big question has been: who owns the coalbed methane?

That's a question which has the potential to tie up dozens and dozens of

well-paid lawyers, geological experts and land title specialists, not to mention

judges and courthouse staff, for several decades. Litigators from both sides

could toil their way up well-trodden paths to the Supreme Court of Canada, cite

precedents running from Virginia to Victoria, from Powder River to Pincher

Creek, from the C molecule to the CH4 molecule, and never, ever run short of

material. Which side would win? It seems to be a 50-50 game. To the lawyers this

means committed clients and long-run, hard-fought battles — great for the law

firms, not so great for the rest.

Since early

railroads ran through the coalfields of southeastern British and the coalfields

of Nanaimo and Comox, that's where we find approximately 15 percent of coalbed

methane, which is freehold — or at least freehold as the property owners would

view it. The Crown tends to have a different point of view. The Crown is

inclined to say: "It's ours."

I think it

was my friend and former Forests minister David Zirnhelt, a good and true

British Columbian, who became famous when he said, "Governments can do

anything," and so they can. Whether the world will applaud when governments

do anything is another matter.

Certainly,

the infamous government preceding the one we have now demonstrated that it would

do anything, and much of the smart money and many of the smart people fled the

province. That's, in part, why Calgary looked stunningly prosperous and busy

when I went over there a few weeks ago to check out the coalbed methane scene. A

lot of hum is generated by former British Columbians. While the hon. Zirnhelt

can say, "Governments can do anything," Calgary viewed the world

differently when he said that.

One

important difference concerned private property. The rest of the world is not

always so sure private property gets the respect it deserves in British Columbia

in view of the fact that government owns 95 percent of the land, that the

communal first nations, not to be outdone, have overlapping claims on 120

percent — or is it 150 percent? — of it, and, furthermore, that government

seems to have a lot to say with respect to how private landowners sell their

logs. Even today we ponder legislation to clean up land titles reached through

private agreements which officials believe are untidy.

We've grown

used to all this. Others find it unusual, if not alarming. Economic historians

have shown how critical the institution of private ownership is for the

development of the economy. Hernando de Soto has demonstrated how the absence of

property rights in the Third World inhibits credit growth and, consequently,

economic development.

British

Columbia still has its citizens who regard private property with suspicion.

Perhaps the economy would benefit from a clear assertion of our commitment to

private property.

[1450]

Now the

good news. Even if some among us don't always appreciate these economic basics,

our Minister of Energy and Mines understands them full well. I believe our

minister has demonstrated that he has little time for policies that cast doubt

on the legitimacy of private property. Furthermore, I'm told that the

freehold-versus-Crown coalbed methane controversy that had been building — and which had legions of lawyers beginning to dream how they

could better finance col-

[ Page 5108 ]

lege for their kids and put a new wing on that house —

is now in the process of being resolved. Thank goodness for that. Thanks to the

minister and to the others in leadership who ensured that result. It's something

that everybody in British Columbia should celebrate.

Where do we

stand today? It's early days in the coalbed methane industry. Encana, a major

player in the Kootenays, is well into its first development program, and others

are leasing up their lands, but there's still much to learn. Resource money is

mobile money. It can be switched from British Columbia to Colorado to Kazakhstan

in the blink of an eye. Under the previous government, lots of eyes blinked.

The window

of opportunity may be limited. Look ahead ten or 15 years, and perhaps LNG from

Indonesia or elsewhere may become the most competitive alternative, not

necessarily coalbed methane. We are encouraged when the ministry and the

minister say: "Let's get on with it."

The

previous government generated a lot of one-way traffic out of here on WestJet. I

believe the current government's coalbed methane program, and its newly

confirmed respect for private property, will help reverse that flow. British

Columbia's energy security and energy supply will be the big winners. It will

help us travel faster along the road to a new era of hope and prosperity.

J. Les:

It's indeed a pleasure to follow my distinguished colleague from West

Vancouver–Capilano. His always insightful remarks are perhaps a difficult act

to follow, but I will do my best in replying to the throne speech that was

delivered just a few weeks ago by Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

The throne

speech, as always, is a seminal event in the legislative year, and this year was

certainly no different. The throne speech that Her Honour read was full of hope

and anticipation of a bright future for British Columbians. The government's

vision, as set out in the throne speech, was to open up every region and every

community to new horizons of hope. I want to underline that particular statement

because that, I think, summarizes the aspirations of many of us in this place.

It indeed probably defines why we're here. We're here to unlock and unleash the

potential that we believe exists not only around the province but also within

each of the residents of this great province.

If indeed

there is no hope, there is not too much of anything else. Indeed, if you look

back at the last decade, throughout the nineties you saw hope being extinguished

almost at every turn. But happily, as a result of the policies of this

government, we've seen renewed hope and renewed opportunity, and that, I think,

is something we ought to celebrate.

We now see

British Columbians looking forward and realizing that the potential they have

seen for many years is now within their grasp. In the forest industry, for

example…. We have said in the throne speech that this is going to be the year

of the forest in British Columbia. I know that for men and women everywhere

throughout British Columbia who are familiar with this industry, who have worked

in this industry for many years and would like to work in this industry in the

future, the statements we have made in the throne speech resonate with them.

They are very much anticipating the changes that we are about to bring forward

with respect to the forest industry in British Columbia. There is not an

industry that has been more important in the past in this great province, and it

has indeed a large role to play in the future economy of this province as well.

[1455]

I know the

Minister of Forests has been working extremely hard in the past months to chart

the course for the future in a responsible way, so that the forest industry we

know in British Columbia, which is productive like almost nowhere else on earth,

is organized in such a way that the economic forces within the industry are

properly harnessed. The incentives will be there for entrepreneurs and workers

not only to look after that resource in an environmentally sustainable manner

but also to extract from that resource as much economic potential as possible.

I'm certainly looking forward very much to the legislative initiatives to come

from the Minister of Forests to once again realize the full potential of this

industry in British Columbia's economic life.

Similarly

for the mining industry, another industry that has a proud history in the

province. Unfortunately, in the years gone by, it has been neglected and worse

by the governments of the day. Today it is, sadly, a mere shadow of what it once

was in this great province. That is not to say that there is no future left for

the mining industry in British Columbia. No one convinces me that all the

minerals that were to be discovered in British Columbia have been discovered and

that there is nowhere else to go.

I believe,

rather, that we have only scratched the surface, and that there is indeed a vast

mineral resource waiting to be discovered by British Columbians who, in fact,

are very good at this. Sadly, many British Columbians today live and work abroad

in the mining industry. I believe we can repatriate these people, bring them

back home, bring their expertise back here to British Columbia, where they can

prospect and learn of new locations for minerals, where British Columbians can

go to work and create wealth for many of their fellow British Columbians.

This is an

exciting industry that has, as I said earlier, a long and proud tradition in

British Columbia, starting with the gold rush of the mid-to-late 1800s and

carrying on through to this very day. It is an industry that has provided many,

many well-paying jobs for British Columbians through many years. I'm certainly

hopeful that we can again rekindle that once-proud industry in our economic

mosaic within this province.

I certainly

would be remiss if I didn't mention the oil and gas industry, although it has

been referred to by several of my colleagues in the throne speech debate thus

far. This is an industry that has enormous poten-

[ Page 5109 ]

tial. It is providing today a huge amount of revenue to the provincial

treasury, which is absolutely critical in support of the important social

programs such as health care, education and social services, which are critical

to British Columbians. As much as that industry has grown to a considerable

magnitude today, almost on a daily basis new resources are being found. If you

just take the mid-range of the potential resources that are still there, we have

years and years and years' worth of resources left in the oil and gas industry

in British Columbia, to say nothing of the huge potential that exists in the

offshore oil and gas fields and, as my colleague from West Vancouver–Capilano

referred to earlier, those resources that exist within the coalbed methane

resource.

We are

indeed well endowed in British Columbia with resources that not only support our

own lifestyles and our own industries but also provide for a tremendous amount

of export opportunities on which the treasury of the province of British

Columbia will be able to earn significant revenues and royalties to support

those important social programs that I talked about earlier.

[1500]

Departing

from that theme of hope for the future of this province, there is a tremendous

amount of hope that can be delivered in the area of tourism. We have a province

that when others visit here, they always comment on the sheer, rugged beauty of

this province. We have it all. We have deserts; we have a marine climate; we

have mountains; we have plains; we have steppe climates. We literally have it

all here in British Columbia — to say nothing, of course, of the very

important resorts that we have developed such as Whistler and many others around

the province, where people can enjoy an experience that is unparalleled anywhere

in the world.

Of course,

the major opportunity before us in the tourism-related industry is, in fact, the

2010 Olympics. The 2010 Olympics is more than a 17-day event. It represents, in

many aspects, a huge opportunity to take the tourism industry in British

Columbia many steps forward, and I look forward to working with my colleagues

and all British Columbians in the days, weeks and months ahead to ensure that

come July 2, 2003, in Prague in the Czech Republic we will be awarded the 2010

Olympics. In my mind, there is nothing that can do more to enhance the long-term

prospects of the tourism industry in British Columbia.

There are

many other emerging endeavours on the economic landscape of British Columbia. I

would like to mention just a few at this point. It wasn't that many years ago

that the winemaking industry in British Columbia was considered to be in some

difficulty. In fact, it was not a very imaginative industry and was losing

market share to the extent it had gained market share. There was a lot of

speculation that British Columbia really couldn't compete in the winemaking

industry. Well, that situation has certainly turned around in the years that

have gone by. Growers in the Okanagan in particular but in other parts of the

province as well, including the Fraser Valley, have replanted the different

varieties of grapes.

Today the

winemaking industry in British Columbia is fast becoming a world-class industry,

I'm happy to say. It supports many farm families throughout the Okanagan Valley

in particular, but also in the Fraser Valley and even in some of the Gulf

Islands and here on Vancouver Island. The resulting wines being produced here in

British Columbia are amongst the finest anywhere. Particularly in the Okanagan

just this past week, the growers were delighted to see the temperature finally

dip below minus 8, which allowed them to harvest the grapes for the icewine

industry. The one or two nights of cold weather indeed was extremely important

economically in the Okanagan, as I'm sure you recognize, Mr. Speaker, being from

that area as you are.

Other areas

that have become increasingly important in the last number of years are the

high-tech industry and the biotech industry in British Columbia. I will mention

just two examples of outstanding companies that are doing world-leading research

in each of their separate areas.

Ballard

Power is the acknowledged frontrunner in research in fuel cells around the

world. Although the technology is not yet at a point where it is commercially

viable, it is certainly coming closer to that day where fuel cells will take

their place in a commercially viable way. I expect the world is going to be

referring to Ballard in years to come as the General Motors of the fuel cell

industry, at least. Right here in Vancouver and more recently in Burnaby is

where this company is located, and British Columbians particularly ought to be

very proud of this world leader in this emerging technology.

[1505]

Similarly,

QLT Phototherapeutics is another one of those companies that is a world leader

— in the biotech industry, in this case. QLT has pioneered a number of

leading-edge drugs. Probably the best known at this time is Visudyne, which

deals with macular degeneration. I know that QLT will be heard from again many

times in the future, as they have a number of other drugs in the pipeline. As

they continue to lead in that field of endeavour, I know they will continue to

employ many highly educated British Columbians in carrying out their research

and their marketing.

The

value-added wood industry is another one that holds great promise, particularly

as we reform the forest industry. As we restructure the forest industry in

British Columbia, we're going to be able to ensure that more wood actually flows

to those areas where the wood will create the greatest amount of value. I know

we have a lot of creative British Columbians who would like to participate. We

have as never before in British Columbia, for example, many companies that are

creating and building log homes and exporting those all over the world. I have

several of these in my riding, and they provide not only a lot of jobs in my

riding but a great amount of export value that is very valuable for our economy.

[ Page 5110 ]

Another

area I want to comment on for just a few minutes, in terms of hope for the

future, is enhanced prospects in terms of our democratic institutions. Typically

in this country and in many other parliamentary democracies, the opportunity for

all members of a government to participate in developing the agenda of a

government is very limited. Due to the leadership of our Premier, there is a

greatly enhanced opportunity for all members of government to participate in the

policy-making process.

I think we

have perhaps been remiss in not referring often enough to how our processes here

in Victoria have changed from what was before. We have, for example, established

the government caucus committees, which allow all members of caucus into the

policy-making process, providing direct input to cabinet in the

legislation-making process and providing input in areas of expertise that each

member of this House brings with them to this place. I think that has been an

extremely healthy evolution in terms of our democratic processes, and it has

been an extremely beneficial innovation in terms of allowing all members of the

House to make important contributions to the future of this province.

Similarly,

we have other commitments we have yet to fulfil within this particular term. One

will be to develop a system of workable recall. The second will be to form a

citizens' assembly that will fundamentally look at how we are all elected to

this place and whether there are perhaps better mechanisms that could be

employed to ensure that the wishes of the voters are reflected as accurately as

possible in the results of the elections. That work will be commencing very

soon, I am sure, and I look forward to the results of the process. Indeed, it is

something that has not been attempted in exactly this way before in our history

in this province.

Another

area I was pleased to hear of in the throne speech was the hope that is held out

for the future of first nations people in British Columbia. I was pleased to

hear, for example, that this government has finally done what, frankly, should

have been done many, many years ago. It has openly stated that many mistakes

have been made previously in the relationship between first nations and others

who now live within the province.

[1510]

Indeed, we

went further than that. We have openly said we regret many of the features that

have described the relationship between first nations people and others. There

have been many unfortunate interactions between first nations and other people,

and our government is perhaps the first government in Canada that has openly

acknowledged those painful truths and expressed our regret in an open and

sincere fashion. I think this was an important statement on behalf of our

government, and hopefully it will play some small role in enabling us all to

move forward together having recognized the past and learned from it, and

enabling us to move on constructively.

The

Attorney General and his ministry have, I know, been hard at work with a number

of the first nations leaders. This House previously has established funding for

economic measures in relation to treaty negotiations and other initiatives, and

I am very hopeful that that will produce the kind of results we need, which give

hope to first nations people that they can finally take their place in a real

way in the economy of this province and can become part of the future in a way

that they have not been able to do before.

It is not

necessarily the case that treaty-making is the only vehicle that will deliver

that hope to first nations people. I want to draw attention once again, as I

think I may have done before, to the Osoyoos first nation, which is one first

nation that is not in the treaty-making process and yet on the other hand is

achieving tremendously well on the economic front. The Osoyoos first nation is a

medium-sized band in the southern Okanagan of British Columbia. It has ten or 12

very significant businesses that are very viable, are doing very well and are

employing all of the people in the Osoyoos first nation, including a winemaking

industry — in conjunction with others — that very soon will be western

Canada's largest winemaker.

I think

it's important to recognize a success like that, and I believe it, too, can

provide hope and encouragement to others to take advantage of opportunities that

exist now rather than waiting for the sometimes very long-term arrangements such

as treaty-making, which can take a long time. In the meantime I think it's

important to take advantage of opportunities that are there now and can produce

a lot of employment, a lot of investment and a lot of integration of first

nations people in our economy today.

I think

that more so than perhaps has been the case for some time now, there is hope for

a sustainable health care system in British Columbia. We have, in fact, a

world-class health care system in British Columbia in many aspects, certainly in

terms of the level of expertise and care that is available in the various

specialties. I refer, for example, to oncology, the treatment of cancer, which

in British Columbia is almost unparalleled anywhere else in the world. British

Columbians today can be confident that if they were to be so unfortunate as to

contract this disease, they're better off in British Columbia than almost

anywhere else in the world — if not, in fact, anywhere else in the world. That

is very comforting to people.

What we

need to ensure here in this House and here in this government is that we are

able to sustain that level of expertise and that level of leading-edge

technology. I can't help but think that it is, therefore, very important that we

ensure that our economy continues to perform and perhaps even, certainly in the

short term, outperform the national economy, so that we can rebuild the economic

foundations that are important to an endeavour such as health care — which is,

granted, extremely expensive but is very important to enable us all to reassure

British Columbians that health care will be there for them when they need that

important service.

It is all

well and good to say we have a great health care system, but for each of us, the

day we get sick or the day we need the health care system is when the rubber

really hits the road. That is when we really want

[ Page 5111 ]

to experience in a personal way that, yes, the health care system is there

and those health care practitioners are there and will be able to provide that

service to us.

[1515]

I want to

talk about education just for a moment almost in the same context. Again,

education is a very expensive endeavour. It consumes nearly $5 billion of our

resources in British Columbia, and yet it is fundamentally and vitally important

to the future of our young people in particular. Here again, a strong economy is

critically important to help us deliver this very important service many years

into the future.

In the

Fraser Valley, in the past we have been somewhat unfortunate in that our

post-secondary education participation rates were lower than they were elsewhere

in the province. But through the years we have seen an evolution to what is

today the University College of the Fraser Valley. That has become a remarkable

institution available to all residents of the Fraser Valley. It has enabled

literally thousands of people to earn diplomas and degrees which they might

otherwise not have been able to achieve, given that education at the University

College of the Fraser Valley is available at a much cheaper rate than it is, for

example, at the University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University or some

other institution outside of our borders. I will be working wherever I can to

enhance the prospects of the University College of the Fraser Valley. It is a

wonderful institution. Today it offers bachelor's degrees in a range of subject

areas. Frankly, I think its potential in the Fraser Valley is literally

limitless.

summarize, the throne speech that we heard a couple of weeks ago gives us all

lots of scope for hoping for a sustained future in British Columbia, a future

that is going to allow British Columbians everywhere to develop their potential

to the maximum and in a way that is supported by government — but where

government doesn't get in the way and where government doesn't suppress the

potential that is within, I believe, all British Columbians.

With that,

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to make a small

contribution to the debate around the throne speech. I want to thank my

colleagues in the House this afternoon for being so kind as to listen to me.

J. Kwan:

I rise to respond to the Speech from the Throne. This throne speech is about

the desperation of this government — a government that's desperate to re-earn

trust after many months of scandal and drift, a government that's desperate to

ward off the threat of recall in constituencies all over the province, a

government that's desperate to appease angry citizens who feel betrayed by

countless broken promises, a government that's desperate to put a positive spin

on a promised economic recovery that never seems to materialize, a government

that is desperate to find new sources of revenue to pay for the cost of

political redemption.

[1520]

That effort

to find a way to pay for high-income tax cuts that never did pay for

themselves…. That is the underlying theme of the throne speech, the budget and

virtually everything this government will do this session. Remember that

promise? At every stop on the campaign trail, at every interview, every time the

Leader of the Opposition then — the now Premier — had the opportunity, he

said as loudly as he could: "Tax cuts will pay for themselves." It

didn't matter that it didn't add up. It didn't matter that respected economists

like David Bond said it wasn't true. It didn't matter that finance officials

said it was pie in the sky. The Premier believed it with all the fervour of a

true believer, and he gambled his credibility and his entire agenda on that

simple prescription.

As we know,

after only a few hours on the job, the Premier gave the biggest tax giveaway to

high-income earners and big corporations in its history. Now, almost two years

later, the results are in: personal income tax revenue down by over $1.2

billion; corporate tax revenue down by $299 million; revenue from the

corporation capital tax down by $358 million. All told, those tax cuts that were

supposed to pay for themselves have resulted in revenue loss of over $1.8

billion.

I'm sure

that perhaps many in this House will say: "Hey, that's fine. Tax is just

another form of theft anyway, so what's the problem if government loses the

money from that revenue source?" That argument would hold water from a

consistent, ideological position, I suppose, if indeed taxes had gone down in

British Columbia. It might even be defensible if the result was a roaring

economic boom. On both counts that's not been the result.

The economy

is staggering, lagging far behind the rest of the country, and British

Columbians are paying more in taxes and fees than ever before because this

government hasn't cut taxes. All they have done is shift the tax burden onto the

backs of the middle class and the poor.

The numbers

are clear. While revenues have declined from personal and corporate taxes, they

have gone through the roof for regressive taxes. Revenues from the sales tax

that the Liberals hiked last year are up by $370 million; from the fuel tax, up

$151 million — and that doesn't include the new 3½-cent-a-litre gas tax that

takes effect on this coming weekend, which would amount to approximately an

additional $200 million a year; and from MSP premiums, revenues are up $516

million.

Of course,

there have been a huge number of other fees and licences and cost increases that

are too many to detail. Taken together, the picture is clear. Government is

counting on big increases in regressive taxes to meet its balanced-budget

target. That means middle- and low-income British Columbians pay a bigger share

than ever before.

In fact, I

have a document here which illustrates the percentage of that shift. Progressive

taxes include personal income, corporation income and corporation capital taxes.

The Liberal government has shifted that tax burden from 26.8 percent of total

revenue in the year 2000-01 to 21.5 percent for this year, '03-04. Then, if you

look at the regressive taxes, which include things

[ Page 5112 ]

like MSP premiums, fuel taxes, the PST and the like, that shift went from

22.5 percent in the year 2000-01 to 29.4 percent in this year's budget. The

shift is clear; that has gone to the people who are middle income and lower

income. They're the ones who get hit the hardest.

[1525]

That's not

accounting, by the way, for all the fee increases that this government has

foisted onto British Columbians. It doesn't account, for example, for the

driver's licence fee — another $75 increase. It doesn't account for the

Pharmacare increase that is going to take place very, very shortly for many

people. It doesn't account for ICBC premiums that are going to go up. It doesn't

account for the hydro rates that are going to go up. There are many, many other

fees and licences and costs that we have not accounted for in the regressive

tax, and already the shift in the tax burden is overwhelming for the middle

income and low income.

Let's be

clear about what the Liberals have accomplished. They have cut taxes. They have

not cut taxes, I would argue. They have simply shifted the burden of the taxes

onto the people who have the least ability to pay. They have done so at the

expense of hope, security and economic opportunity for the vast majority of

British Columbians. From those just starting out to those who are in their

senior years, most British Columbians have less money in their pocket and less

to look forward to.

Just think

of what a young student must now face with tuition fees going up every year by

30 percent. They went up last year on average by about 30 percent, and this year

the same thing. Or a man who has worked all his life and hopes to save a little

money when he turns 65, who must now spend more of his savings on drugs he needs

to stay healthy…. Or a single mother who's trying to balance home and work,

who must now choose between the two…. She is no longer eligible for the child

care subsidy because the child care program, as we know from the budget, is

being reduced by some $10 million.

These are

the stories of the new-era agenda of the Liberal government. This is the reality

of the Liberals' failing adventure. People are frustrated all over British

Columbia. People feel a sense of betrayal. People feel that they're not being

listened to, that their concerns are not being represented in this Legislature.

As my colleague the Leader of the Opposition and I travel across the province,

we hear countless stories not from our constituents alone but from constituents

of government MLAs, Liberal MLAs. They cannot even access their MLA to raise

their concerns.

In fact, I

received something interesting from a community, the community of Powell

River–Sunshine Coast, who sent me these two letters attached to a pink slip.

It is addressed to me, and it reads: "My name is…." I'm actually not

going to use her name. I wasn't sure if she actually….

Deputy

Speaker: Excuse me, member. I think you're aware that this sort of thing is

not allowed in the House.

J. Kwan:

Pardon me?

Deputy

Speaker: I think you are aware that what you have there is considered a

prop.

J. Kwan:

My apologies. It's a document that was sent to me from this individual.

Deputy

Speaker: Yes, but what you have attached to the document is not allowed in

the House. It's out of order. I would appreciate it if you would remove it,

please.

J. Kwan:

Okay. I will think of how I can detach the pieces and put this away so I can

actually read the attached document that she has requested me to present to the

House. I will do that.

The letter

attached to the two pink slips, which I've been asked to put away, reads as

follows. I think I can actually use the name because the individual wanted me

specifically to present this in the House.

"My

name is Susan Robertson, and I'm a retired resident of Powell River, B.C., the

Powell River–Sunshine Coast MLA's riding. Many people here do not support

the actions of our current Liberal government.

"In

February, some of us began an accountability vigil where we protested in front

of our MLA's office from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. six days a week. The purpose of

this vigil is twofold. First, it is to remind the population of Powell River

of the betrayal of this government. Second, it is to remind the MLA from

Powell River–Sunshine Coast that we hold him accountable for representing

our views in Victoria.

"For six weeks in the spring, my protest sign

was made up of two pink slips. One slip represented our desire to fire the

Premier, and one was for the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast."

[1530]

The letter

actually uses the individuals' names, and I'm modifying that.

"The

signatures appearing on the slips were obtained from citizens walking past the

member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast's office during that short period of

time. As the member is seldom in his office and will not attend town meetings

or any meetings where he may be confronted by the people he represents, I'm

asking you to be my voice and present these symbols of our contempt.

"Thank

you for your time and understanding.

"Susan

Robertson"

There are cartoons, amongst other things, attached to this documentation as

well.

People are

looking for different ways to express their displeasure, perhaps most

importantly to express their sense of betrayal and their inability to have a

voice in this Legislature. To that end, my colleague the Leader of the

Opposition and I receive lots of information — letters and innovative things

like the document that I just read out attached to the pink slips — to

illustrate the point. This is the reason why B.C. today is a more polarized,

less confident and less prosperous society than when the Liberals were handed

the reins of power.

This throne

speech, like the ones that preceded it, is long on rhetoric and short on

specifics. But this throne speech is unique in its detachment from the daily

real-

[ Page 5113 ]

ity of most British Columbians and for the fundamental dishonesty of a

central claim that the new era of hope and opportunity is upon us, when many

people can see, and what they see are darkening clouds.

The throne

speech goes on to talk about the importance of reconciliation with the

aboriginal people, the first people of this land, the people who have allowed us

to be here today to stand on their land as we engage in debate. It is important

to note that while the government MLAs are praising their government's action on

reconciliation, the leaders of the aboriginal community have other thoughts.

I thought

it would be worthwhile to actually read onto the record a press release that was

sent out by the UBCIC, the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, and what they think. I

think it is essential that the people who are impacted by this government's

action and also previous governments' actions — what they think and what they

have to say — ensure their voice is heard in this Legislature and not just by

the government bench Liberal MLAs, who say everything is grand and things

couldn't be rosier. Once again, when you talk to real people outside of the

chamber, they really do have a different point of view, and I want to make sure

that view is reflected here.

This press

release was sent out by the UBCIC, dated February 12, 2003. It headlines:

"Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs' Response to the Throne Speech."

"Chief

Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs stated: 'Although

we appreciate the government of British Columbia's admission of historical

wrongdoing, generally speaking, the UBCIC is not overly impressed with

yesterday's Speech from the Throne.'

"Chief

Phillip continued: 'Yesterday's so-called statement of regret is obviously part

of a public relations strategy designed to convince the general public that the

government is committed to reconciling aboriginal title interests and Crown

interests.

[1535]

"'Further,

the government is attempting to pacify native people in order to buy peace in

the forests, peace on the water and peace in the oil patch. Most

significantly, the government is desperately attempting to convince investors

that B.C., by virtue of its progressive aboriginal policy, is in a position to

offer a safe and stable investment climate. In reality, the government

continues to pursue a policy of offering marginal economic opportunities to

first nations communities. In short, all the government is really offering are

bigger table scraps,' said Chief Phillip.

" 'In

terms of the government's so-called economic measures fund, a first nation has

to agree not to assert the aboriginal rights 'on the ground' or 'in the

courts' during the term of these funding agreements. We ask you, is that

economic opportunity or economic coercion?' observed Chief Phillip.

"Chief

Phillip remarked: 'The throne speech refers to equitable economic opportunity.

The gas and oil industry in northeastern B.C. generates an annual amount of $5

billion of investment opportunity while, in total contrast, local first

nations communities tolerate deplorable conditions of poverty. In one

particular case a local native leader reported that 19 people were forced to

live in one house.

"'We

do not need public posturing. We do not need public statements of regret. We

do not need public promises and expressions of good intent. We need the

government of British Columbia to recognize that they have a legal and moral

duty to accommodate our aboriginal title interests in all of the land and

resources that comprise the province of British Columbia.'

"Chief

Phillip concluded: 'The courts have spoken. Delgamuukw clearly states that we

enjoy a 'proprietary' or ownership interest in all the lands and resources

within B.C. We have every right and reason to expect a significant and

substantive involvement in the economy of the province of B.C. We are sick and

tired of the poverty that is a direct result of our ongoing economic exclusion

and economic marginalization. We need much more than hollow public promises

and bigger table scraps. We need and demand economic justice.'"

This is on

the website of the UBCIC, from an aboriginal community leader representing

UBCIC, who has strong views about the throne speech.

For all the

rhetoric that's written within it, I think Chief Phillip had actually raised

some very important issues that I hope the Liberal MLAs will take note of. As he

calls it, the table scraps that are being thrown out come with conditions.

Those, of course, would be the funds — the economic measures fund, the first

nations fund — where the aboriginal community would have to relinquish their

rights on the ground or in the courts. If there is a disagreement, they have no

other recourse in order to get those table scraps. Those conditions are

important items for the Liberal MLAs to note when they pound their desks and say

how wonderful their government is.

These are

the same Liberal MLAs who last year pounded their desks when the Attorney

General brought forward a referendum to question aboriginal people's rights —

to put a minority rights issue to the majority for a vote on basic, fundamental

issues that the courts have already established, including aboriginal titles and

recognition as one example, and issues of resource distribution and access to

those resources, which is basically economic recovery not just for the

aboriginal community, but economic recovery, stability and certainty for all

British Columbians.

[1540]

Those

questions were put out to a referendum even though the aboriginal community

spoke against it, even though the opposition spoke against it, even though it

was a clear discriminatory approach in terms of subjecting minority rights to

the majority for a vote.

Words don't

count when your actions speak otherwise, because action speaks louder than

words. To date, I would argue that there's been very little goodwill, if any, by

way of action by this government to show the aboriginal community they are

indeed sincere in their words and in their rhetoric around reconciliation.

Now, I hope

I'm wrong. I hope this government will indeed move forward and reconcile the

historical wrongs, because for too long we have seen too much devastation that

has taken place in the aboriginal community. The time has long come where it

must stop. It's up to this government to move forward instead of backwards. I'm

sad to say that so far, I've seen very little action, if any, of this government

moving

[ Page 5114 ]

forward. Words are cheap; action counts. I hope the Liberal government will

move forward for the aboriginal community.

I want to

just touch on the issue around education for one moment, because the throne

speech also had some nice words to say about education and how this government's

doing all these fantastic things. But the reality is this. The reality check is,

it seems to me, what we've always got to do now. When the government says one

thing, you've got to actually do a reality check because what happens in these

chambers and what words are spoken by the government MLAs don't actually reflect

what is really going on.

In the area

around education we know that the Liberal government, the Minister of Education,

has frozen the education budget. In reality, what does that mean? It means that

education services, services in the classroom, have been cut — make no mistake

about it. Why is that, Mr. Speaker? It's because costs have gone up, and these

are fixed costs. Fixed costs have gone up.

This

government legislated the teachers back to work. You know what? This government

never paid the school boards the money for the increase in salaries for the

teachers. This government this year is increasing gas prices by 3½ cents per

litre. Those costs will increase costs for the schools in their heating bills

and anything where they would require gas in order to keep the building running

and operating and warm. Those costs are not covered by this government in their

budget. Those increased pressures will be there for the school trustees.

Inflation

is going to go up. Those costs are not paid for by the government and not

accounted for in the classrooms. The Minister of Education can wax eloquent

about how she is protecting education. The truth, in reality, is far from it.

The reality is that we see cuts in the education system directly in the

classroom. We see school closures happening across British Columbia. We see

children being bused from British Columbia into Alberta — the first time ever

in the history of B.C. where children have to go to another province to get an

education.

[1545]

Then the

minister and the Premier, in his infomercial, went on and on about how he's

increasing the education budget by some $100 million. Reality check. There is

nothing in the budget line to show a $100 million increase. It's worse than

that. If you look at next year's budget, you will see that the only base

increase in education is $50 million, and that's been counted twice over two

years to say that there's $100 million. Even then, that supposedly good news

does not reflect the truth and the reality. Don't take my word for it. Check

with the BCSTA, and they'll tell you that is exactly what has happened with the

education funding.

While the

throne speech can wax eloquent about how great everything is and that education

and health care are being protected, the reality is completely different. Just

today we had families of residents of Skeleem who came down because the recovery

centre there for brain-injured residents is closing at the end of the month. You

know what, Mr. Speaker? The families of these residents weren't even consulted

on it.

Then the

Minister of State for Mental Health, who got up to respond to the question even

though it's not part of his portfolio, said: "Don't worry. Everything is

fine." Well, tell that to the families of the residents who have not been

consulted. They don't feel very fine about it. That's why they're down here

raising the issue, protesting. There were only about 20 people who were allowed

into the visitors' gallery today. There were another 20 who weren't allowed in

the visitors' gallery and who were outside, hugely concerned about this issue.

Once again,

when you use the litmus test of reality versus what the Liberal government says

and versus what the MLA of the government says, you see a completely different

picture. What is the responsibility of MLAs — of all MLAs? It's to use that

litmus test and bring reality into this House and be a voice for their

constituents. That is their job, first and foremost. Backbench MLAs for the

government should not just be sitting here echoing what the Premier's office

told them they have to say. They should be held accountable and be responsible

to their constituents and voice their concern in this House. I hope to God they

will start to do that, because democracy depends on it, and it is, after all,

their job.

[1550]

Deputy

Speaker: That completes the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne.

Hon.

members, I'll repeat the motion:

[We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative

Assembly of British Columbia, in session assembled, beg leave to thank Your

Honour for the gracious speech which Your Honour has addressed to us at the

opening of the present session.]

[1555]

Motion

approved on the following division:

YEAS — 42

Whittred

Cheema

Hansen

J. Reid

Bruce

Santori

van Dongen

Barisoff

Thorpe

Hagen

Plant

Collins

Nebbeling

Stephens

Abbott

Coleman

Chong

Penner

Jarvis

Orr

Harris

Belsey

Bell

Chutter

Mayencourt

Trumper

Johnston

R. Stewart

Christensen

Krueger

Bray

Les

Locke

MacKay

K. Stewart

Brice

Sultan

Hamilton

Hawes

Kerr

Manhas

Hunter

NAYS — 2

MacPhail

Kwan

[ Page 5115 ]

Hon. G.

Collins: I call budget debate.

Budget Debate

(continued)

P. Bell:

It's a real honour for me to think that, in what appears to be a short

period of time in my life, this my third response to three budgets. It really

demonstrates that the new era is moving forward in British Columbia. Finally,

we're starting to see some of that growth and opportunity that we did not see

through the 1990s. I'm excited to speak to the budget speech for 2003.

[Mr.

Speaker in the chair.]

Before I

get into the actual budget, I'd just like to congratulate a few individuals from

my riding who recently won the Queen's fiftieth anniversary medal — five very

deserving individuals from Prince George North, including a good friend of mine,

someone who has worked tirelessly in the Prince George community over the last

25 or 30 years, Mr. Ron East. Also, an individual who has worked incredibly hard

in Prince George, who was largely responsible for the University of Northern

B.C. and I believe was one of the first chairs of the board for the University

of Northern British Columbia, an individual who ran Northwood Pulp and Timber

Ltd. for many years, Mr. Horst Sander.

Another individual, very deserving again, a tremendous contributor to the

community and someone I refer to as the Miss Hart Highway, is Shirley Gratton,

who has put in an incredible amount of work in youth sport, in community

council, and has really been a huge contributor. Two other individuals are

Murray Sadler, a lawyer in Prince George — again, very, very involved with the

early development of the University of Northern British Columbia; and a very

good friend of mine from Mackenzie, Mr. Tom Michael, who actually flew Spitfires

in World War II and continues to be a councillor in the community of Mackenzie.

I believe this is around his third or fourth term, at the ripe old age of 81, I

think. I'm hoping he hangs on for the next provincial election. He certainly did

a great job getting me elected this time. Those five individuals are very

deserving of the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal.

[1600]

Moving back

to the budget, you know, this is truly an exciting time in the province of

British Columbia. For the first time ever that we can tell — certainly since

1951; that's as far back as we could check — in 2002-03 every single ministry

came in on or under budget. That's just exceptional, in my view — to have a

province with the size of budget that we have, to have a ministry like the

Ministry of Health Services, as an example, that has a budget in excess of $10

billion and is able to manage that budget effectively. Historically, the

Ministry of Health has been unable to keep itself within target, especially for

the last five, six or seven years. Certainly, I congratulate all of the

ministers on the other side of the floor for their efforts in ensuring that

their budget was brought in on or under their targets.

You know,

the great thing…. I'm really talking there about last year's budget. You know,

there are some detractors who will say that no, it wasn't under budget, that

there were a few items that were taken out of contingency. That's what

contingency is there for. When you have a missing women's investigation that

costs literally tens of millions of dollars, which could not possibly be

anticipated, that's an appropriate use of a contingency fund. When you have the

provincial emergency program and you have large-scale flooding in different

areas, as I did in part of my riding…. I had a number of roads washed out, and

my riding was one of the beneficiaries of the provincial emergency program. To

spend money on the provincial emergency program makes a great deal of sense.

That's an appropriate use of contingency funds.

Some people

say that the $10 million that was spent at the University of British Columbia in

the library was not an appropriate use of funds, but I say that any time you can

get $10 million from the feds for contributing $10 million from the province,

that's a great use of money. I think that was a sound financial decision. I

might add that if my father were still alive here today, I'm sure he would

support that decision, since he was the associate librarian at UBC for many,

many years. I'm glad part of his vision has been carried forward in the

expansion of the library at UBC.

To the

detractors that say we went into contingency funds, I say: that's what

contingency funds are there for. It's a prudent use of those funds, and I

believe the Finance minister made the right decisions in terms of making

appropriate use of that money and leveraging that money for those uses.

You know,

when you come in on or under budget, it actually gives you some choices for a

change. It's choices we didn't always have in this province. Certainly for the

last ten years, we were making those choices and those decisions before we could

afford to make those choices and decisions. Like any family, there comes a point

in time when the credit cards are maxed out. You can't lever the debt up

anymore, and you're forced into taking tough measures. This government, through

the leadership of the Premier, has made those difficult decisions that we've had

to make over the last year and a half. The fact that we made those difficult

decisions has given us some choices that we haven't had.

I can tell

you, government is not about making easy decisions. Any government, anyone, can

make easy decisions. Oftentimes you hear people in different communities saying:

"Why are we having to make these difficult decisions? Why are we actually

having to tighten our belts somewhat to ensure that we can afford to have a

bright future for our children?" Well, you know, it's pretty simple math in

my view. It's simply a question of "pay me now or pay me later," and

we've been using the philosophy of "pay me later" for the last ten

years in this province.

[1605]

I really

admire our Premier for following up with the types of decisions that he's had to

make. Really, it demonstrates to me that he is a man of courage when

[ Page 5116 ]

he's prepared to make those decisions and take the type of heat that he's had

to take in the public for making those decisions.

But 30

years from now, just as W.A.C. Bennett is viewed now as a visionary — by our

very critics, I might add…. Our very critics today oftentimes say that if we

didn't have a man like W.A.C. Bennett make the types of decisions around B.C.

Hydro and the infrastructure of the province when he did, we wouldn't be where

we are today as a province. Well, they didn't do anything to help us for the

last ten years; that's for sure. Certainly, I think that 30 years from now our

Premier will be viewed very fondly throughout British Columbia as well, because

he made those tough decisions.

I certainly

was fairly young, as were many of my colleagues, although I do know the odd

colleague has better memory than me of the W.A.C. Bennett era.…

An Hon.

Member: I wasn't born.

P. Bell:

And there are several that weren't born, actually. But my recollection of those

W.A.C. Bennett years is that there was a whole bunch of upset people. There were

people saying that we shouldn't build the dams, that we shouldn't invest in our

future. In fact, the people and the rhetoric that carried on during that period

of time are very similar to the rhetoric that we hear today. The fearmongering

that's going on…. In fact, I recall that at the time, W.A.C. Bennett was

accused of selling our future to the Americans. I believe that was the statement

of the day — and I see that my friend from North Vancouver is nodding; he

would be the one that would perhaps know the best — that we were selling our

future. Mr. Speaker, I'm sure you would recall that as well, possibly. He would

recall it better than you.

But I'm

sure that was the quotation — that W.A.C. was selling away our future. You

look today at the people that hold him as an icon, and they're the critics that

are accusing our Premier and our cabinet today of making the tough decisions. I

congratulate our Premier and all of our cabinet for making those difficult

decisions, and I think they've done that with a tremendous amount of courage and

vision.

When we

came to office, it became absolutely clear to us that we had to get business

back in British Columbia. There's no question that we drove business away. We

drove the mining industry away from the province. We drove the forest industry

out of the province. We drove technology out of the province during the 1990s.

We have had to reverse that trend, and it hasn't been easy.

I come from

the business world, and I can tell you that money is very portable. I can invest

anywhere I choose to invest, whether it be in British Columbia, in Canada, in

North America or in the world. There's nothing that prevents my money from

flowing across boundaries. When you ask people how they make their investment

decisions, generally they want to get the best return on investment that they

can.

I want to

share a little story with you, if I may. I had a couple of folks come into my

office, and they happened to be from the teaching profession, actually. We were

discussing the changes to the education system, and they were concerned that we

were not putting more funds into education, even though we had put a tremendous

amount in.

I asked

them if they had any RRSPs or investments, and sure enough, they were planning

for their future. They were planning for their retirement. They had some money

tied up in RRSPs. I asked them the question: "How did you make the decision

in terms of making your investments?" They said: "We went to an

investment counsellor, and we told them what level of risk we were prepared to

accept. Then we said to them that we'd just like them to make as much money as

they can, given that level of risk." I thought: well, that's interesting. I

said to them: "Do you know where your investments are?" They said:

"We've got a little in Standard Life, and we've got a little bit of

gold." I said: "No, no, no. Do you know where the companies that

you've invested in are doing business?" They said: "Actually, no, we

don't." I said to them: "Do you care where they're doing

business?" They said: "Actually, no, we don't."

That's the

point. People don't care where they do business. What they do care about is the

best rate of return they can get. If we don't provide that return for them in

British Columbia, they won't invest here. If they don't invest here, we won't

create the wealth and the employment that we need to create to provide the

social services that people are looking for us to provide.

[1610]

This

government really has focused on two areas so far and will continue to focus on

those two areas. The first one is the level of taxation that we have in this

province. I must say that the Premier and cabinet have been bold in their steps

towards improving the taxation environment in our province. Not only do we have

the lowest rate of income tax for the first two brackets of income — for those

making under $60,000, the lowest tax rate in all of Canada — but we've also

taken significant steps toward reducing taxation for various businesses.

We have a

business tax rate that is competitive throughout North America now. We've

removed that as a distraction. We've removed that from the reasons why

businesses may choose not to locate in British Columbia. That's been very

helpful. There are a number of other things that we've done as well. We've

removed PST from production equipment and machinery. We have a 20 percent

flow-through credit for mining. So there's a whole bunch of things we've done to

create a competitive tax regime.

The other

key thing you have to do is reduce the regulatory count, because regulation gets

in the way of people doing business. Every day in our constituency offices we

find more and more of this. It's not unusual for me — and, I'm sure, all of

the various MLAs — to

[ Page 5117 ]

have constituents come in and talk to us about things they've come up against

that just seem silly.

I had an

individual come in the other day, who wants to purchase some mountain pine

beetle timber. He's a willing purchaser, he has an incremental use for the

fibre, and he is willing to pay market value for the fibre. But because of the

environment we've created, we find it difficult to actually sell him that wood.

This is with the mountain pine beetle running rampant in our northern forests.

Fortunately,

we're working through that process, and we're finding a mechanism. We've

deregulated much of government, but we need to continue to work hard on that. I

fear that one-third may not be enough in terms of removing needless regulation,

but certainly it is a step in the right direction. I'm confident that the

Minister of State for Deregulation will ensure that we have the appropriate

regulations in this province in order to stimulate that growth.

What has

this done? We've made changes in our regulation. We've made changes in our

taxation regime. What benefits are we seeing? Last year, for the first time

ever, we had over two million British Columbians working in the province. That's

a significant step — over two million people working and 78,000 new jobs.

Often I hear the chorus line from my seatmates to the left of me…. Not only

physically but politically they're to the far left of me, I might add. I often

hear: "They're part-time jobs." That's not true. They're good-paying

jobs. There are many new folks working out there today in high-paying,

family-supporting jobs.

Oftentimes

people say those jobs are all in the lower mainland; they're all down in

Vancouver. I hate to tell them this, but that's not the case. I have a few

examples I'd like to read out for the record, because there are some significant

ones. This is just the Prince George area I'm talking about. There's one

company, Dollar Saver Lumber, which is a small manufacturer that does some

value-added work and produces a nice quality product. They have employed 75

people over the years. They've been in business for 25 years. Thanks to solid

support from Canfor, they're able to move from two shifts with 75 people to

three shifts, so they will be employing over 100 people. Actually, I believe

they're up and running with their third shift now — a nice little bump in

employment in Prince George.

West Fraser

Timber has started up a third shift, as well, just outside of Prince George, and

there's upwards of 80 new staff working at that. This is all just in the last

few months. There's a new call centre in Prince George. LiveBridge out of the

United States has been attracted to Prince George. They have something in the

order of 200 to 250 staff working there today. Certainly by the end of this year

they will be up to 350, and they anticipate within two years over 1,000 new jobs

in Prince George. That's huge. It's extremely important.

[1615]

I can go

on. That's not all of the examples. There are many, many more. There is a sort

yard in Prince George that brings in fibre and logs, sorts them to their highest

and best use and then resells them to various manufacturers. At the same time,

they produce unique products for specialty markets. They're quite interesting.

This little company here…. I'll tell you the employment numbers in a second,

and that will put the lie to saying it's little, because it's not. One of the

markets this little company has developed is the production of rough-cut lumber

for movie studios and movie sets. Their lumber has been featured in various

movie sets around British Columbia. It's found quite an interesting little niche

market. At that sort yard there are over 40 staff working. They're good,

high-paying jobs. In fact, they've been so successful that they're putting on an

addition to their milling operation, and they'll be hiring another ten staff who

are probably working there already. Again, it's a nice little business that's

growing.

I'm going

to continue in this vein, because I think it's important for people to

understand that these are good jobs paying high wages, and they're spread out

throughout the province. Another example is Brink Forest Products in Prince

George, which has been manufacturing finger-jointed studs and various other

commodities for a number of years. I believe they have about 80 or 90 staff. Mr.

Brink is putting the completing touches on an additional 20,000-square-feet

building. He's opening up another whole finger-joint line and adding 40 more

staff. These staff are making in the $18-to-$22-an-hour range. They're

high-paying jobs, and he is very optimistic. Mr. Brink has, in his vision, a

view to move forward and start manufacturing furniture in Prince George as well

— a very exciting option.

I'll

briefly go on here; I could do this for my full half hour. Carrier Lumber has

opened up Cheslatta Forest Products in a joint venture with the Cheslatta first

nation and the residents on the south side of Francois Lake. They employ 40 to

50 staff. Canfor is adding a third shift at Fort St. James. That's another 40 or

50 staff. West Fraser, as I had indicated earlier, has added staff. A small

value-added manufacturer in Prince George is producing landscape ties. That's

employing 13 new staff.

Quite often

the opposition members refer to these as meaningless jobs or part-time jobs. The

thing that is important to note is that the average wage in British Columbia in

the past year has increased by 5.1 percent. What does that actually translate

into? Well, 5.1 percent is significant by anyone's measuring stick. That's a

pretty healthy number. The national average is only 1.6 percent. It's

significant that our average wage has increased over three times as much as the

Canadian average. We've started to grow back to the point where we're starting

to look at Alberta again. We're starting to sneak back to where we were. We lost

our position in the 1990s as the second-highest wage anywhere in Canada behind

Ontario. Alberta moved into that position. There's been lots of good news for us

in the heartlands and in the north.

Speaking of

the heartlands, I'd like to move on to our heartland strategy, because I think

that's significant. Although we have been successful in creating some employment

and some new investment in the

[ Page 5118 ]

heartlands, I think there's much more to do. Clearly, this government has

heard a very strong message. The Premier and all of cabinet have come to the

table, and they understand the implication.

Three

significant reports, in my view, have sent this message to us. One would be the

Baxter report. The second would be the Progress Board's report on area code 250,

and then certainly the Select Standing Committee on Finance chaired by the

member for Peace River South also sent a very strong message. The message was

pretty simple: for too long the heartlands were left on their own to survive.

[1620]

The members

of the opposition are constantly referring to how the current government members

don't represent their ridings. Nothing can be further from the truth. I've lived

in Prince George for about 14 or 15 years, and I can tell you that we were left

on our own through the nineties. These two people here, the last of a struggling

party, who refer to us as not representing our…. How dare they? They're the

ones who made all of the regulatory decisions that drove mining out of this

province, that drove forestry out of this province, that made it so difficult

for people to survive, that took Prince George from a community of 80,000 people

down to a community of 71,000 or 72,000 or 73,000 people. They devastated our

heartlands. How dare they say we're not representing them?

This

government has been very, very proactive. Despite the fact that it's politically

not expedient to try and help the heartlands, the Premier has shown tremendous

courage in moving forward with this strategy.

Some of the

real key points…. When we think of our heartlands strategy and of what the

significant components of the heartlands strategy are, certainly one of the

things we have to do is ensure that we have stability in the heartlands around

the land base. When you're talking about stability, you're talking about first

nations, treaty-making and land use certainty. The Attorney General's office,

through the treaty negotiations office, has been very, very proactive in working

ahead and trying to get out in front of some of these treaties and settle some

of the difficult decisions we have facing us. There's been a $30 million,

three-year economic measures fund put forward to develop capacity in first

nations. There are opportunities for revenue-sharing. There's a whole bunch of

good things in terms of building that certainty around land use.

There are

significant transportation opportunities. I want people to be absolutely clear

on this, because oftentimes I hear editorialists in my community commenting on

how we'll never get our share out of this new 3½-cent gas tax. We're going to

get all our share and then some. In fact oftentimes, as we're down in the

lunchroom these days, I can tell you that many of us from the heartlands are

having a tough time with our urban MLAs asking us: "How come you guys are

getting so much up in the heartlands and you're leaving us out to dry?"

Perhaps it's time for that to turn around, but this time the heartlands really

are being looked after.

Mr.

Speaker, $650 million collected over three years — that's what that 3½-cent

gas tax will actually generate, and 100 percent of that money is going to go

into a transportation infrastructure fund to be held in a Crown corporation. So

every penny of that $650 million is going to go back into roads. That's what

people expect, that's what they want, that's what they've told us, and that's

what we're doing.

Out of that

$650 million, $362 million is going to be spent on northern and remote roads, so

in excess of half of that money is going to be going into northern and remote

roads. Another $210 million of that goes into resource roads, which are very

important in my riding. I have many, many roads that have not been looked after

over the years. People were not expecting the types of volumes of wood to travel

across them. It's very important that we reinvest in those roads. There's

another $37 million for oil and gas roads to expand the drilling season so that

we can capitalize on that huge market. Instead of having a three-month window

for drilling for oil and gas, we'll be able to extend that season out and

actually capitalize on that investment and create more employment for people.

That's $609 million out of a total of $650 million that's collected over a

period of three years, and that's all for the heartlands.

There's a

real significant opportunity for us. I see my colleague from Victoria–Beacon

Hill giving me the evil eye and saying: "How come we don't get any of that

money in Victoria–Beacon Hill?" I feel for him, and I appreciate the 3½

cents that's coming to the heartlands from his riding. I can tell you that we

all appreciate that. I congratulate him for agreeing to forward that money on.

It's significant.

How is this

money going to be spent in our area? There are lots of different opportunities.

A transportation advisory committee will be set up, a group of citizens and

locally elected officials who will be able to establish priorities for the

moneys that are available in each given area. I think that makes a tremendous

amount of sense. Hopefully, it takes some of the politics out of how we spend

that money.

[1625]

I can tell

you about some of the areas that are significant for me in my particular area.

The Chief Lake Road is consistently having problems. Highway 39 into Mackenzie

is a key highway that has not had money spent on it for a long, long time and

desperately needs improvement. Highway 16. Highway 97 through the Pine Pass

still needs significant work. A second bridge across the Fraser River in Prince

George or a twinning of that bridge and the old Cameron Street Bridge in Prince

George I think would be helpful. There's a number of significant investments

that we could make there.

Moving

along the road into the heartlands strategy here, beyond simply infrastructure

there's also tremendous energy opportunities in the north. It's not just energy

opportunities specifically in the Peace area, but there's the new untapped

basins — the Nechako basin,

[ Page 5119 ]

the Bowser basin — and coalbed methane throughout the north. There's the

offshore opportunities and a clear commitment from this government that it wants

to be in the ground or, I should say perhaps, in the ocean by 2010. So there are

significant opportunities.

You know,

we have always invested from the north into urban British Columbia. A good

example of that is that 45 percent of all the dollars that are invested in the

Working Opportunity Fund in British Columbia come from the heartlands, come from

people who are investing from communities like Prince George or Qualicum or Port

Alberni or Vernon — and I'm looking around the room — or Merritt. Forty-five

percent of the dollars that go into the Working Opportunity Fund come from the

outlying areas. Yet only 12 percent of the money is returned to those areas, and

that's something we have to change and improve upon.

I'm going

to wrap up by just saying that education clearly is a key priority for this

government. We made a commitment in '01-02 of $42 million. We've added another

$50 million to that this year and another $107 million in '03-06 — significant

dollars. That translates into about 5 percent more per student in the next three

years.

We've

worked hard together as a team. I'm very proud of the involvement I've been able

to have, as all my colleagues have, in how we've moved forward. I congratulate

the Premier and all of the cabinet for their vision, their guts, their

determination and their hard work.

Jarvis: It's my pleasure to rise in response to Budget 2003. Somewhat like

my throne speech, I said that this is my thirteenth budget I have spoken to in

this House, only because one year the previous government — probably due to

the condition that they were in — had two budgets in one year.

As a result

of the previous government's lack of fiscal prowess, this province went from a

leader across Canada to a have-not province, one that other provinces now have

to contribute money to. In other words, we are in last place with an

extraordinary debt and a daily payment of interest to the bonded bank-holders

outside of our borders of close to $7 million to $8 million a day every day of

the year.

Millions

are being paid out to pay the interest only on our debt, and that's ostensibly

because of the previous government — nothing off the principal, just interest.

If people can imagine: every day, 365 days a year, we send somewhere between $7

million and $8 million out of this country. That's literally millions and

millions of dollars lost every day. Today we are still paying that debt and the

interest — two years after the NDP, as I said, were ousted overwhelmingly by

the people of British Columbia.

[1630]

Today we

are now, without question, committed to fully reversing this past decade of

decline. We are hearing from the previous government's supporters, the naysayers

across the floor, wondering why we have to tighten our belts the way we are

doing and why we are not still continuing to spend, spend, spend — recklessly,

as they did before. The answer is that you just do not turn the ship or this

province around overnight. There is such a thing as fiscal responsibility. I

find it hard to comprehend that there is so little understanding out there with

some people. You just don't stop paying money on what you owe or what you

borrow, especially after you borrow it.

This is

exactly what we did in this province between 1986 and 2001. We borrowed billions

upon billions of dollars. As I said earlier, we only paid the interest —

hundreds of millions of dollars per year, every day, every year, just wasted,

straight into interest payments; no reduction of our capital costs on that. You

cannot do that in your personal life, so I wonder why the people and the

naysayers expect the government to be able to do it. If you continually spend

more than you earn, without paying back any of the principal, and you keep doing

it every year, year after year, you eventually go into bankruptcy. It's as

simple as that. That is just where this province was going — towards

bankruptcy — until we became government. Then we put in a sound fiscal plan,

an approach to managing the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.

I'm still

amazed at the lack of understanding by the member for Vancouver-Hastings, as she

was part of the government which created this mess that the taxpayers of B.C.

find themselves in. I would remind her what Tommy Douglas, the old sage of the

NDP-CCF party, said about debt: "If you have to borrow money from the

banks, you owe your souls to the banks." He did not believe in debt,

whereas I guess the previous government failed to realize the disastrous

ideology they were going through and destroying this province with — jobs —

and putting us into a large uncontrollable debt. The lack of jobs was caused by

the philosophy of this previous government, especially in our resource areas.

The member

across the floor should have realized what she was doing. She was part of the

government that was doing it. She was at the helm of that ship of state and at

the helm of the three fast ferries, as well, that put us in such a bad position.

I was

mentioning the fact that in the last ten years, we had a lack of jobs in this

province and unemployment was rising. I noticed just lately the latest volume of

Economic Analysis of British Columbia by the savings and credit unions of

British Columbia. In it they say, if I could read it into the record:

"B.C.'s labour market outperformed expectations in the year 2002."

Now, this is a year after we've taken power in this province. It says: "At

least in terms of job growth, total employment bottomed out in December of 2001,

after falling steadily in the last year and a half. In short, the provincial

government's restructuring and consumer spending and residential property

investment, as well some rebound in exports, were the key factors in shaping the

last year's provincial employment picture." We created ostensibly

70,000-plus new jobs.

The time

has come that we have to pay the piper. We're trying to do so in perhaps the

softest and most

[ Page 5120 ]

reasonable way, and, believe me, the results will be better in the long run.

It's tough sometimes out there to do what we're trying to do, and we appreciate

that some people go through a few problems. Nevertheless, it will get better.

But first your spending must be controlled to the point where your outgoings are

within reach of your incoming revenue. We the present government are taking a

prudent approach to the management of the taxpayers' dollars now.

[1635]

One

of the problems with B.C. is that the political choice of the previous

government was that they trashed our resource industry. The risk-takers, the

ones who do the investing and developing in B.C., fled this province for other

jurisdictions. The government of the time only encouraged those risk-takers to

go elsewhere, as they — the government of the time — just loaded more taxes

and applied excessive rules and superfluous regulations on those that were

producing revenue in British Columbia.

Those rules

and regulations were based mostly on philosophical reasoning rather than

rational thinking. Now we have to go out and encourage those risk-takers to come

back to British Columbia. It won't be easy. In doing so, we have to reduce many

of the redundant rules and regulations, and we have done that — for example,

to the mining industry of this province.

We have

given them some tax incentives — for example, flow-through taxation. It's

because of this flow-through taxation that we are now seeing…. I was talking

to a gentleman just a short while ago, who was creating a mine and doing

exploration up in the Toodoggone River — isn't that a great name? — area way

up in northern B.C. He said: "We wouldn't be there today, investing in this

province, if it wasn't for that flow-through tax credit." There's another

mine going in north of the Revelstoke area, and it will probably have 200 or 300

men in it.

We still

have a lot of work to do. B.C. needs to be an attractive place to invest, create

wealth and produce jobs. Getting the conditions right for such long-term

benefits just does not occur overnight.

I'd like to

bring to your attention and read into the record a fax I got from the president

and CEO of the Mining Association of British Columbia, Mr. Gary Livingstone. I

thought, as an urbanite, that there are people in the heartlands who might like

to hear this read out. He said:

"Hi.

I thought you might like to know our views on yesterday's budget. A heartlands

economic strategy for the interior is the right way to go. Not only is it good

for rural B.C., but what's good for rural B.C. is good for all of B.C. The

budget takes some important and logical steps to help strengthen mining by

specifically referencing the need to protect mineral-rich lands for potential

mineral discovery, by encouraging people to search for minerals, by encouraging

mine construction and by keeping B.C. competitive with other jurisdictions. I

hope others in the province are able to see the wisdom of your approach."

Now, that is a good recommendation.

We are

being prudent now with our responsibilities, as this budget shows, and the

bankers see that as well. They see B.C. is now being fiscally responsible, and

our credit rating is better than it was before. As a result of this prudent

handling of our taxpayers' dollars, we are now seeing benefits come back to us

— not big benefits, not great savings, but savings of some type anyway. It's

the start of a much-needed recovery in this province.

We're

following exactly our plan that we related to the people of British Columbia in

our election platform, when we said that we would focus on our finances and put

the moneys where they would do the most good. The bankers see that this is

happening, and the rates are being adjusted in our favour accordingly.

An example

of this is in education, which is part of our restructuring program, where we

tried to get the runaway costs under control. There were some tough changes and

belt-tightening in that ministry. The school districts were and still are faced

with great challenges to meet the tight fiscal restraints that we put before

them. All the while, this government said that when money becomes available, it

will be going to education first. The base funding of about approximately $4.8

billion has not been changed, and it won't be changed until the year 2004-05, I

believe, and then you'll see more increases.

However,

when surpluses did become available, the government put them into primary areas

like education. Last year we put two one-grant amounts totalling just over $109

million into the education system. This year we put another one-time grant of

$50 million into education. The Premier just announced a further $107 million

over the next three years that he is going to put into education. You can see

that in the midst of the fiscal restraints, if there is a surplus, we are not

forgetting the importance of education.

[1640]

Still

further, you can see, if we did not have any debt, what could have been done in

this province. Imagine: no debt. Just think of what that money would have been

available for in the education, health care and social services. Millions of

dollars every day would have been freed up.

Health care

had a budget of approximately $9 billion when we came to office in the latter

part of 2001. Knowing the importance of health care and its costs and the fact

that they were running out of control, we still managed to put another $1.1

billion into the budget. Twenty-five years ago the cost of running the

province's health care plan was $3.5 billion. Today it's over $10 billion and

risi