2002 Legislative Session: 3rd 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)

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2002

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 3, Number 9

CONTENTS

Routine

Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25 b )

Eid-ul-Adha festival

J. Nuraney

Bulkley Valley Rod and Gun Club

D. MacKay

McLean Mill National Historic Site

G. Trumper

Oral Questions

Comments on women by Women's Equality minister

J. MacPhail

Hon. G. Abbott

J. Kwan

Government support for mental health services

J. Kwan

Hon. C. Hansen

Funding for independent schools

S. Brice

Hon. C. Clark

Impact of budget on low-income earners

M. Hunter

Hon. G. Collins

Tabling Documents

British Columbia Utilities Commission annual report, 2000

Oil and Gas Commission annual report, 2000-01

Columbia Basin Trust report, 2000-01

B.C. Hydro annual report, 2001

Petitions

D. MacKay

Reports from Committees

Budget Debate (continued)

Hon. R. Coleman

R. Stewart

Tributes

R. Stewart

Budget Debate (continued)

R. Stewart

B. Suffredine

McMahon

Hon. J.

Murray

MacPhail

Nettleton

Visser

Mayencourt

Tributes

L. Mayencourt

Budget Debate (continued)

Mayencourt

Hon. K.

Whittred

[ Page 1211 ]

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2002

The House

met at 2:04 p.m.

Prayers.

[1405]

Introductions by Members

Hon. S.

Bond: Mr. Speaker, I am very delighted today to make a number of

introductions in the House. I know you will be pleased to help make them welcome.

First of all is a former member of the House from Prince George, who served in the

1970s, a good friend to all of us. We are very pleased to have in the House

today Mr. Howard Lloyd.

Additionally,

I have three constituents from my riding, who are excited about the process of

watching government in action. I am very pleased to welcome Hillary Monkman,

Sarah Waters and my daughter, Melissa.

Hon. S.

Santori: This afternoon it gives me great pleasure to introduce a very

special guest, Her Worship, the mayor of Grand Forks, Lori Lum. Also I would

like to introduce three students from the University of Victoria and one from

the Vancouver City College. First of all, I have with me Leah Romano, who is

undertaking a career in teaching; Sarah Benson, also attending the University of

language; and last but not least, my daughter, Tracy, who is also attending the

University of Victoria and also will be taking up a career in teaching. I would

ask that the House make them all feel welcome.

McMahon: It's a pleasure today to introduce constituents from my riding. I

have here Patti Stober with her sons, Marcus and Jordan. Patti and Jordan are

visiting Marcus, who is also attending the University of Victoria this year.

Missing from the group is husband Dallas, who I understand is out enjoying the

sunshine and golfing. I ask that the House make them welcome.

J. Bray:

I see in the House today we are joined by a long-time supporter and constituent

of mine, Mr. Campbell Atkinson, who I believe has not missed a question period

since last July. I would ask the House to please make our guardian very welcome.

Hon. G.

Abbott: I'd like to introduce three residents of the North

Okanagan–Shuswap, who I share with the member for Okanagan-Vernon. They're

business people and residents in the area: Roger Lockwood, James Lockwood and

Richard Lockwood. I ask the House to make them welcome.

P. Bell:

Joining me in the House today is my daughter, Diana Bell, who will be leaving for

Australia in eight days. Would the House please make her feel very welcome.

Mayencourt: It gives me great pleasure to introduce Pam and Allan Perkins,

who are in the gallery. They are visiting here from Sunnyhill, England. I would

ask that the House please make them feel welcome.

[1410]

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) EID-UL-ADHA FESTIVAL

Nuraney: I rise today to announce the celebration of Eid-ul-Adha, which will

be celebrated by Muslims this coming Saturday. Over 1.4 billion Muslims around

the world, including the seven million in North America and 100,000 in British

Columbia, will celebrate the end of annual Hajj, which is a pilgrimage to Mecca,

with the festival of Eid-ul-Adha, the second of the two major Muslim festivals.

The Hajj, the pilgrimage, symbolizes on a larger scale the unity of humanity.

Historically,

this celebration is about the sacrifice that Prophet Abraham and his son —

peace be upon them — were willing to make and surrender to the will of God.

Prophet Abraham was asked by God to sacrifice the thing closest to his heart,

which was his son. Just before Prophet Abraham did so, God said: "Oh,

Abraham, you have already fulfilled the vision — thus indeed do we reward the

righteous. Indeed, this was a manifest trial." Instead of his son, a goat

was sacrificed.

The lesson

we must derive from this is our willingness to give up that which we love the

most and strive to bring others to a better life. The Muslim community of

British Columbia will be holding a reception to celebrate this occasion here in

the legislative building next Wednesday at 6 p.m., and I encourage all members

to participate.

BULKLEY VALLEY ROD AND GUN CLUB

MacKay: I recently attended the Bulkley Valley Rod and Gun Club's annual

banquet in Smithers and wish to quote from their program. I think I could have

written part of it myself: "In these confrontational times, it is important

to belong to an organization that represents the rights and privileges of

conservation-minded outdoors people." I must say I thoroughly enjoyed the

friendship of this fine group as well as their unique variety of rather

succulent wild game dishes.

I must say

— and I'm sure you'll all agree with me — that moose tongue in

raisin sauce, caribou enchilada, sheep in curry sauce, elk sweet and sour, wild

turkey salad, venison cabbage rolls, Moroccan sharp-tailed grouse, lynx Oriental

salad, beaver tail

[ Page 1212 ]

and beans and, of course, the always popular cougar in gravy are not your

typical banquet of New York steak, pasta alfredo and chicken cordon bleu.

Congratulations

are in order for a volunteer organization that so positively carries out their

conservation, education and recreation mandate. I'm proud to represent people

such as those who belong to the Bulkley Valley Rod and Gun Club and the values

they represent.

MCLEAN MILL NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE

Trumper: I'm proud to tell you today about a wonderful asset to the province

and the people of my riding. Located on 13 hectares of beautifully forested land

in the scenic Alberni Valley lies Canada's last working steam-operated mill. The

McLean Mill National Historic Site is a glowing example of local initiative, not

only preserving the glorious heritage of Canada's forest industry but also

diversifying the local economy and creating local employment.

The McLean

lumber mill started as a small family-run business. They logged in the area and

operated the mill from 1926 to 1965. The McLean family donated the mill

buildings and heritage equipment to the city of Port Alberni in the early 1980s,

and later, with a generous contribution of land from MacMillan Bloedel, allowed

for the designation of the site as a national historic site in 1989.

[1415]

In 1996

the federal and provincial governments provided funds for the restoration of the

mill. Today the site is open from May to September, when the sawmill operates

and does custom cutting activities. On site are the original buildings, homes,

bunkhouses, school and smithy. Fascinating interpretive programs are presented

by a troupe of local actors in original costume.

In 2001 the

Alberni Pacific Railway steam train began to transport visitors from downtown

Port Alberni to the McLean Mill. The exterior of the train station was

completely restored to its original appearance by volunteers on one long, hot

weekend in July of 1990. I know, because I was conscripted to help.

None of

this would have been accomplished without the many volunteers in the Western

Vancouver Island Industrial Heritage Society, which manages the McLean Mill on

behalf of the city of Port Alberni.

I encourage

British Columbians to step back in time and visit the heritage jewel in the

Alberni Valley. Who knows? On one of the train trips you may meet the Beaufort

bandits, who from time to time come out of hiding and try to hold up the train.

Oral Questions

COMMENTS ON WOMEN BY

WOMEN'S EQUALITY MINISTER

MacPhail: Today we'd like to discuss how women are faring under this

government.

Yesterday,

in her local newspaper, the Minister of State for Women's Equality was quoted as

saying: "More women are abused, not oppressed." And she made it clear

that she was speaking as a member of cabinet.

It's

unclear what the minister meant by that amazing statement. Even the editor of

the paper found it incredible, stating: "I don't know what she was

thinking.... I'm not sure that she was thinking at all." Could the Minister of

Women's Services please explain to the House: what is the Liberal thinking on

this? What exactly is meant when a cabinet minister sees no connection between

abuse and equality?

Hon. G.

Abbott: This is a government that is very much committed to the principle of

equality for all, including women. Further, it is a government that's very much

committed to the principle that there should be abuse of no one — children,

women or any other people who are vulnerable in our society. I know that the

minister responsible is working very hard on this front to clean up some of the

messes that were left behind by the former administration. I know she's working

very hard on child care. She's working very hard to ensure that services are

there for women when they are unfortunately thrust into difficult, vulnerable

situations.

MacPhail: That's interesting, because the Minister of State for Women's

Equality is also quoted in this interview as saying: "If inequality exists

between men and women in the workplace, it's because of women's own

choices."

According

to the minister: "The opportunities are exactly equal. People make

choices." Again, it's unclear what the minister might have meant by this.

Could the minister actually responsible for Women's Services please explain to

this House what the Liberal view is, specifically, of social and economic gender

equality.

Hon. G.

Abbott: The member had the opportunity over the past ten years to attempt to

create a socialist utopia here in British Columbia. They failed. We are very

much committed to principles of gender equality. I don't know what kind of

misconstruction the member may have put on the words of the minister

responsible. I suspect it was extensive. I'll let the member speak for herself.

I know that this minister is very much committed to those principles.

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition with a further supplementary.

MacPhail: Let's examine that in the context of the interview, because it

gets better.

Yesterday

we witnessed huge budget tax increases on middle-income earners to pay for the

government's tax cuts for the rich. The Minister of State for Women's Equality

offers this rationale for the chosen direction of the government: "The rich

get richer and the poor get poorer." According to the minister:

[ Page 1213 ]

"That's the world we live in, the world we've always lived in."

[1420]

What does

she suggest women do? She says: "Well, then, make more money." That's

a quote.

Given these

incredible statements by the minister — her belief that inequality is a matter

of choice; that her ministry is in fact a sunset ministry; that the rich deserve

to get richer and the poor, poorer; and that violence against women is not an

issue of social inequality — how can this minister stand up and say that this

government is working toward social and economic equality for women? Why doesn't

this Minister of Women's Services do the right thing and say to his colleague:

"Step down and get out of the way"?

Hon. G.

Abbott: Again, I don't for one moment believe the nonsense coming out of

that member's mouth. I don't believe it for a moment. The member can cobble

together any amount of misconstruction around what another member may have said.

Clearly that is the case — in her absence, nonetheless.

I refuse to

be lectured by a member who was a key minister in a government that blew half a

billion dollars on fast ferries — half a billion dollars. Imagine the high

principles that we could have upheld with that half a billion dollars. Imagine

the child care and imagine the women's services that could have been provided by

half a billion dollars that that member acknowledges was a failed experiment.

J. Kwan:

The minister doesn't have to worry, because we'll table the document at the end

of question period.

GOVERNMENT SUPPORT FOR

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

J. Kwan:

On October 30, 2001, the government fired the mental health advocate. The

Minister of State for Mental Health said he would be an effective advocate for

mental health patients.

I refer to

the documents which the opposition shared with the minister yesterday. They

outline the frustration of one family trying to cope with mental illness, their

utter despair in dealing with the mental health system and their efforts to

obtain help from the minister — the Minister of State for Mental Health —

and from the Premier.

In the

letters dated November 7 and December 6 and addressed to the Premier, the family

sought assistance in dealing with a system that isn't serving their son's needs

or their needs. The Premier's response, dated December 11, was very

sympathetic. It advises the family that they'll be hearing from the minister of

state shortly. Well, this family didn't hear from the minister of state — not

in December, not in January, not in February.

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

Hon.

member, I would urge you to put your question now, please.

J. Kwan:

Thank you, hon. Speaker.

Finally,

this Monday, with police cars and an ambulance in front of their home, of their own

initiative they got through to the minister's office. What happened? They were

referred back to the system with no apparent intervention and no apparent

advocacy.

My question

is to the Minister of Health Services. Would he personally accept this standard

of advocacy? Is this how mental health patients, their caregivers and their

families should be treated by the office of the Minister of State for Mental

Health, now that he's the sole person for this province responsible for mental

health?

Hon. C.

Hansen: I find it quite surprising that this member would stand up and try

to lecture us on mental health programs in British Columbia, when the colleague

sitting beside her, the member for Vancouver-Hastings, was the Minister of

Health in January of 1999 when the mental health plan was brought in by the

previous government.

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. C.

Hansen: There was a commitment.

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, hon. members. The Minister of Health Services has the floor.

[1425]

Hon. C.

Hansen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In 1999 the

Minister of Health brought in a mental health plan that was supposed to put $125

million over a period of seven years into programs to serve mental health

patients in British Columbia. Do you know what the record of the NDP government

was? They were an abysmal failure in delivering on mental health programs in

British Columbia. In the first three and a half years of that seven-year, $125

million mental health plan, the NDP government delivered less than $25 million

towards that. That was a violation of the trust of some of the most vulnerable

people in British Columbia, and that member who asked the question has only

herself…. She should hang her head in shame for the record of their

government.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant with a supplementary

question.

J. Kwan:

This family wrote to the Premier and wrote to the Minister of State for Mental

Health, asking for assistance. It's been three months since, and he did not get

any assistance from this government.

[ Page 1214 ]

You'll

recall that back in October this Liberal government sent out a press release,

and it says: "Minister of State Ensures Advocacy for Mental Health." You know what? This family received none.

Will the

deputy minister admit that mental health advocacy is a difficult job and

requires unique skills and professional training? Will she admit today that

there is a need to make sure there is a mental health advocate in this province

because the minister of state is actually not doing his job? Will she ensure

that the moneys are refunded to ensure that the office of the mental health

advocate is funded so there is somebody in British Columbia who will stand up

for this family and others? Will this minister admit that especially those who

are most vulnerable would not get any assistance from their big tax cuts for the

wealthiest British Columbians and that the most vulnerable are being left out?

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, hon. members.

Hon. C.

Hansen: This government has every reason to be proud of the actions we have

taken in mental health programs in British Columbia. This is the first

government ever in Canada, probably in the Commonwealth, to appoint a cabinet

minister with responsibility for mental health programs. The reason for the

appointment of a cabinet minister with that responsibility is because the

previous government's record was abysmal in meeting the needs of families

exactly like the family described by the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant.

Interjection.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. C.

Hansen: We have committed to funding the balance of the $125 million mental

health plan. We have committed to putting the dollars into the capital projects

in mental health services that the previous government failed to deliver on. I

have every confidence that individuals who are in need of mental health services

in this province are going to be much better served under this government than

they were under the previous one.

FUNDING FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS

Brice: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.

It is being

reported that as part of the budget announcement yesterday, funding has been

increased to private schools at the expense of the public school system. I would

like the minister to tell us whether this is true.

Hon. C.

Clark: The funding for independent schools is based on a formula that's been

long established in government. Independent schools get their funding based on

their per-student enrolment, and that's tied to the per-student funding in the

public school system in the district they're in. This year we're predicting that

while enrolment is likely going to go up for independent schools, enrolment in

public schools is likely to go down a little bit. This is a formula that hasn't

changed this year from the year before or the year before that, but I'll tell

you something that has changed for this government. When you look in the blue

book, you'll see that the funding for education has gone up by almost $20

million.

[1430]

Something

else that's changed is that you'll see this government believes teachers should

be paid better and parents should be involved in the education system. This

government believes that school districts are locally elected and have the right

and the ability and the obligation to make decisions based on the needs in their

local communities. This government believes that we should respect the education

partners we have with government. That is a big change from the last decade.

Mr.

Speaker: The member for Saanich South with a supplementary question.

Brice: A question to the minister. If enrolment at the independent schools

does not increase at the rate expected, can the Minister of Education tell us

what will be done with any surplus dollars?

Hon. C.

Clark: This government, as I have said many times, is firmly committed to

public education in British Columbia. Having said that, any money that does not

go to independent schools because we don't see an enrolment increase that may

have been projected will be redistributed back through the school system so that

we can continue to support our children who are at our public and independent

schools everywhere in British Columbia.

IMPACT OF BUDGET

ON LOW-INCOME EARNERS

Hunter: I'm not going to make a long speech, because I have a serious

question for the Minister of Finance. I've heard from a number of low-income

earners in my constituency who are citing media reports that the budget measures

announced yesterday will have a disproportionate impact on them. Can the

Minister of Finance provide any reassurance to these people that the media

reports they are citing are false?

Hon. G.

Collins: I think I heard most of the question but perhaps not all of it. If

I didn't, then perhaps he can repeat it for me.

The

government made two changes yesterday in particular to the tax system. The first

one was the MSP premium changes. The average premium increase will be about 50

percent, but government went

[ Page 1215 ]

out of its way to try and protect lower-income British Columbians from that

impact. In fact, 230,000 or more British Columbians will actually see their

premiums go down after this change as opposed to up. Some British Columbians

will actually find themselves paying no MSP premiums, particularly those at the

low end.

The other

change on the taxation front was that of a change in the PST of one-half of 1

percent. As well, government wanted to try and insulate people at the lower end

of the income spectrum from that change, and as a result, the PST tax credit

that individuals can claim, which was $50 per person, has been raised 50 percent

to $75 per person so that people at the low income level….

Interjection.

Hon. G.

Collins: That way, people at the low-income level will actually be insulated

from some of those changes. In fact, people at the very low end of the income

spectrum will actually benefit from those changes as opposed to the other way

around.

[End

of question period.]

Mr.

Speaker: Hon. members, I would just urge every member to search somewhere

deep in their desk and find a copy of Standing Orders . Please take it out

and read

section 47 a , pertaining to question period. Blow the dust off it

first, and please read

section 47 a . I'm sure question period will work a lot

more smoothly. Thank you.

Tabling Documents

Hon. R.

Neufeld: I have four reports to table: British Columbia Utilities Commission

2000 annual report, Oil and Gas Commission 2000-01 annual report, Columbia Basin

Trust 2000-01 report and B.C. Hydro annual report 2001.

Petitions

MacKay: I have the honour to present a petition. I have a petition with

several hundred signatures on it from residents of Smithers and Telkwa who wish

to express their thanks to this government for allowing them the choice to

frequent smoking or non-smoking establishments.

Reports from Committees

Stewart: I have the honour today to present the report of the Select

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations…

Interjections.

Mr.

Speaker: Order, please. Order, please, so that we may hear the member.

Please proceed.

Stewart: …for the second session of the thirty-seventh parliament. I move

that the report be taken and read as received.

[1435]

Motion

approved.

Stewart: I ask leave of the House to suspend the rules to permit the moving

of a motion to adopt the report.

Leave

granted.

Stewart: I move that the report be adopted. In doing so, I'd like to make a

few brief comments.

The work of

this committee has, in reality, just begun. In anticipation of the core reviews

of the Crown corporations, our committee has concentrated on the preliminary

work of providing the background of the Crown corporations and the process for

reviewing these agencies.

I would

like at this time to thank the Chair of our subcommittee, the member for East

Kootenay, for all his work in preparing the guide to our operations. This makes

up a significant component of our report. The guide will provide the framework

for any future work of this committee. The Crown corporations secretariat and

the Clerk of Committees have also been a great asset in this committee.

Motion

approved.

Orders of the Day

Hon. G.

Collins: I call response to the budget.

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon.

R. Coleman: I'm proud today to stand and respond to the budget speech of

yesterday. Mr. Speaker, this is about a group of people taking responsibility

after getting elected by the people of this province and doing exactly what they

said they'd do — that they would put this province back on the track to fiscal

responsibility and a strong financial future in British Columbia.

I sat in

this House in opposition for five years prior to the last election. I saw five

budgets — five budgets that nobody could believe, five budgets that had

different assumptions in them and difficulties with every single one. I also saw

budgets that were fudged, budgets that did not have realistic forecast

allowances and budgets, frankly, that didn't put this province in very good

stead in anybody's eyes in any way whatsoever, including bond agencies.

We've

changed that. We brought down a budget yesterday that was put together by 77

members of this Legislature. We brought down a budget that was a lot of work, a lot of time and a lot of thought. The reason we did that was

because we felt that budget-making

[ Page 1216 ]

and future-making in public policy should be done in an

open and accountable way.

What did we

do? We charged our members with taking a core review of the operations of

government in the province of British Columbia. We asked ourselves the tough

questions. We dealt with duplication. We drilled down and found things where

government was spending money where they shouldn't be.

In my own

ministry I had seven agencies receiving $35,000 apiece on what was supposed to

be a pilot project to review the interrelationship between non-profit

organizations within communities that were receiving government funding. You

know, that pilot project was going on for five years, because nobody said:

"What are the results of that $35,000 per program assessment in each of

these six or seven communities?" Nobody asked the questions about where

that money was being spent and how it was being spent. If you don't take care of

the nickels and the dimes, the big dollars flow out the door in a hurry, and the

next thing you know is that you've got huge problems, financially and fiscally, in a

province like ours.

[1440]

The first

thing we had to do was to strategically shift this government, strategically

change its thinking — its thinking being that we are here for only one reason,

that there is only one person that's a taxpayer in the province of British

Columbia and that there's only one tax dollar. Our job is to manage it responsibly to

deliver the programs that we can deliver, choose to deliver the ones that are

most important, and make the adjustments within our program development that

make it work for the province.

Hon.

Speaker, this was something that everybody that worked on it found to be

difficult. They found it to be time-consuming. They found it to be stressful.

But they also found it, at the end of the day, to be rewarding. I can remember

talking to backbenchers in the previous government after a budget speech in

1999, at a reception. They had no idea what the direction of their government

was. They had no idea what the plan was. They didn't have the foggiest idea from

throne speech to throne speech. They didn't have the foggiest idea from budget

to budget, because they weren't part of the process. They weren't allowed to

represent their constituents. They weren't allowed to ask the tough questions in

committee as we did through our strategic shifts that affected budgets.

The reason

this budget and this throne speech that we have put into this Legislature in the

last week and a half are going to be successful for the people of this province

is because every MLA had an opportunity to give us input, every MLA challenged

us to think and every cabinet minister and MLA worked hard to have success on

behalf of all British Columbians.

I want to

spend a few minutes today on some of the good things in this budget — the good

news. It's all good news as far as I'm concerned, because any time you lay it

out to people and tell them the truth and let them know the real challenges you

have and take your financial house and put the proper forecast allowances in

place, people can see where you're headed. People can see you have an objective.

They can see you have a goal, and they can see you want to accomplish things.

In my

ministry there are some things that are about to be accomplished. Government has

a fundamental duty to protect its citizens. In this ministry we have

responsibility for policing. The nature of crime in our society has changed

dramatically. We deal with more violent offenders; we deal with more organized

crime. We deal with more difficulty in the accumulation of evidence and how we

would deal with it within our court system. The result of that is that we need

to enhance the sophistication and the ability of our law enforcement agencies to

perform.

Something

you won't hear as people criticize this budget is the fact that police funding

in this province was protected. What you won't hear is that in addition to that,

the funding was actually enhanced so we can move forward with

technology that our law enforcement officers need on the front line in order to

do their job.

Our law

enforcement officers in our community work shift work. They have a difficult,

difficult job. They work in an environment where we as a society will judge a

decision they have to make in a split second. Based on all their skills and

experience, they'll make a decision like that, that society and other people

will second-guess for the next six months to a year — or forever. These

individuals deserve our support and our respect and, frankly, our acceptance of

the professional job they have to do.

When I

became minister, one of the things that disappointed me was sitting down with my

people from police services, the B.C. Chiefs of Police and the RCMP, and finding

out that for years the law enforcement community was trying to get through to

the minister responsible on the things that were needed in law enforcement to

improve its future in this province. It fell on deaf ears. That's not acceptable

to any of us. We've moved forward, in seven months, further than the law

enforcement agencies were probably allowed to move forward in the last ten

years. The reason for that is because we're prepared to take the leadership. The

Premier has a Solicitor General because he wants somebody waking up every

morning and thinking about policing and how we can enhance it in this province.

That's the job.

[1445]

We're going

to build a five-year plan for policing, and within that five-year plan we're

going to evaluate all aspects of policing. We're going to take our police

services, in conjunction with our provincial police force — which is the Royal

Canadian Mounted Police — and our city police forces and coordinate how we do

business. We're going to move to an integration of services so that serious

crime, forensic ident and special investigational teams overarching the entire

police infrastructure will be there for our citizens.

We're going

to take a real-time computer system, and we're going to put it in our cars and

make it available to our law enforcement officers. We're going to

[ Page 1217 ]

integrate that system with other systems so that law enforcement officers in

this province will know when they're sitting on the side of the road whether

there's a protection order out on somebody that shouldn't be in the

neighbourhood. They can access a sex offender registry to know where the

offenders are and where they live when there's a crime committed in that

community. They can access the information of people coming out of our prison

system, and they can access the information on what goods are being pawned in

pawnshops in our province so we can follow stolen property at a better rate.

We can do

this because we're testing the system now. We're testing in Richmond and

Vancouver and Port Moody. We're having great success.

I went to

Treasury Board and asked for the commitment to be able to invest the money in

that type of system for police agencies in the province. Treasury Board has

approved it so we can enhance policing, and that's good news in this budget.

We're going to meet our commitment to improving the safety and the fighting of

crime in every community in British Columbia.

Our

ultimate goal is to move to where we have integration, seamless operation in

policing and no borders of communication of intelligence so that we can make

sure the bad guys don't win.

Mr.

Speaker, we have the Organized Crime Agency in this province, which is already an

integrated model working in policing. It's already having successes, and it's

having successes because this government was prepared to enhance its funding

last fall so we could complete and work on the very serious and complex

investigations that it has to do.

As we move

forward, we're finding this. We're having regions of the province come to us and

say: "You know what? It's about time." In the northeast area of this

province, in the Peace, all the regional districts and the mayors have got

together and asked me as Solicitor General if they can work on an amalgamated

model to police an entire region of the province with the RCMP. Of course, I

said yes, because it's exactly the type of initiative we want to see in our

communities as far as enhancing policing and law enforcement.

It is

policing that we have to spend some time on when we build this five-year plan,

but it's not the only thing we will be spending time on as we move forward. One

of the criticisms that may come out of some of the issues relative to how we're

doing business is in victims programs. Victims programs in this ministry have

been protected at the police-based victims programs. We will be taking the

responsibility to make sure those programs are enhanced and made to work for all

the communities of British Columbia. We will be conducting the overarching

review of victims programs and other agencies of government to see how they

should be coordinated or amalgamated or made to work better. That's the mandate

we were given to do as part of the ministry.

We have had

some things happen in this province that have had an effect on us and some

things outside this province that had an effect on us in the last year. All of

us know about September 11. As a solicitor general it would be irresponsible for

me not to tell the people, when I had the opportunity, in speaking to the

budget, that the provincial emergency program funding is strong, that our

organization is strong and that we as a group of people should be proud of how

they operate and how our law enforcement coordinate with them.

September 11 I received my first phone call, about 7:30 in the morning, from our

police agency, the RCMP. Basically, it was that we were already setting up our

24-7 operation to coordinate all information relative to policing and

intelligence in British Columbia with regards to what happened in New York.

[1450]

Shortly

thereafter, I heard from emergency program people, and they were already

coordinating with our law enforcement people. We had moved immediately to assist

in the security of anybody that worked for the U.S. consulate in Vancouver. We

had already moved to where our volunteers were being organized so they could

accept and handle the people who were going to be landing on those planes that

were being diverted to British Columbia. Every hour for the next 24 hours I was

briefed and kept up to speed by our people on what was happening. The system in

British Columbia worked, and it worked very well.

I always go

back to the one conversation I had a few weeks after September 11 with Hugo

Llorens, who's the U.S. consul in Vancouver. Mr. Llorens said this to me:

"You know, Canadians and Americans are like siblings. We have our

disagreements, but when the chips are down, we're there for each other. I want

you to take any opportunity, whenever you're speaking to Canadians, to thank

them for their support, their assistance and their outpouring of love and help

in our time of dire need on September 11 and beyond." That was because our

agencies moved, and that's because our people care. It's because we have the

people in place that can do the job.

This budget

is about revitalizing our economy. It's about telling the truth to British

Columbians about where we are. It's about putting B.C. back where it wants to

be. We are not going to see this province become a have-not province. The reason

we're not going to see that happen is because of the structure that has been put

in place as a result of this budget, the core review, the restructuring of

government, the planning, the forward thinking and the hard work, frankly, of

every member of our caucus and our cabinet.

There's a

group of people, and in particular one person, that have to take leadership when

you're building a budget, and that's the Finance minister. I can tell you that

as we went through this process, if there hadn't been an individual who would

take the leadership and stand up and make the tough decisions and point us in

the direction of the tough decisions financially, we wouldn't be here today

moving forward to a strong future. The Finance minister and his staff should be

complimented on the work, the time and the commitment they made in building this

budget and building

[ Page 1218 ]

our future. I think they're going to see, as we move three to four years down

the road, that his vision, his ability to look forward and deal and his

toughness in helping us get to where we go will be the reason we got there in

the first place.

As we move

forward through this process, we should start to hear from people in British

Columbia that actually understand what's going on. All kinds of people had all

kinds of quotes in the newspaper today, and you could almost take the quotes and

draw a political line down and know exactly what the individual was going to

say. But you know, there are a lot of people out there that have been calling

and saying: "Stay the course. Hang in there. We know it's not easy, but you

know you have to make these decisions." The reason they know we have to

make these decisions is because they see the future for their children and their

grandchildren in how this government will perform in the next three to five

years. We have to set the foundation for its future, and we can do that by

simply staying the course.

The other

side of this budget and its operations is that some of the things that have come

out in the 24 hours have been…. One quote said we're expanding gaming, because

the B.C. Lottery Corporation's revenues are projected to go up over the next

three years. Well, if people would pay attention, they would know that a Crown

corporation has to operate properly and fiscally responsibly, and that's what

the corporation's doing. They'd also know that they've taken over the conduct

and management of bingo, which will obviously enhance their revenues, because

they didn't have those revenues before. Also, they would pay attention to the

fact that this corporation is well run and is obviously achieving goals that

have been aligned to it through a business plan system that they needed to do.

As we go

into that kind of discussion, I always find it kind of humorous. In opposition I

saw the bouncing from pillar to post in the gaming sector take place and all the

difficulties around the wrong influences being in the wrong place. Then the

question comes up: "Aren't you expanding gaming? You're actually meeting

the contractual and business commitments that were in place when you became the

government, relative to the community casinos and destination casinos you

had." We're not. What we did do, though, was to say that the infrastructure

will be 17 community casinos, seven destination casinos — if they can get

financed and built and completed — and that's it. There are no more casinos in

B.C. — period.

[1455]

You know,

hon. Speaker, we made that decision in a public cabinet meeting. We make our

decisions around gaming in public. If you want to see how the previous

government made their gaming decisions rather than in open cabinet, you can go

see how's it's done in open court. That's the result of how they did business

— what's in our headlines today on a regular basis.

I'm proud

of what we've done in gaming. We've taken five agencies and converted them to

two. We put the responsibility into the hands of a professional corporation at

arm's length from a ministry, so there can be no influence by any politician

ever again with respect to gaming in this province. We brought the regulatory

regime and the enforcement over to the ministry. We are presently preparing a

new gaming act so that we can consolidate how we're doing this, do it properly

and give our people the actual legal tools to do the job we want them to do.

We're going to do that in this session.

Something

else we're going to do in this session is to modernize the residential tenancy

relationship in this province. We're going to move forward to do that because

it's necessary. We did a consultative process to the end of January. We received

over 1,400 submissions with regard to residential tenancy from tenants,

landlords, public individuals — and even three, as a matter of fact, from

politicians. We've taken that information, we've put it together with some

policy and we're blending it into

an act and making sure that act works for both

parties, long term, in plain language.

We want

people to understand that very important relationship that they have with their

home relative to rental so that they know what the rules are and, at the same

time, so the person that owns the property, the landlord, knows what the rules

are. They know it in plain language, and they know they can access justice

easily, effectively and in such as way that we can also enhance the interest of

people making an investment and building more rental housing in this province. I

think we'll reach that goal, hon. Speaker.

We're also

looking at the streamlining of liquor licensing as we move forward. We're

looking at all the options and seeing how we can improve how we do business. You

know, in addition to having a fiscal plan and a budget, and in addition to

having strategic shifts in a government, you have to cut regulation and red tape

so that the economy and government can be more efficient for both parties. We're

going to do that, because that's what we have to do.

There's a

fellow by the name of Bill Clennan. Bill is known as the memory man. He wrote a

poem once. This poem goes like this. It's kind of apropos, given that the

Olympics are here. I believe it was coming back from an Olympic

event that he actually wrote this, on an airplane, but it really applies to this

government.

The contest lasts for moments

Though the training's taken years

It wasn't the winning alone that

was worth the work and the tears

The applause will be forgotten

The prize will be misplaced

But the long hard hours of practice

will never be a waste

For in trying to win

You build a skill

You learn that winning

Depends on will

You never grow by how much you win

You only grow by how much you put in

So any new challenge

You've just begun

Put forth your best

And you've already won.

[ Page 1219 ]

Yesterday

the province of British Columbia won because of the hard work that was put in by

the members of this Legislative Assembly.

To close,

just a note from a friend who works in the health sector — I wouldn't want

anyone to know the name, so I'll leave it out — in an email received today.

"Hi Rich:

"After

listening to Gordon Campbell's speech the other night, I understand a lot

clearer now. I did understand a little. Keep your head up, ducky, because

there are no more wooden nickels around."

That's the

sentiment as British Columbians start to learn that the tough decisions are

being made in this Legislature by this government to build a long-term future

for our province. We are going to be successful. We will not waver, because we

can't waver. We have to do the job for the future generations of this province,

and we will.

[1500]

Stewart: There's much reason for optimism today in British Columbia. A week

ago we heard a throne speech that undoubtedly instilled confidence in people

across this province, a throne speech that established and restated this

government's commitment to a new era.

Yesterday

we received the budget from the Minister of Finance, a budget that sets out a

responsible three-year plan to reinstate confidence, to bring government's

finances to order after a decade of mismanagement, to refocus our health care

system to put patients first, to refocus our education system to put students

first and to refocus government on the things that government should be doing.

These two

documents are indeed reason for great confidence, but there is also a context

that is important to the future of this province. That context is the people of

British Columbia — the volunteers; the activists; the community workers; the

public servants; the medical staff; the support staff, the teachers and their

students; our aboriginal communities; the parents; the grandparents; our youth;

our elected officials at all levels; our workers and their employers; the people

who invest in this community every day — our citizens, young and old, who call

this province home.

Tributes

TED SEGODNIA

Stewart: It never ceases to amaze me — the level of commitment that exists in

our communities, the dedication of volunteers and others in improving their

communities and in helping their fellow man, whether here at home or abroad.

Along that vein, I want to begin this afternoon by marking the passing of a

truly great man, a great community volunteer and a friend.

I knew Ted

Segodnia primarily through the Coquitlam Rotary Club. He was the club's

president for 2001-02. In that capacity, Ted was tireless, working to improve

his community through a service club that he considered the best in the world.

But Ted was far more than just involved in Rotary. Ted was deeply involved in

social work in his native Ukraine, individually though his church and through

Rotary International. Ted had a distinguished career with Canada Customs, but

perhaps his proudest accomplishments included helping five orphanages in Ukraine

become self-sustaining through Rotary's Children's Opportunity Project.

Ted passed

away in January. He will be remembered as a great person, a community-minded

person, a person who always looked for ways to help others. There are many such

people in my community, as I'm sure is true in every other community in the

province — tireless volunteers who work individually and through social

agencies and non-profit societies and service clubs to improve their community.

Debate Continued

Stewart: I was recently at a meeting of the local committee working on the

Trans Canada Trail. This dedicated group of volunteers and the organizations

working with them have undertaken a tremendous project, one which will benefit

my community and this province for years to come. I'd like to congratulate and

thank these volunteers for their tireless efforts and for the tremendous legacy

they're leaving behind for the people of Canada.

addressing the budget that was delivered yesterday, it is important to remember

all of these people at the community level who work outside of government and

within government to deliver programs and services and benefits for the

communities across this province. Last weekend I was proud to attend the

diplomats night for Douglas College's model United Nations. I was delighted to

talk at that event with many students who were showing tremendous interest and

knowledge of the complex issues that affect countries around the world.

[1505]

These

discussions gave me great cause for optimism and excitement at the level at

which today's young people are interested in the global community and are

determined to be a force in effecting change for the better for themselves and

future generations. I'd like to congratulate these students and Douglas College

for their vision and their commitment to addressing these challenges.

Tomorrow

night I'll be honoured to attend the Baden-Powell dinner for Scouting in my

riding. I remember my days in Scouting. I remember the tremendously valuable

contribution that this organization should be honoured for as it works with our

youth to improve their understanding of the social situation, to encourage them

to reach their very best and to continue to work in our communities for the

betterment of our society. I look forward to that dinner, and I congratulate the

Scouts and other community groups throughout British Columbia.

[ Page 1220 ]

Both the

throne speech and the budget spoke quite significantly about education. I want

to make some important statements about education, for the record. I've heard

our Premier and our Minister of Education speak about our outstanding school

system — one of the best in the world, one that we can be truly proud of. I've

heard them speak at length about the dedication of teachers and of all staff

that work with our young people.

I myself

know firsthand about the long hours that teachers put in. My wife is a teacher.

The dedication that the teaching profession and teachers in general show to

their classes and their schools is to be commended. They work long hours.

They're the coaches and the committee chairs and in some cases the guidance

counsellors. They run field trips and community groups that help students

understand the role they can play in their future and in the future of our

communities.

tremendously value the work of teachers, as does this government. I tremendously

value our education system, as does this government. It was one of our

commitments, prior to and during the election, that education was to be our

priority, that we must have an education system that provides quality,

flexibility, choice and outstanding outcomes for children, students and youth

across this province. I'm committed to doing that.

Unfortunately,

there are some hurdles to overcome. I get lots of mail about the fact that this

government was required once again to step in and put in place a contract for

teachers. Of course, this is nothing new. Not since 1993 — I believe it was

— has the government of British Columbia been able to come to a negotiated

settlement in the education system. That flaw, that challenge that we face, is a

very important one. We have committed, as a government, to ensuring that we

examine the way in which contracts are worked out between employee and employer

groups in the education system so that we can come to some better agreements in

future, so that negotiated settlements can be the order of the day rather than

unheard of.

I also sit

on the Select Standing Committee on Education. That committee has toured the

province. It has heard from teachers, students, parents, professionals, trustees

and many others about our education system, its tremendous value and the

challenges it faces as we move into a new century. I felt tremendously honoured

to sit on that committee as we went around the province and heard from groups

about some of their issues.

[1510]

heard from aboriginal students in Queen Charlotte City who were facing

challenges associated with aboriginal education and the need for government to

ensure as many options as possible to improve outcomes within aboriginal

communities in the education system.

We heard

from rural school district officials from Houston, Prince George and Cranbrook

about the challenges that face rural schools. We heard about students with

special needs and about gifted children. We heard about the value of programs

such as languages, arts and culture.

We heard

about challenges associated with the graduation requirements in this province

and how not a great enough percentage of students are graduating. In fact, I

would argue that the only great enough percentage of students to graduate would

be 100 percent, and that clearly should be our goal. Right now, of course, we

fall short, particularly in aboriginal communities.

We heard

about the need for trades education for students at the high school level who

weren't aspiring to go to university, to post-secondary. We heard about the

disparity between the percentage of students who were aspiring to go to

university and the percentage of their parents who thought they would. It seems

that more parents believe their children will go to university than actual

children and students believe. Even so, among the students who think they're

going to university, a smaller percentage of them actually go. Of those who

actually go to university, of course, not all of them graduate.

We heard

about the issue of post-secondary tuition as well as the challenges created by

an unfunded tuition freeze. Some students were finding that the pressures

created by that freeze left them in the fifth year of a four-year course of

study.

We heard

about community schools and inner-city schools. In fact, it was my honour to be

invited to visit three community schools in Vancouver and one in my riding. At

Franklin School I joined in their hot-lunch program, and I saw their special

needs class and their special needs students and education program. I was truly

honoured to be able to witness the work that they're doing at their community

school.

At Hastings

School I saw the tremendous preparations they were putting in for their

community Christmas dinner and the value that community school has for the

people in that area. I saw at Bayview School the work that the parents and the

community do to encourage and support the community school in that

neighbourhood. I spoke to a class and got their opinions about their school and

about community schools in general.

I want to

thank, in each one of those schools, the parents, the advocates and the

community leaders that came out and showed me around and explained the value

that they place on community schools. I want to thank all of these schools, I

want to thank the students I spoke with and I want to recognize that we in fact

were able to protect many of the programs that I find to be the most valuable

programs we deliver as a government.

Of course

we have fiscal challenges. The easiest thing in the world to do would be to

ignore our fiscal challenges and go right ahead and spend, go right ahead and

protect programs that we, as a government and as a people, can't afford. The

easiest thing to do would be to forget that this isn't our money. This is the

money that belongs to the people of British Columbia. Across this province, this

is their money. We must re-

[ Page 1221 ]

member that at all times. We must remember that sometimes the tough

challenges, the tough choices, are the right ones. Sometimes it is important for

government to stand up and make tough choices to do the right thing, even when

it is not popular or even when there are protests about it.

[1515]

Yesterday

the Minister of Finance said that this budget balances not just our books but

our capacity to meet people's needs. I believe that is true. I believe we must

balance our capacity to meet people's needs. We must make sure that as we move

forward over the next three years and try to balance the books that were left

us, the books that left us a $3.8 billion fiscal deficit — structural deficit

— we not only keep in mind the needs of every individual British

Columbian but also recognize that we must remain competitive as a province. We

must become competitive as a province with jurisdictions across the country and

across the continent.

I want to

applaud and thank the people who've written me, both the people who've raised

concerns about actions that we've had to take, actions that we've been forced to

take to deal with the deficit we've been left…. I want to thank them, but I

also want to thank the people — and perhaps there's more of them, in fact,

than the other — who've written and said: "Stay the course. We're

concerned about this one here. This one bothers me, but I recognize you wouldn't

do it out of spite; you're doing it because it's the right thing to do. You're

taking tough choices; you're making tough decisions. You're making difficult

decisions, and you're going to take the heat for it, but we ask you to please

stay the course so that we, the people of British Columbia, can look forward to

a new era of prosperity."

I myself

look forward to that. I myself look forward to the day when we will not be

borrowing from our children, not borrowing from the future, as the last

government did every single year in the nineties — every single year, year

after year. Even when they said there wasn't a deficit, it turned out there was

a deficit. They borrowed from our children, and we're now going to have to pay

that back, because I refuse to leave that to my children.

That's not

the legacy I want to leave them — a legacy of debt. I want to leave them a

legacy of hope. I want us, my generation and the generations represented in this

room — yes, yours too — to leave them a legacy of hope and opportunity, a

legacy that represents what British Columbia can be. British Columbia is the

best place in the world. It should also be the best economy in the world. It

isn't that. It's far from that now, of course, but it can become that again.

I thank the

Minister of Finance for the tremendous work that he and his team have put

together in delivering a budget that I believe will help move us toward a

competitive environment and a new era of hope and opportunity. I hope and

believe that we can look at those disadvantaged in our society and help them. I

also look forward to a day when we will be able to afford, as a government, the

kinds of programs that you and I value, the kinds of programs that everyone in

this room values, but that right now are more expensive than we can afford.

Right now, we will be spending, this coming year, more money than we bring in,

which has been a characteristic of British Columbia's government for 15 years.

That has to change, and I know that it will change.

I look

forward to the coming years when British Columbia will be able to stand, hold

its head high and say: "We've met the challenges. We are now, once again,

leading Canada. We are now, once again, going to put forward the kind of society

that our children will be able to thrive in, that our people in every walk of

life — public servants, private sector employees, entrepreneurs — will be

able to thrive, grow and have a great future in."

I look

forward to that day, Mr. Speaker, and I thank you very much.

[1520]

Suffredine: I am honoured to be able to respond to the budget speech today.

About eight months ago I was given an opportunity that only one of about 50,000

British Columbians ever gets. I was given the chance to represent my region and

make a difference. I was given the chance to show the determination of a

government that wanted to bring back balanced budgets. I was given the chance to

help revitalize the economy.

Chances

like this don't come easily, and they're not cheap. I had to give up a lifestyle

that most people would envy. I lived on the shores of Kootenay Lake, a mile from

my place of work. On a warm summer day I could boat to work and fish on the way

home. If I took the morning off in the winter, I could be knee-deep in powder

snow at the Whitewater ski area within 30 minutes and back for lunch. Within an

hour or two I could choose to go to one of three world-class hot springs. All

this was in a community that was connected to high-speed, wireless Internet and

a fabulous component contained in that community of arts and culture.

Year after

year the economy got worse. After 27 years of working in Nelson, I changed

occupations so that I could help change the province. Now, change is never easy.

Changing my lifestyle wasn't easy, and the budget is about change to health

care, education and our economy. That will be change for the better. I know it

creates uncertainty, and I know that, particularly in my community, many are

anxious. I understand their fears.

I know that

continuing to run the province the way it had been would have caused the

collapse of our public system of health care and education. That would not be in

the interests of patients, and it certainly wouldn't have been in the interests

of the workers who are now concerned about their job security.

I know that

in the short term I may have to take some criticism. It may even be that some

people say I don't care. They couldn't be more wrong. To restore sound fiscal

management requires courage. We must live within our means or fail.

[ Page 1222 ]

The members

opposite apparently had a revelation earlier this week. They discovered that to

pay for health care services the money had to come from the pockets of British

Columbians. The Leader of the Opposition thought it was a surprise when she

announced that every single increase in health care spending in this province

will come directly out of the pockets of British Columbians. Well, that was no

surprise — at least not to 77 members in this chamber.

It was only

a surprise to the members opposite, who still don't know that everything that

government gives to us it first must take from us. It was only a surprise to

those members opposite who think it's fair to describe something as fully funded

as long as you think you can borrow the money. They don't seem to realize that

every dollar borrowed must be repaid, and repaid with interest.

I was

elected to be part of the change to restore confidence in government and bring

British Columbia back as a leader in Canada. I promised to put the interests of

patients first in health care. I promised to put the interests of students first

in education. I promised to support plans to revitalize the economy.

I was

recently faced with some difficult choices when legislation was before this

House that altered contractual commitments in public sector contracts. I

decided, faced with that dilemma, that patients and students had to come first,

but I also knew that failing to change a system that was about to explode with

expenses was no choice at all. I knew that workers in the system that would soon

collapse had none of the job security they wanted.

Since May

16 I made learning about health care my top priority. I was fortunate to be

selected for the Health standing committee. I had no idea at the time how

legislative committees worked; I'd never been on one. We began to travel the

province, and I didn't really know what to expect. I was surprised and pleased

with the presentations we received. While some asked us to leave the system

alone, many gave us creative ideas for change.

[H.

Long in the chair.]

We listened

carefully to the advice they gave. We prepared a report that reflected what we

heard. There was much to learn from people around the province and people who

worked within the health care system.

[1525]

I'm going

to describe a little bit of what we heard. We heard from doctors, nurses,

physiotherapists, caregivers, chiropractors, cleaning staff, maintenance

personnel, home support workers, researchers, natives, administrators, health

societies, ambulance personnel, practical nurses, acupuncture practitioners,

counsellors, podiatrists, mayors, teachers, old age pensioners, seniors housing

organizations, hospice societies, medical associations, universities, unions,

veterans, psychiatrists, psychologists, pharmaceutical representatives and a

host of private citizens and other groups too numerous to name today. That's

just a partial list.

There was

much to learn from people in British Columbia. It was most unfortunate that the

Leader of the Opposition, who was a member of our committee, could not find time

to attend any of the meetings. I've heard her criticize the recommendations, as

a result of her failure to listen. It's easy to criticize when you haven't heard

a word people said. It's harder to really listen. It's even harder to listen,

learn and then speak. Listening first might have given her the foundation for

sound, credible opinion.

Many people

in British Columbia believe it is time that the medical premiums are adjusted.

That's what real people who pay the premiums told us when we travelled. This

unfortunate but necessary measure will help ensure continued high-quality health

care delivery.

The changes

coming in health care will be dramatic. I have no doubt of that. I believe that

when all the changes are known, people in British Columbia will recognize that

we are actually focused on better delivery of services that put patients first.

education we took steps to put students first. When I went to school — a few

years ago — there were no class size limits. Sometimes class sizes in schools

I went to approached 40 students. Students do learn differently, and class size

is important. The steps taken recently to limit class size in the act and

protect that class size from being traded away for money are very important.

Returning

autonomy to universities and colleges is also an important tool. Freezing

tuition was a shortsighted measure. Colleges and universities need the

flexibility to adjust revenue sources if they are to offer the courses students

need. Taking an extra year or two to graduate has a much higher cost than a

modestly increased tuition. It has a cost for rent, food and daily living

expenses. That cost far exceeds the difference in tuition. It also has a cost in

lost income that will never be made up.

I wasn't

the greatest student, but because the courses I needed were available where I

went to school, I graduated with two degrees in five years. I was the

second-youngest graduate ever from the college of law at the University of

Saskatchewan. That wouldn't be possible in British Columbia today. The courses

just aren't available. To get in, you have to have the highest-average marks in

history. For average achievers like me, you don't even get the chance to try.

Those accepted take longer to graduate than they should. Now it's taking some of

our best and brightest five years to get their first degree.

The tuition

I paid in about 1970 was approximately $1,200. Today's tuition in B.C. for a

comparable degree amounts to about $2,200. When I had to fund my education, the

minimum wage in Saskatchewan was $1 per hour. Today our minimum wage is $8 per

hour.

Education

has a cost too. In the three decades since I started university, costs to

universities have risen. Universities and colleges exist to serve the needs of

students. We must give our universities and colleges the tools and autonomy to

make the choices that will

[ Page 1223 ]

work for them and for the students. After all, what more does a student want

than to be qualified for a high-paying, personally satisfying career? What more

does business want than a qualified workforce to draw from?

[1530]

In my

riding, Selkirk College provides a campus that spans my riding and the adjoining

one. Selkirk recently announced cutbacks in many course offerings to try to deal

with its $600,000 debt and its annual deficit. They announced those changes just

before changes to the Education budget and changes to their ability to control

their own revenues were announced. Only days later we passed legislation that

will give them that autonomy and flexibility. If that brings more opportunities

for students, it's worth it.

The

combined strategy of cutting taxes, reducing red tape and putting students first

is the key to a future full of hope and prosperity. I want to congratulate the

Minister of Finance for his vision. He's right. Reckless spending has turned us

into a have-not province. I don't want to depend on charity from other

provinces. We need to be leaders again. It took eight months to build, but the

foundation he has established with the budget is sound. In spite of September 11

and the softwood lumber dispute we have a sound plan that sets goals that are

achievable.

We should

never lose sight of the facts that September 11 changed our world and that

softwood lumber is our largest source of revenue. These two factors

fundamentally changed economic conditions. It is a remarkable achievement that

notwithstanding the dramatic worsening of our economy, the Minister of Finance

has been able to place a plan for a balanced budget before us. That plan is

reasonable, responsible, affordable and realistic. It is one more thing: it is a

remarkable achievement.

Earlier, I

spoke of changes that I accepted to help bring change. I don't get to fish

anymore on my way home. When I'm in Victoria, I get to live in a small apartment

where I can't even see the water. Sometimes I don't get to see my home or my

family for weeks at a time. People occasionally say things about me that are

untrue and uncomplimentary. With all that, would I choose to do this again?

Absolutely.

With the

leadership demonstrated by our Premier and the Minister of Finance on Tuesday, a

new era of hope and prosperity won't be far away. We only need to stay the

course that has been set. Reversing the mistakes of the last decade is worth it

all. The Minister of Finance said it well yesterday, Mr. Speaker: "After

ten years, it's about time."

McMahon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is again an honour to stand before you

and respond to the budget speech as MLA for Columbia River–Revelstoke.

Yesterday's

budget speech clearly lays the groundwork for the direction government will take

in the coming years. As British Columbians, we are facing many challenges. In

recognizing our challenges, we must also recognize a need for a fundamental

change in attitude: a need for responsibility. Yesterday we were given a clear

indication of the fiscal challenges ahead, as presented by the Finance minister

to all British Columbians. We know we must live within our means and do what is

necessary to keep within our budget, a budget that this government will balance

by 2004-05. It is a promise we made to the people of this province, a promise

that we intend to keep.

I am not

going to downplay the significance of what is happening. I believe most people

in this province and in my riding recognize that we cannot maintain the status

quo, but I also know that there is some controversy about the manner in which we

are moving forward.

[1535]

Every day I

receive messages from my constituents in Columbia River–Revelstoke. Many tell

me that they believe the government is making the right decisions. Some don't,

but let me assure you that these decisions have not been easy to make and at

times have not been easy to accept. However, I know people understand that they

are being made for the right reasons and in the best interests of all British

Columbians.

We must get

our fiscal house in order and revitalize the economy so we can take advantage of

growing opportunities in rural communities. As a government we have the pressing

challenge of an unsustainable public health care system. With expenditures

tripling since 1985, the system has grown from 31 percent of the annual budget

to more than 40 percent. There is no greater priority than saving and renewing

health care. This year and next year alone the health budget will increase from

$9.5 billion to $10.2 billion — 7.3 percent.

The

interior health authority is facing tremendous challenges and spending pressures

and is looking at a number of options to ensure the most efficient use of health

care dollars on a regionwide basis. Obviously, while people can appreciate these

financial pressures, four communities in my constituency — Kimberley,

Invermere, Golden and Revelstoke — all have the same message for government:

don't close our hospital. On behalf of the citizens of Kimberley I will present

a petition in the House this week.

As the new

interior health authority looks at a number of options to help provide quality

care for the entire region, I want to assure my constituents that no one area is

being targeted. I will continue to ensure that the health authority is very

aware of the ties that each community has to its hospital and to also underline

how greatly people value the services being provided at each facility, as I

share those same feelings.

To fund the

increases of doctors, nurses and paramedicals, the government had to make some

tough decisions. We raised the provincial sales tax rate yesterday to 7.5

percent. We raised the tax on a carton of cigarettes by $8. We increased MSP

premiums for some by 50 percent. Overall, the vast majority of my constituents

understand.

What we

inherited from the previous government is shameful, and we have had some

difficult decisions to make. The NDP left us with many challenges: the

[ Page 1224 ]

nurses, the teachers, the doctors. We've dealt with them, and we're moving

forward. As we work through the workplace adjustment strategy, I am continually

reminded that changes should have been made years ago.

Since being

elected, we have repeatedly stated that funding for health care and education

will be maintained. In fact, we've increased health care funding, and this

budget shows a slight increase over last year for the education budget to $4.86

billion. We recognize that we need solutions and certainly not an allegiance to

the status quo. We need to explore all avenues of help, expertise and

suggestions with stakeholders in each community to reach workable solutions in

both health care and education. In refocusing health care funding on patients'

needs and in restructuring health governance and delivery, we are attempting to

find savings and efficiencies throughout the system that are consistent with the

five principles of the Canada Health Act.

Before long

the Select Standing Committee on Education will be presenting its report to the

Legislature. For the first time in nearly 30 years the committee has consulted

widely with British Columbians. We have heard from more than 800 groups and

individuals throughout this process. I have had the honour of chairing the

committee, and I look forward to the completion of this report and to presenting

it to the Legislature in the near future.

The

government recently introduced changes to provide flexibility and local autonomy

to elected school boards. Students will be better protected and enhanced by the

new legislated limits on class size. A new funding formula that is soon to be

introduced will give districts a better chance to plan through three-year

funding allocations. These are all positive changes that will assist school

districts in providing excellent opportunities for students. This government

will put students and patients first.

[1540]

Columbia

River–Revelstoke has a number of ski resorts throughout the constituency. In

December the Solicitor General implemented interim measures to B.C.'s downhill

ski operators for an endorsement allowing minors on the premises until 7 p.m.

under the supervision of a parent or guardian. This is something that the

industry has been asking for, for a long time. Throughout the constituency this

announcement has certainly been good news and appreciated by the operators I've

spoken with.

Recently

Panorama ski resort near Invermere introduced a $20 million expansion to its

operation. Again, this announcement is good news for the area, which attracts

many visitors year-round. Just this week the mayors of Invermere and Radium

travelled to Victoria, and we met with the Minister of Forests to discuss ways

of providing services within the Columbia Valley. Standing solidly behind the

mayors are their communities, who are looking proactively for solutions. I

support them in their efforts.

Another

area of concern in both Golden and Revelstoke is the safety of the Trans-Canada

Highway through Rogers Pass to the Alberta border. I am looking forward to the

Minister of Transportation's tour of the area, which will allow her to see

firsthand the highway which causes much concern for so many people.

Just

recently the mayor of Kimberley led a delegation to Victoria to meet with the

Premier and various ministers of this government regarding their concerns for

the ongoing economic viability of the community as they worked through the

transition from a mining-based community to a tourism-based community. In

December the Sullivan mine closed. It has been a major employer in the region

for almost a century. I am working with Mayor Ogilvie and his committee through

this transition, and I am committed to helping them in any way possible to

ensure that they are a thriving, sustainable community with a bright future.

A key to

this community's viability is the expansion of the Cranbrook Airport, which lies

in the Columbia River–Revelstoke riding. Obviously, the expansion is important

to the entire region, as it would open the door for both business and tourists

to discover our region. The hard-working individuals involved in moving this

project forward should be commended. I have met with the Minister of

Competition, Science and Enterprise in this regard and have spoken to many

others about the project.

Yesterday's

budget was intended to let people know that British Columbia is a desirable

destination, a great place to invest and a source of world-class products and

ideas.

In closing,

I would like to remind my colleagues of the enormous potential that lies in the

Columbia River–Revelstoke riding, both in tourism and in natural resources.

The direction this government laid out in the budget speech is the foundation

which will enable us to live up to that potential and ensure that our rural

communities thrive. The budget is about restoring sound fiscal management, about

revitalizing the economy and restoring hope and prosperity. It is about putting

patients and students first. Finally, it is about a better future for all

British Columbians.

Hon. J.

Murray: Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to be able to rise in this House today

as the member for New Westminster and speak in support of the budget. It's an

honour to have been elected as the representative in this Legislature for New

Westminster. I can say that being a member of this House from New Westminster

and being a part of this government is both an adventure and an extraordinary

privilege. I am grateful to the people of New Westminster for the support they

have given me and the trust they have bestowed upon me. I've had the great

pleasure over the past two years of getting to know many wonderful people from

all corners of the city. I'll serve them to the greatest of my ability, both as

their representative in this House and as a member of this government. My

commitment to the people of the Royal City is to listen to their ideas

[ Page 1225 ]

and concerns and to provide a voice for New Westminster in Victoria.

It's easy

to forget, standing here in this chamber in Victoria, that in 1859, over 140

years ago, New Westminster was the first capital of the colony of British

Columbia. It was literally built out of the side of a hill by Col. R.C. Moody

and his battalion of the Royal Engineers camped at Sapperton. New Westminster

was actually the first incorporated city in western Canada. It was incorporated

almost 30 years before Vancouver became a city. By 1863 the city had grown to

nearly 1,000.

[1545]

editorial in the British Columbian in January 1863 boasted this:

"Notwithstanding

all her natural difficulties" — which meant mosquitoes — "and the

virulent and potent attacks by her enemies, New Westminster has continued from

the first to make steady, healthy and — in proportion to the population of the

colony — rapid progress. Three years ago her site was covered with a dense and

mighty forest. Indeed, at that time, the site was not chosen, nor probably

dreamed of — save by one man — as the spot for a great city, the future

capital of a great colony.

"Four

years later the Royal Engineers were disbanded and Col. Moody returned to

England, but many of the engineers and sappers stayed behind, and their

descendants live in New Westminster still. By 1865 the downtown area had been

cleared of trees and most of the streets graded, and a ballroom large enough

to hold 200 dancers was built and opened, with what was described at the time

as 'the most brilliant social event which has yet taken place west of the

Rockies.'

"Alas,

three years later, in 1868, the potent attacks by her political enemies on

Vancouver Island succeeded in the goal of moving the capital of British

Columbia, with its attendant economic wealth and prestige, from New

Westminster to Victoria."

I'd like to

acknowledge Terry Julian, the author of a book called A Capital Controversy ,

as the source of some of the preceding history and quotes in my speech.

New

Westminster was born of people accepting the challenge to work hard and achieve

results, people bringing talent and creativity to build something new for

themselves and their families, people caring — a community helping each other

survive and succeed through tough times. It took courage and vision to carve New

Westminster out of a hillside 140 years ago and build it into what it is now. It

was risky for our earliest settlers to leave the relative safety and comfort of

places like Fort Victoria and the capitals of Europe and the Far East to build

their homes, their businesses and their lives in this new town.

Of course,

the collection of strong, self-reliant and community-minded people on the banks

of the Fraser River included the people of the Qayqayt first nations

downstream from Sapperton camp, where Front Street now runs. This native

community was established long before the battalion and European settlers came,

and some of its members joined the newcomers in the commerce of the new

settlement. Band members' descendants have just recently reached out to

re-establish their connection to New Westminster and are partners in achieving

community goals.

The first

residents of New Westminster, aboriginal and non-aboriginal alike, worked

together in different languages, and they succeeded. I don't think our early

citizens needed 400,000 government regulations to build a thriving city out of

the wilderness and marshes on the banks of the Fraser River. They created a

vibrant community positioned to serve the needs of other adventurers and their

families, who also, through hard work and self-reliance, undertook the challenge

of building British Columbia — transforming the minerals, timber, fish and

wildlife into goods, shelter, food and homes.

Our

forerunners not only created homes and buildings, some of which still exist

today in New Westminster, but the early members of the community built the very

first public library in British Columbia. They had the foresight to set aside a

large piece of wilderness for parkland, and as a result, we have one of the

finest park systems on the lower mainland, with Queen's Park, Moody Park,

Tipperary Park and many others.

The Royal

City was the mainland berth for fleets of paddlewheelers that plied the waters

between Victoria and Yale to the Cariboo Wagon Road and to the goldfields

beyond. In fact, the founding and building of New Westminster is inextricably

linked with our province's evolution. New Westminster has seen its share of

challenges over the years, but people responded to those challenges.

When the

politicians decided that the capital city of British Columbia would move to

Victoria in 1868, our people didn't just pack their bags and move to the Island.

Many stayed in the community they called home and kept on building and improving

it. They developed fish canneries, shops, hotels, sawmills and other

wood-products industries, the foundations of which are still in operation today.

[1550]

When fire

destroyed much of New Westminster in 1898, our people helped those in need and

rebuilt their town and their lives. They moved ahead into the next century with

spirit, with optimism, with determination. Over the next century and a half,

they overcame the many challenges that came their way, and they built a

community that became, I believe, the finest and most liveable community in this

province. The spirit of that community is still thriving today.

I've lived

in the Royal City since 1989 and within a short walk of its boundaries for seven

years before that. I was drawn by the spirit of the community, by its history of

strength and self-reliance.

Once a

natural harbour and transportation centre on the great highway of the Fraser

River, New West is still a transportation centre today. It's located in the

exact geographic centre of the lower mainland. It's linked by SkyTrain to

downtown and our neighbours to the south and east. It's served by rail and is

close to the airport and ferries, the valley and the border. New Westminster

provides easy access to services in all directions.

[ Page 1226 ]

I see the

spirit of this community in the diverse cultures and people creating

neighbourhoods where they live, work, play or raise families in New Westminster.

I see the spirit of New Westminster in one of our earliest homes, the Irving

House, where, at the historic centre, volunteers keep the past alive for the

present to learn from and enjoy, and throughout the many neighbourhoods where

Royal City homeowners were among the first in B.C. to preserve and restore their

older homes. Our dedication to heritage in New Westminster has served the rest

of greater Vancouver well by inspiring others to preserve their heritage

buildings.

I see that

spirit in institutions like the Royal City Soccer Club and the New Westminster

Salmonbellies lacrosse team — a game and a team both with a venerable history

in our city. I see it in the Royal City Curling Club, which is home to the 2000

men's world champions, the Greg McAuley rink, and the 2000 women's world

champions, the Kelly Law rink. I wish our Royal City curlers all the best in

their quest for the gold in Salt Lake City this month.

I see the

spirit of this community in the people who, through a combination of

determination and perspiration, brought a dream to life and established the

Raymond Burr Performing Arts Centre on Columbia Street. It's named after one of

New Westminster's most famous exports to the United States, Raymond Burr. The

spirit resonates through the many, many volunteer events that we host to raise

funds for others, from women's shelters to parenting programs, from services for

the disabled to medical support for African children.

Our

community expresses its history and traditions in yearly celebrations such as

May Day, Victoria Day, Canada Day — all at Queen's Park. Actually, the May Day

celebration is worth describing. It first took place in 1870 and is the longest

continuing celebration of its kind, not only in British Columbia but in the

entire British Commonwealth. More than a century after this tradition started,

hundreds of boys and girls from New Westminster elementary schools still gather

around maypoles in Queen's Park each year for folk dancing, music and fun. Along

with our May Day celebrations, we have the Hyack festival and parade, the Chinese

New Year celebrations in February, Queensborough Day in the Philippine

festival in June, Fraserfest and the Show and Shine car festival in July, Santa

Claus in December and many more.

[1555]

Our

community succeeds in keeping alive its spirit, its history, its traditions and

its compassion. I chose New Westminster. It's the place my family calls home.

For me, New Westminster is summer — sitting on the warm Queen's Park grass,

breathing in the sunshine and cedar trees, watching my children race through the

spray-pool coolness. New Westminster is spring — sharing tea and warm cinnamon

buns with a friend on the patio at a quay riverfront café; watching the sea

lions chasing oolichans rolling and curling on the Fraser River surface.

New

Westminster is sheltering from a rainy fall afternoon, plunged into the chaos of

the Sunday family swim at the Canada Games pool, sliding, swinging, diving,

wrestling with three tireless children. It's stepping from the cold, slushy

night into the family bustle of the Massey Theatre lobby, anticipation

electrifying us as we surge to our seats, ready to be transported back in time,

for a few hours, by the Nutcracker ballet staged each year by the Royal

City Youth Ballet.

New

Westminster is where my children grew to become adults. It's where my youngest

will graduate from school this June. It's also the home of the silviculture

business I built with my husband. I worked for many years in the forest

industry. In the early years I planted hundreds of thousands of trees across

this province — tough work in isolated places; self-reliant people solving

problems, persevering, being productive, adapting to the challenges of

wilderness and weather and having fun.

Over the

years I had the privilege of working with thousands of self-motivated,

hard-working young people providing forest restoration services to clients

across the country. I saw what can be accomplished when people are challenged to

do their best, are accountable for their results and are free to find their own

ways to achieve them.

It's an

industry where businesses learn the meaning of excellence. They know that the

next job depends on providing value in the last job. They know the privilege of

serving clients and being paid for it is earned each time anew and there are no

guarantees. Like New Westminster, the reforestation industry is also made of

people accepting the challenge to work hard and achieve results, people bringing

talent and creativity to building something new for themselves and their

families, people caring and a community helping each other survive and succeed

through tough times.

People

often ask why I left business to enter politics. Mr. Speaker, I saw a government

pushing our society in the wrong direction, away from self-reliance, away from

accountability for results, away from the talent and creativity of free

enterprise. I witnessed the previous government trying to take away workers'

choices.

In my

industry they began converting reforestation into a government-run make-work

program. The government imposed laws that interfered with self-reliant

businesses, large and small, stifled autonomy and inventiveness with

overrregulation and drove up the costs of building this province. In doing all

this, they wasted billions of taxpayer dollars that were earmarked for

investment in improving our forests, our highways, our ferry service and our

health care system.

I saw a

government with no apparent awareness of the direct connection between having an

environment in which businesses can thrive and society's ability to afford the

very services that people count on. I saw a government without the ability to

manage well.

Now, I know

that a government and a business have different purposes. A company's primary

responsibility is to create value for its shareholders, and a

[ Page 1227 ]

government's primary job is to provide value for all its citizens, but

government has much to learn about managing from the business community.

Leadership, project planning and sound business processes provide any

organizations with the tools it needs to achieve results.

In the case

of a government, achieving results means creating greater value from every tax

dollar spent to enrich the lives of all its citizens. I entered politics because

I saw a government without the skills or know-how to create a prosperous

province with a thriving economy that can support its citizens services in the

long run.

British

Columbians' yearly average take-home earnings dropped by $1,700 a year over the

past decade. During years of prosperity in the rest of the country I saw the

impact of that on the residents and businesses in New Westminster. I believed

that my business skills and experience could help make positive change in

government and for my community.

Last May,

77 B.C. Liberals were elected because the people of British Columbia agreed that

the cost of business as usual, the status quo, was higher than the cost of

change. If your mortgage and credit card bills are too high, you've got to bring

them down. If you're not making as much money as you used to, you've got to cut

back your spending. What holds true for individuals, families and businesses

must also hold true for governments.

[1600]

With the

events of last fall many government programs and obligations created and

expanded during the past ten years became even more unaffordable. We will not

and cannot leave the next generation of British Columbians with a debt hangover

while we in this generation continue uncontrolled spending of borrowed money.

The cost is too high. Last May people realized the cost of the status quo was

higher than the cost of change. Business as usual wasn't working. That's why the

people of this province and the people of New Westminster elected us to make

those changes.

The voters

in the last election did not tell us that everything the previous government was

doing was fine and to keep on doing it. They elected us to restore fiscal

responsibility and accountability. Swift and decisive action to control spending

was clearly necessary.

The budget

released on Tuesday marks a major turning point for British Columbians. The tax

changes this government has made since July leave a billion more dollars in

people's pockets. This budget represents the determination of this government to

create a foundation for increased economic activity and revenues in the coming

years. That means B.C. will prosper again.

It shows a

steady commitment to spending less until we can once again afford to spend more.

That means we will have a balanced budget on March 31, 2004, and begin to

decrease our debt loads and interest costs.

This budget

also shows a depth of commitment to quality health care and to protecting —

and, where possible, improving — services that are the highest priority, such

as education and services for the most vulnerable. That means we are looking

ahead and investing in people and in our future.

This budget

includes a three-year fiscal plan, a road map of where we want this province to

go and how we will get there. That plan includes our commitment to maintaining

high environmental standards and respecting the strong environmental values of

British Columbians, an essential part of our far-reaching strategy to achieve

economic and social vitality. Positive change is our job. It's what we were

elected to do.

I am proud

to be part of a government that is returning leadership to this province. This

budget invites British Columbians to accept the challenge to work hard and

create results, to bring their talent and creativity and build something new for

themselves and their families, and to continue caring, being a community and

helping each other survive and succeed through tough times as we create

conditions for the better times ahead.

Spending

less is easier to say than to do. This budget reduces government spending by

almost $2 billion in the third fiscal year. That scale of reduction will mean

reducing or eliminating some programs that people value and have grown to depend

on. That is part of the cost of change. As the Finance minister said, it is

bitter medicine, but the province needs to take it to get better and to thrive

again.

The

businesses of New Westminster — the sawmills, the stores, the services, the

public market at the quay — depend on a thriving and prosperous economy. This

budget will bring back business investment in jobs.

New

Westminster is the home of many schools and of Douglas College. We're the home

of the Justice Institute of British Columbia, a training facility for police and

other law enforcement officers. We're the home of St. Mary's Hospital, Queens

Park Hospital, Royal Columbian Hospital and many care homes. This budget

increases our investment in health care and protects education funding. It puts

patients and students first.

There are

many vulnerable people in New Westminster who need ongoing help or who need

short-term help to get back on their feet and become self-reliant again. There

are children without proper family support or adequate food. These are the

people for whom a well-managed and prosperous economy is absolutely critical so

the province can afford the services and supports they need. This budget

reflects our commitment to protect the most vulnerable in our community.

The future

is full of challenges and difficulties. I'm aware that the changes we are taking

as a government are major and will impact many communities in this province,

including my own city of New Westminster. Most of the people in the Royal City

accept the challenge to work hard and achieve results. They bring talent and

creativity to build something new. They care. They are a community that help

each other survive and succeed through tough times.

[ Page 1228 ]

[1605]

The voters

of this province said loudly and clearly that the model for government adopted

in 1991 had to change. They made perhaps the biggest change in the province's

recent history. They did not vote for a government that would take the easy road

and avoid solving our economic problems, and they did not vote for a government

that would move warily and timidly with half measures when full ones were

needed.

They did

not vote for a government that would keep looking over its shoulder to see what

the media was saying about them, and they did not vote for the status quo. They

voted for a government that will make the hard choices they knew had to be made.

They voted for a government that will bring fiscal prudence back into policy, a

government that will bring the economy back to life. They voted for a government

that will bring some balance back into labour relations in this province and put

students and patients and the vulnerable first.

They voted

for a government that is both compassionate and realistic, a government that

will rethink the essential job of government and improve the way it functions,

which will plan for the future and identify priorities, set targets and be

accountable for results. They voted to bring hope and prosperity back to British

Columbia, and this budget sets the foundation for success. They voted for us,

and we intend to succeed with the job we were elected to do.

Mr.

Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition to continue on the debate on the

budget.

MacPhail: This is the second time that I rise to address a budget brought in

by the Liberal government. In preparing for my reply today, I looked back at

what I said in the reply to the last budget, which was brought in by the

government on July 30, 2001. I note in reading my comments that I said this to

the government: "I actually wish you well; I wish you the best. I see that

you're taking massive, massive risks in this budget, and for the sake of British

Columbia, I hope that you're right." That's what I said when the Finance

minister tabled his first budget.

The reason

why I say this, Mr. Speaker, is because over the course of the last eight

months, the Liberal members have risen day after day in every forum possible to

say that the New Democrat opposition is fear-mongering and that we're naysayers.

I thought I'd take an opportunity to see whether I was fear-mongering on July

30. I did say that the government was taking risks. There's no question about

that, but I also wished them well.

The member

for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant and I were the only two members in the House who

survived the last government, and we had learned our lesson. There were two of

us and 77 members of the government. In the course of the discussion about the

budget, I outlined the risks that were being taken, but I also emphasized that I

hoped the risks would come to fruition on behalf of all British Columbians.

Here's who

I said would be put at risk. Oh, I'm sorry. First of all, I noted that there was

an advertisement that came out on the same day the government tabled its budget

on July 30, 2001. It was very interesting. It was an advertisement, as some

members may recall, to recruit people to come and work in the government in

British Columbia — July 30, 2001. The advertisement was entitled

"Advertising for People." It said that people who come to this

province will have to be able to work in an atmosphere of ambiguity and risk. My

gosh! That has certainly come true.

[1610]

I also

outlined a number of areas where there were huge risks taken in the July 30

budget. I said that on the one hand, the corporate world was getting hundreds of

millions of dollars in tax breaks, and on the other hand, people were being put

at risk because of that. People on welfare were being put at risk. Aboriginal

people were being put at risk. Families who need services in this province were

being put at risk. Youth were being put at risk Sexual assault centres were

being put at risk. Today we saw that.

I made a

major mistake in my address, though. I was new, and we were running as fast as

we could to keep up with this government. I applauded the government for their

support in keeping child care funding. I thought that the government had kept

funding for child care, so here's what I said: "I do laud the government,

though. I do laud the Minister of Finance for continuing to fund the Child Care

B.C. program." I'm so happy that people didn't pay attention to my words

and say, "Leader, you lied; they didn't keep their promise," because

it turned out the very next day that I had misspoken myself and that the

government had cut the funding for Child Care B.C.

I then went

on to say that the economic forecast of 3.8 percent growth was taking a huge

risk and that no one else in the whole economic world was willing to forecast

the economy at that rate of growth. I put the question about who would take this

risk. I ruminated aloud that the government must take this risk in order to be

able to give their corporate backers big tax breaks.

That was on

day one of my reply. Then the next day I went on to outline some of the things

that my colleague and I would be watching in the budget, some benchmarks that we

would be watching. Later on I'll address those benchmarks that were outlined in

my speech, about what we needed to watch for as this budget unfolded. I think,

as I later refer to those, that we'll find that most of the predictions, most of

the benchmarks set in my support and best wishes for the government, have not

come to fruition at all, have failed miserably, and there are huge, huge

consequences for middle- and lower-income families.

Yesterday

was a tough day. It was a tough day because the Minister of Finance, this

government and the Premier stood up over and over again and said: "We

inherited a mess." That was the basis for everything that flowed — the

terrible, terrible breaking of promises. The Finance minister said: the devil

made me do it. Remember that old comedian, Flip Wilson? I grew

[ Page 1229 ]

up with Flip Wilson. He used to dress up as a woman — he was hilarious —

and he would say: "The devil made me do it!" And yesterday the Finance

minister and the Premier said: "The devil made us do this. The devil made us

bring incredibly huge economic hardship on low- and middle-income families."

Let's just

examine who the real devil is here in yesterday's budget and what the government

did inherit. I'll quote from an

article in the Georgia Straight.

Interestingly enough, the article's entitled "What Did the Liberals

Inherit?" The person who wrote this, I will just go on record as saying, is

not a New Democrat and in fact worked for the Social Credit government just

before they lost the election to Mike Harcourt and the NDP. I'll read from it.

This isn't an old article. It's less than two weeks since it was published.

"With

the provincial treasury nearly overflowing when the fiscal year ended on March

31, 2001, the New Democrats were able to make a small payment on our seemingly

ever-growing provincial debt, marking just the third time in the past 30 years

that B.C. debt actually declined.

[1615]

"The

surprising results from the New Democrats' last fiscal year presented a unique

challenge for the new Liberal government. How could Premier Campbell and

Finance minister Gary Collins claim to have inherited a fiscal mess when the

provincial treasury was brimming with cash? What was the need for dramatic

change if the province was in the black?

"As

Social Credit did in 1975 after defeating the NDP and as the NDP

did in 1991 after defeating Social Credit, Gordon Campbell and his Liberals

ordered" — and in the

article it is in quotation marks — "an

'independent' review of the province's books to illustrate the mess they said

they'd inherited. But the task was challenging, for although the 1975 NDP and

the 1991 Socreds left their successors with actual deficits, the 2001 New

Democrats' record-breaking surplus could not be retroactively altered. The

Liberals did clumsily attempt to reconfigure NDP income tax revenues but were

quietly rebuffed by the auditor general.

"What

to do? In an interesting twist, instead of contriving an inflated deficit

based on past fiscal results, the Campbell-appointed fiscal review commission

projected a potential deficit in the future. That is, the financial panel

looked forward three fiscal years, estimated that revenues might be lower and

expenditures higher than was required for balance in the consolidated revenue

fund, injected a sizeable, rather dubious dollop of 'forecast allowance' in

the

summary accounts just in case something unforeseen occurred, and then

added the estimated cost of the dramatic Liberal tax cut. Voila! A deficit of

stunning proportions — almost $5.2 billion in the

summary accounts —

magically appeared for 2003-04, which would be the third fiscal year after the

NDP left office.

"Armed

with the dubious 'analysis,' Campbell and Collins began their

claims that they had 'inherited a structural deficit' from the New Democrats,

even though the shortfall might not appear for a couple of years, if at all.

They later adopted, after initially accepting the panel's $5.2 billion

structural deficit figure, a reduced shortfall of $3.8 billion, perhaps

because it appeared unseemly to claim that the cost of Liberal tax cuts was

the NDP's fault.

"Whether

or not Premier Campbell is right in making sizeable reductions to the

provincial public service and government programs, it's questionable that he

can claim he was forced to do so because he inherited a structural deficit

from the NDP. Having the mandate and the legislative authority to implement

his government's fiscal and other policies, he need not blame his predecessors

for his own policy priorities, nor need he fabricate a fictitious inherited

structural deficit as an excuse to do so. He diminishes his political

credibility by making demonstrably untrue allegations."

That's

from a Social Credit political person, Will McMartin. Yet that didn't stop the

Premier and the Finance minister from continuing to say that they inherited a

mess. Of course, the Liberal backbenchers rise, person after person, and

repeat that about the mess we inherited.

I was just

joking with my colleague here, and I'm putting everybody in this House on notice

that when this government is backed into a corner, we will know they're backed

into a corner, because they'll stand up and say: "But what about the fast

ferries?" Well, they can rest assured that every time they do that, we'll

call out beforehand so that they don't get off the hook, so that they have to

answer for their own makings. We'll make sure that we call out before you get to

your misplaced blame. You're all on notice. All the members are on notice that

when you're supposed to answer for your own mess and you try to blame others and

you invoke the hated fast ferries, we're on to you.

More

importantly, the public is on to you as well. The public has moved on. The

public ain't looking backward. The public, British Columbians, are looking to

see what this budget has done to their pocketbooks. What this budget has done to

British Columbians' pocketbooks is taken a whole bunch of much-needed disposable

income out of the pockets of the middle class — and lower-income, despite what

the government says. They don't even answer for how they've robbed the middle

class. They've taken a whole bunch of disposable income out of the middle class

and turned it over to the wealthiest.

[1620]

It's like a

straight line. There are probably armoured cars — Brinks armoured cars —

going from middle-class neighbourhoods right over to West Vancouver, right over

to Shaughnessy, right over to Oak Bay–Gordon Head, probably going from the

middle-class neighbourhoods in Port Coquitlam to middle-class neighbourhoods in

Surrey to middle-class neighbourhoods in the West End of Vancouver, loading up

to take the money over to the richest neighbourhoods in this province. That's

what the budget did yesterday. That's what they did. There's one group of people

responsible for that transfer of wealth from the low income and the middle

income to the richest — one group. They sit in the chairs of the government

today.

Don't

invoke fast ferries. Don't invoke the mess you've inherited, because it's simply

not true — not true.

Did the

Finance minister learn his lesson? Well, let's see. He was ridiculed for his 3.8

percent forecast back

[ Page 1230 ]

in July of 2001 — not by me. I didn't ridicule him. I said: "I hope

for the best, Mr. Finance minister. I hope you're right." He was ridiculed,

and just six weeks later, he had to backtrack.

Of course,

that was only the beginning of a series of backtrackings by this Minister of

Finance, a series of admissions of failure, a series of admissions of oops. I

understand they go on today. I understand that today the Finance minister is

saying: "Well, I don't know whether I'm actually going to pay those doctors

or not, and I don't know whether I'm actually going to do the provincial sales

tax increase."

My gosh,

the Finance minister, above anyone else, is to bring sanity and stability and

confidence to the provincial economy and the provincial budget, and here he is

lurching from pillar to post, waking up one morning and saying: "Oh, gosh.

I think I'll raise the sales tax today."

Did he

learn his lesson on economic forecasting? Well, the revenue assumptions are very

interesting — very interesting. The Minister of Finance has taken a different

approach. The Minister of Finance got burned by listing numbers, by trying to

actually get people to believe he knew what he was doing when he forecast GDP

increases in economic growth and revenue assumptions. He didn't risk that this

time, because he was so ridiculed and failed so miserably last time.

Instead,

he's underlined the entire economic plan of this government by saying there will

be fewer services. For instance, he's saying that the reason why he knows he'll

be able to balance his budget is because there will be fewer surgeries. A couple

fewer surgeries? No — 10,000 fewer surgeries. This is a government that's

priding itself on increased funding for health care. Really? Then why are you

balancing your books on saying there will be 10,000 fewer surgeries?

His revenue

assumptions aren't based on economic numbers; they're based on people numbers

getting less. So 40,000 fewer people will be on welfare. I love this one: 1,800

fewer people will be children in care. At the same time that those services are

being cut to the bone, he's saying there will be 1,800 fewer children in care.

That means that this government must be planning to put children at risk. There

will be 5,000 fewer criminal cases.

He said

there will be normal weather for three years — normal weather — meaning that

there will be a 100 percent snowpack for B.C. Hydro. Well, I don't know. Maybe

he is God. Maybe the Premier and the Finance minister fight it out to see who

really is God, because they're predicting 100 percent snowpack for three years,

meaning that B.C. Hydro's revenues will flow.

[1625]

He's

predicting double the tourism revenue, even though that contradicts his own

economic forecast panel. Yup, there it is: there will be double the revenue from

tourism. What did his own Economic Forecast Council and his own budget say about

that? Well, let's look. "Council members believed that the British Columbia

economy would underperform the national average due to restructuring in the

forest sector and, more immediately, the impact of the softwood lumber dispute,

reduced tourism activity and provincial fiscal restraint during the next two

years." Oh. Well, I guess we can't count on a doubling of tourism revenue

in the next two years, can we?

Anyway,

there's the underlying assumptions of the budget this year. You know why I think

the Minister of Finance shifted to this kind of unusual way of predicting how he

was going to balance the budget? It's because he can actually achieve this. He

can actually achieve 10,000 fewer surgeries, 40,000 fewer people on welfare,

1,800 fewer children in care and 5,000 fewer criminal cases by just denying

them service — by just saying that there'll be fewer cops to catch criminals,

by saying that we're not going to worry about children at risk, by just saying

to people, "Sorry, this morning you're not on welfare," and by just

saying that we're not going to do those surgeries.

He will be

able to achieve his forecast, his underlying assumptions, by just denying people

service. Or else there is another way he could achieve it. That's by driving

hundreds of thousands of people out of this province. He will achieve the

underlying assumptions of his forecast by saying to British Columbians:

"Now leave. Leave this province." I predict that's exactly what will

happen.

I was a

little bit interested in the business community's reaction to the budget,

because I travelled the province with some of my colleagues here on the budget

consultations. I know everybody is getting up and hammering me — these Liberal

backbenchers are hammering me — because I didn't travel with the Health

Committee. Day after day they rise up and say: "That bad member didn't

travel the province on the Health Committee."

I admit

that there are two of us. There's my colleague from Mount Pleasant, and there's

me. So yes, we have to pick the times that we can go on these Liberal

consultations. That's true. The fact of the matter that health decisions that

were negatively impacting British Columbians were being made every day back in

Victoria while that Health Committee was travelling the province.... It seemed like it

was not going to be a useful part of my time to go on that trip. Frankly, I

disagreed with everything they came to as a conclusion in the report, which

didn't reflect the public input anyway. So yes, you can all stop berating me for

not going on the Health Committee.

I chose to

go on the public consultations on the budget, because I actually thought there

was no way the Finance minister could introduce a budget before he said he was

— February — so there was time to hear from people and have the input.

Business person after business person came forward and said: "Don't

increase the debt." They didn't even think in their wildest imagination

that there would be tax increases. They said: "Reduce taxes even

faster." That's what business people said, so I am a little surprised and,

quite frankly, disappointed that the business spin doctors and the spokespeople

for business are saying: "Oh, no,

[ Page 1231 ]

no, no. Tax increases are just fine. Oh, no, whatever we said before, we

didn't mean." They're just in lockstep with this government, come hell or

high water, regardless of the impact on their own members — the business

community.

Yesterday,

that was proven in a very disappointing way to me. I actually used to value the

input of the business community when I was Finance minister. I know why they did

that. The business community was so desperate to get rid of the NDP. Fair

enough. I guess maybe they're so afraid that the public will say: "Gee, we

don't like this government; we don't want this government." They're so

afraid that this government may be put at risk that they'll do anything to

protect it, including serving up the interests of their own members, including

standing up and saying: "Oh, tax increases are fine."

I challenge

any Liberal MLA to come forward and show me in the budget consultations we did

around this province where one business person said: "Raise taxes."

Yet, there we have it.

[1630]

You know, I

think the rest of the province, frankly, is suffering from buyer's remorse.

Maybe that's what the business community is worried about. Buyer's remorse is a

gender-specific concept, I think. Women suffer it more. Buyer's remorse means

you make a purchase and then you regret it very shortly afterward. People do

that with houses sometimes — major purchases. The whole province except,

clearly, the business community is suffering from buyer's remorse today. Maybe

that's what the business community is worried about — that maybe the public is

going to say, "Oops, this isn't the government we wanted," and move

forward to change that government.

Here's what

the Certified General Accountants said, though. I must commend them. At least

they addressed the issue. "Confidence in strong budget weakened by tax

hike. On the one hand, the minister offers incentives to the small business

sector, and on the other, he raises the provincial sales tax from