2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the

Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Monday, August 31, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 1, Number 7

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Tributes

Employees of CHEK TV

C. James

Introductions by Members

Tabling Documents

Office of the Merit Commissioner, 2008/2009 Annual Report

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M201 — Independent Budget Officer Act, 2009

B. Ralston

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Douglas College

D. Horne

Bulkley Valley Exhibition

D. Donaldson

Wheelchair basketball championships

S. Cadieux

Environmental initiatives in Hartley Bay

G. Coons

Peace River rescue

P. Pimm

Fresh Groove Productions

M. Elmore

Oral Questions

Funding for arts and culture

C. James

Hon. K. Krueger

B.C. Liberal Party campaign statements

C. James

Hon. C. Hansen

Funding for arts and culture

S. Herbert

Hon. K. Krueger

D. Donaldson

S. Simpson

Internet gaming

S. Simpson

Hon. M. de Jong

School district funding

K. Corrigan

Hon. M. MacDiarmid

D. Thorne

J. Kwan

Government funding priorities

M. Farnworth

Hon. K. Heed

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 3 — Supply Act (No. 2), 2009

Hon. C. Hansen

B. Ralston

Hon. C. Hansen

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 3 — Supply Act (No. 2), 2009

J. Horgan

Hon. C. Hansen

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Bill 3 — Supply Act (No. 2), 2009

Throne Speech Debate ( continued)

N. Simons

Hon. J. Yap

K. Corrigan

Hon. K. Krueger

G. Gentner

Statements

Correction to comments made in the House

Hon. K. Krueger

Throne Speech Debate ( continued)

G. Gentner

M. Dalton

H. Bains

D. Hayer

[ Page 125 ]

MONDAY, AUGUST 31, 2009

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Tributes

EMPLOYEES OF CHEK TV

C. James: I rise on behalf of all of us in this Legislature to wish very well an institution that closes up today in Victoria on Vancouver Island, but impacts all of the province, and that's CHEK TV. I think on all our behalf I'd like to say thank you for the service they've given to us on Vancouver Island. Those of us who are Vancouver Islanders see them as our station, and they will be truly missed on all our behalf.

It's not often you have politicians rise up to thank the press, but we all in this Legislature have seen firsthand the hard work of the employees at CHEK. They've worked very hard to try and hang on to that station. I know they're not giving up yet, but I wanted to make sure all of us offered our best wishes and our appreciation to all of the employees at CHEK TV today.

Introductions by Members

R. Chouhan: Today a number of students came here to protest against the lowest minimum wage. It's going to be even lower tomorrow when New Brunswick introduces an increase in the minimum wage. So today with us are Dayna Sykes, Jackie Woodley, Meghan Marchand, Veronica Harrison, Heather Mckenzie, Edward Pullman, Meaghan Kerr, James Coccola, Cam Gerard and Trevor Davies. Please join me to welcome them all.

[1335]

J. Kwan: I see an old friend from the Legislature is visiting us, the former Minister of Small Business and Revenue. Who knows? Maybe he's here to oppose the HST and advocate for the restaurant and foodservices association. Would the House please make him welcome — Rick Thorpe.

P. Pimm: I stand today to welcome to the House my wife, Jody, my mother, Josephine, and family friend Pat Framps. Please help me welcome them to the House.

K. Conroy: It also gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce a young worker in the Legislature today. His name is Abe Fomonoff. He is actually a laid-off steelworker. He is from my constituency, and he worked very hard on my campaign and also worked very hard on the member for Nelson-Creston's campaign, which obviously showed really positive results. He's here to watch what happens today, and he's actually coming back for the budget tomorrow. So would you all please welcome him.

Hon. I. Black: In the precinct today are two family members of mine from Glasgow, Scotland: Ian and Janice Kemp. I come from a remarkably small family, so you don't often have people come to visit you, but never mind from another country. So it's a pleasure to have them here, and I ask the House to join me in making them feel most welcome.

J. Horgan: Members will remember a year ago I stood in this place and spoke about the mother of all field trips with a student from Belmont high school going to the Arctic Circle to learn and observe the impacts of climate change. Well, that student — Lily Jackson — is with us in the gallery today, and I want all members of this place to acknowledge her for (

a) making the trip to the Arctic and (

b) making it back and being a constituent of mine.

There's a second Belmont graduate that I'd like to acknowledge. He is off….

Interjection.

J. Horgan: Now, easy there.

Lily is off to UVic this year, but the second graduate is off to Freiburg university tomorrow. That's my son Nate Horgan. I'm going to miss him desperately, and I hope that members will take into account when they heckle me that I won't have the benefit of my good son to back me up when I get home.

Hon. N. Yamamoto: I would also like to introduce a student who also participated on the journey to the Arctic to raise awareness for climate change. This is Alejandra Henao. She's a student from a high school in my riding — Carson Graham — and she will be attending UVic in the fall as well.

Just for your information, there's a collection of images from the trip that they made in the lower rotunda, and it will be on display until September 4. So please welcome the students.

H. Bloy: It gives me pleasure to introduce a great party worker and volunteer with the B.C. Liberal Party, Terri Rainey.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present the 2008/2009 Annual Report of the Merit Commissioner.

[ Page 126 ]

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill M201 — Independent budget

officer Act, 2009

B. Ralston presented a bill intituled Independent Budget Officer Act, 2009.

B. Ralston: I move introduction of the Independent Budget Officer Act for first reading.

Motion approved.

B. Ralston: This bill amends the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act to create the independent budget officer, an officer of the Legislative Assembly. The independent officer's mandate is to provide objective, timely analysis and updates to the Legislative Assembly about the estimates of government, the state of the province's finances and trends in the B.C. economy, to undertake research regarding the province's finances when requested to do so by certain standing committees and members of the assembly and to provide estimates of the cost of proposals contained in legislation.

The independent budget officer is entitled to a right of access to data necessary for the performance of his or her mandate.

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

Bill M201, Independent Budget Officer Act, 2009, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

DOUGLAS COLLEGE

D. Horne: I'd like to highlight the David Lam Campus of Douglas College. This very distinguished educational institution in my riding graduated a record number of nursing students this past year: 109 baccalaureate graduates, eight from the psych program, 54 diplomas in nursing. This is due in great part to the new world-class facility which I toured this past May.

[1340]

This new facility has the largest and latest computerized patient simulation labs with four humanoids that can talk, breathe, bleed and respond to administered drugs by students; four multi-bed labs that prepare nursing students for work in hospital wards; and two fully furnished apartments to act as home care instruction.

This government understands and appreciates the need to train more highly qualified nurses and meet our growing needs, and this is why we contributed $35.2 million towards this 9,700-square-metre facility.

Many have contributed to the growth and success of Douglas College. I would particularly like to express my sincere thanks to the board for their hard work, vision and dedication — the chair, Andrew Taylor, for his great dedication in the advancement of the college; the vice-chairs, Ann Kitching and Mary Hemmingsen, for their countless hours of service.

Thank you to faculty representative Graeme Bowbrick; staff representative Bruce Clarke; Peter Kendrick; Alysia MacGrotty; Mike Russell; Paul Wates; student representative Matthew Steinbach; and Michael Hwang, who is currently serving his first term on the board.

I would also like to recognize the hard work of Susan Meshwork, the chair of Douglas College educational council. As well, a very special thanks to Susan Wither for her exceptional leadership over the past 12 years, and finally, Scott McAlpine, Douglas College's new president, who is critical to the college's continued growth and success.

BULKLEY VALLEY EXHIBITION

D. Donaldson: It started in 1919, and just last Thursday to Sunday, August 27 to 30, the Bulkley Valley fall fair celebrated its 90th anniversary.

This is an amazing accomplishment. It's testimony to the agricultural traditions in the northwest and of the quality of the event. More than 20,000 guests each year are now hosted by the fair — a phenomenal number for the remote, rural area.

People from all across the north come to the fair, making it a significant local economic generator. The fall fair, now known as the Bulkley Valley Exhibition, is set in a beautiful location on the banks of the Bulkley River. When the sun shines, like it did the past four days, Hudson Bay Mountain rises prominently above the fairgrounds, and there is no better place to celebrate the importance of agriculture and rural life.

I congratulate Bulkley Valley Exhibition Society President Anita Tomayer and the board, as well as Coordinator Cindy Mensies, her staff, volunteers and business sponsors for putting on such an incredible event.

Of particular note were the generous bidders in the 4-H livestock auction, and just before that started, Kispiox Valley rancher Grahame Larson received the environmental stewardship award for changes he made to his operations to improve water quality in salmon-rearing streams. Congratulations to my friend Grahame.

As you know, Grahame, your organically raised beef is all I eat — the best in the country.

The exhibition is all about promoting the relational economy of producers and consumers meeting each

[ Page 127 ]

other at the fall fair and highlighting how agriculture enables us to remain living in remote, rural areas throughout the ups and downs of the natural resource–based economy.

I invite everyone in this chamber to demonstrate their commitment to the family farm by joining me in congratulating the Bulkley Valley Exhibition on their critical contribution to rural community life.

WHEELCHAIR BASKETBALL CHAMPIONSHIPS

S. Cadieux: This past week the America Zone wheelchair basketball world championships were held at the fantastic new Richmond Olympic Oval. I was honoured to be invited to make the gold medal tipoff between Canada and the USA on Saturday.

The event was a huge success thanks to the hosts, the B.C. Wheelchair Basketball Society, which is a non-profit organization that is seen as a leader in the Canadian wheelchair sport world, promoting wheelchair sport and producing some of Canada's and the world's top athletes.

In addition, wheelchair basketball programs are available to participants with and without disabilities of all skill levels, from age eight to seniors, in centres around B.C.

For the 2009 America's cup, Richmond welcomed a hundred of the top male wheelchair basketball athletes, representing eight teams from North and South America. This event is a qualifying tournament for the 2010 World Wheelchair Basketball Championships, and the top teams from this tournament are guaranteed a spot next year.

As the host country, the Canadian athletes tore through the competition of Colombia, Argentina, Mexico, Jamaica and Brazil, making their way to the gold medal game against a perennial foe, the United States. This was the first time the U.S. and Canada had faced each other since a thrilling game at the Beijing Paralympics, where Canada defeated the U.S. in double overtime.

[1345]

Playing for our team were some of the top Paralympians in the world, including silver medallists from Beijing, B.C.'s own Bo Hedges and Richard Peter. I'm pleased to report here once again that our men delivered a fantastic game, finishing the tournament with the silver medal and a spot at the 2010 world wheelchair championships in Birmingham, England.

ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES

IN HARTLEY BAY

G. Coons: Deep within the Great Bear rain forest the isolated village of Hartley Bay, home of the Gitga'at First Nation, has a big green ambition. This small community has embraced the goal to become the greenest first nation village in Canada. To do so, they have undertaken an ambitious plan to fundamentally change the way they impact the environment, starting with how they make and consume power.

They have recently installed network energy smart meters throughout their village. When fully operational, this smart grid will help each community member to monitor their energy in real time by simply logging on to a webpage that is personally designed for them.

The band is also looking into harnessing the water of the nearby Gabion River to produce hydroelectric power. This small-scale 900-kilowatt run-of-the-river hydro site will provide 100 percent of the power needs for part of the year, significantly reducing their need for diesel.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Just to remind…. Members.

G. Coons: Thank you for that.

I do have to add that this is not the sell-off of our rivers. This is not an independent power project.

They also intend to retrofit buildings with geothermal furnaces to wean the village away from their heavy fossil fuel dependence. The Hartley Bay projects provide a number of benefits, including greater energy awareness at the household and community levels, energy savings for the community as a whole, training people and creating skilled workers who can work with other communities, and technological growth and development through the design and installation of green initiatives.

In 2008 the community, spearheaded by project manager David Betten, worked with Indian and Northern Affairs and Pulse Energy to install the network energy-metering devices. This year the Gitga'at was one of several Canadian organizations that were nominated for the ninth annual ITAC IT Hero Awards presented by Intel.

The residents of Hartley Bay are changing the way they live to protect the Earth so they can become the greenest first nation village in Canada.

PEACE RIVER RESCUE

P. Pimm: Miracle on the Peace River. This summer Demetrius Jones, who is three years old, went on a camping trip to Peace Island Park with his grandparents. On July 12, 2009, Demetrius decided to wake up earlier than his grandparents and go on a bit of an exploring mission.

Demetrius has a new battery-powered Chevrolet Silverado, and he drove his truck down the boat launch to the Peace River. He could not get stopped in time, and into the river it went. The truck tipped over, and Demetrius would not let it go. So off on the journey of his lifetime went Demetrius and his truck down the mighty Peace River.

[ Page 128 ]

Now, you have to remember that the Peace River has a current of about eight kilometres an hour. When the child's grandparents woke up two hours later and could not find the child, the search was on.

A good friend of mine, Don Loewen, and his four buddies — Dwayne Polowich, Doug Markwark, Darren Painter and Wayne Hought — jumped in the riverboat and headed downstream. Don figured that the boy had been gone for about a two-hour head start, so they knew they'd have to travel down the river about ten to 15 kilometres.

I spoke to Don afterwards, and he went through the event with me. Now, imagine, if you're in this riverboat, you're probably thinking you may find a toy or a body or something. Well, now imagine you see a toy floating in a back eddy on the Peace River 12 kilometres from the entry point, and you see a very tired three-year-old child still alive and riding his toy. That's exactly what my buddies found.

Fear set in at that exact moment for all of the men as they knew that the boy was alive. They didn't know what he would do when he saw the riverboat rescue vehicle. Don Loewen did not want to get his boat too close to the child, so he jumped into the river when the boat was about 50 feet away, and he swam to the child and the truck.

The water in the Peace River at this time of year is high, cold and dirty. My friends not only found but also saved this child's life — him and his toy truck. This is truly a miracle. I wish Don and his buddies could be here today in the House to be recognized for their bravery and for the heroes that they truly are. We're all very proud of them.

[1350]

FRESH GROOVE PRODUCTIONS

M. Elmore: This is a remarkable story about the levels of excellence that can be achieved when a dynamic group of young people combine their passion for dance with the desire to be of service to their community.

Initially formed because of their desire to make it in Canada's dance scene, this group of young people eventually went on to form Fresh Groove Productions, which is now one of the leading dance studios dedicated exclusively to teaching hip hop, street and break dancing.

It has award-winning dance crews in three age divisions who are all the 2009 Canadian national champions. Their youngest crew, Freshh, are ages eight to 13 years old. In 2007 they won the gold medal in the Olympics of hip hop, Hip Hop International. This year they brought home the bronze medal when the international event, which drew more than 1,700 dancers from 28 countries, was held last August 2 in Las Vegas.

Fresh Groove engages youth in a positive way and always tries to perform at many local events and undertake other activities that give back to their communities. This past year Fresh Groove students even went to the Philippines to help build homes for the marginalized as a part of their effort to instil a strong sense of community spirit in their participants.

Today I ask my fellow members in the House to join me as I congratulate Fresh Groove Productions, its instructors, students, parents and their supporters for providing an excellent model and venue for youth to excel as individuals and as dynamic members of their communities.

I also offer my personal thanks for their efforts to give me a few dancing lessons in hip hop. I had a tough time keeping up with them. They're very energetic.

In particular, I'd like to make special mention of its three extremely talented championship dance crews: Freshh, in the junior division, ages eight to 13 years old, the 2009 Canadian champions, 2009 world bronze champions, whose members include my constituents Xandro Acuna, Servin Emnacen, Jaymie Sorongon, Zach Vran, Devon Isaac, Mclelland Stewart….

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Oral Questions

FUNDING FOR ARTS AND CULTURE

C. James: Every single day brings new evidence of this Premier's broken promises. On Friday afternoon the government sent letters to arts groups across B.C. informing them that their direct access grants had been cancelled — cancelled abruptly in spite of written and signed contracts, in spite of the minister's consistent reassurance that the money would be coming, cancelled after the groups had already planned programs and, in some cases, after the events had already taken place.

My question is to the Finance Minister. Will he explain his government's betrayal to B.C.'s arts communities, and will he explain why this government told them one thing before the election and did just the opposite after the election?

Hon. K. Krueger: This government places a tremendously high value on the contributions of the arts and cultural community to the social fabric of British Columbia as well as to our economy. It is a remarkable achievement that we have been able to fund, through the B.C. Arts Council, grants to these communities in almost the same amount, at almost the same levels as last year.

Turning to the matter of direct-access gaming, I'd welcome a follow-up question.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

[ Page 129 ]

C. James: If this is the way the government shows their support for arts and culture, we have a real problem in British Columbia, and the arts community has a big problem in British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

[1355]

C. James: I know this minister has his answer ready. I'd like to ask the question first, and perhaps he can listen, unlike what he's been doing with the arts communities across British Columbia.

I'll read out a few groups that the minister might want to go and meet with right now: Museum of Northern B.C., Carousel Theatre, Victoria Symphony, Touchstone Theatre, Intrepid Theatre, Fraser Valley Gilbert and Sullivan Society, Vancouver International Dance Festival. These are just some of the groups that this government misled. They were told in writing that the government money would be coming, and then on Friday, all of a sudden, they were told: "Sorry, no funds for you."

Again, my question is: how does this government explain throwing thousands of people out of work after they were told that the funds were secure and they're waiting for them?

Hon. K. Krueger: I forgot that it's question period, not answer period. I'm sorry for starting early there.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Krueger: As I mentioned, the groups who are funded through the B.C. Arts Council have substantially the same funding as last year. The direct-access gaming funds are very often oversubscribed in demand and in applications. The Ministry of Housing and Social Development published, on August 24, the priority order that it would follow in deciding where the funds would go from direct-access gaming.

These priorities make sense to me, and I think they will to the members opposite. Firstly, programs that support low-income and disabled British Columbians; programs that provide food, shelter and support to at-risk individuals; programs that support community health services; programs that fund nutritional and similar programs in schools for underprivileged children; public safety programs; a limited number of arts and culture activities….

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplemental.

B.C. LIBERAL PARTY

CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS

C. James: The facts are clear. These groups and organizations were told by this government that the funding would be coming over the next three years. On Friday they received a letter saying: "No funding. Sorry."

That's the fact, Minister. That's the fact. You have cut funding for arts and culture that have provided funding for groups and organizations that provide support for jobs in British Columbia, and they will be hurting because of this government's decisions.

I'm sad to say that it isn't simply the arts community that is suffering because of this government's direction. Before the election we also heard the Premier say that he would support health services, that he'd strengthen seniors care, that he wouldn't bring in an HST, that he'd improve education. Well, since the election it's very clear that it's a completely different story.

My question goes to the Finance Minister. We have a budget coming in tomorrow. I'd like to ask the Finance Minister: will he stand up today in this House and apologize — apologize to seniors, to students, to small businesses, to the arts community — for this government's betrayal of their trust?

Hon. C. Hansen: Tomorrow's budget is going to be a budget that is going to recognize that British Columbia, like the rest of the world, is going through very challenging economic times, but it is a budget that is actually going to show how we can protect essential health care, education and social services in British Columbia and how we can position British Columbia to make sure that we come out of this economic recession even stronger in the future.

FUNDING FOR ARTS AND CULTURE

S. Herbert: My question is to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts, who seems to think it's funny that he's not answering questions. Hopefully, this'll be different.

The B.C. Liberal government promised $95,000 last year, $95,000 this year and $95,000 next year to the Vancouver Children's Festival, in gaming funds, to produce their festival. Now the festival is told that the government is tearing up this contract and that they won't be getting the promised investment. The thing is that they already spent the money, which the Minister of Tourism also assured them would be coming before the election.

How does the minister justify this betrayal and breach of trust?

[1400]

Hon. K. Krueger: These are tremendously challenging times around the world for all jurisdictions — their revenues, their finances, their programs — and the

[ Page 130 ]

direct access gaming funds from which these grants flow are far oversubscribed.

To continue the priority list that I offered to the Leader of the Opposition…

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Krueger: …next are community education programs, such as day cares and preschools; public community facilities, like community halls and recreational facilities; youth and disabled sports; non-sport youth groups such as Scouts and cadets.

Surely, all members of this House respect these worthy organizations and believe that there has to be some sharing of the available funding.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Herbert: The minister has got his message box down, but somehow it doesn't actually relate to the questions that we're asking here — because there is no answer to the question of how much the arts community has been betrayed by this government.

A typical letter — I've got one here, so the minister might actually want to read it — says this: "The branch has selected your organization to pilot the new three-year direct access program grant approval. Accordingly, we have approved '08-09, $95,000; approved '09-10, $95,000; and approved '10-11, $95,000."

Nowhere does it say "maybe." Nowhere does it say: "You can't trust this government's word."

The children's festival, like many other cultural organizations, performed the work the government required of them when they signed on. Now the government won't pay them for the services that the government required them to perform, throwing their futures into doubt and non-profits provincewide into massive debt, forcing them to do massive layoffs.

Why should these charities pay for this government's incompetence, mismanagement and betrayal?

Hon. K. Krueger: To date, $53 million has been allocated to gaming grants for the year 2009-2010. The province considers applications for these grants four times per year.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Krueger: I have explained to members opposite that — like all other jurisdictions around the world since the financial troubles began on September 12, 2008 — our revenues do not stretch to cover all of the applications. So I've read to the members opposite a priority order by which decisions are being made.

D. Donaldson: On the second day of the 90th annual Bulkley Fall Fair this past weekend in Smithers, organizers received a letter stating that this year's gaming grant of $20,000 was cancelled. The notice was received after the fair had started. The fair is an event that is key to the local economy and vital to the livelihood of so many members of the grass-roots community in the region.

To the Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts: does the minister believe it is fair and honest for the government to promise funding, then cancel it partway through an important community event?

Hon. K. Krueger: Fall fairs play a tremendous role in the communities and local economies where they occur. I've lived in Smithers. I've attended the Bulkley Valley Fall Fair, and it's certainly something that everyone on this side of the House cares about.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: But I'd ask the member opposite who is heckling. Does she think that…?

Mr. Speaker: Member, through the Chair, please.

Hon. K. Krueger: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

Does any member opposite think that a program that supports low-income and disabled British Columbians is a lower priority than a fall fair? These are tough decisions that have to be made in government.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

D. Donaldson: It seems this government believes that making promises to the citizens of this province and then breaking them is a good thing. The coordinator of the Bulkley Valley Exhibition told me she broke down when she opened the letter this government sent in the middle of the fair, cancelling the funding. That is the human impact of this minister's decisions.

[1405]

Again to the minister: will the minister do his job, stand in support of grass-roots community groups and commit to reinstating the promised funding that this government cut?

Hon. K. Krueger: There are few easy choices in tough times. To the great volunteers who serve in the Bulkley Valley Fall Fair: would they agree with that member that the fair is a higher priority than providing food, shelter and support to at-risk individuals?

Interjections.

[ Page 131 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister, just take your seat for a second.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: Would any member on the opposite side of the House argue that a program to fund nutritional and similar programs in schools for underprivileged children is a lower priority than fall fairs? Not everyone can be funded, and tough decisions have to be made.

S. Simpson: If this minister or this government — anybody in this government — had lifted one finger to deal with the question of the highest levels of child poverty for the last six years in this country, maybe you'd be more believable when you wring your hands on these issues.

Yesterday the member for Vancouver–West End and I met with over a hundred members of the arts community in Vancouver. Not one of those members believes this minister. All of them represent groups that had three-year funding commitments before the election. All those groups have had those commitments broken and ripped up by this government after the election.

My question to the minister is this: why would any organization in this province have any confidence in the believability of this government or this minister on any of their commitments?

Hon. K. Krueger: There are far fewer children living in homes that are supported by income assistance now than there were in the '90s. But those very children that the member opposite professes to be asking questions about are in those groups that I have listed as our priorities.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Krueger: The member says he can't hear, and it's because of his colleagues.

Those very children live in the homes that these programs that we've placed as priorities treat as priority — programs that support low-income and disabled British Columbians; programs that provide food, shelter, and support to at-risk individuals; programs that support community health services; programs that fund nutritional and similar programs in schools for underprivileged children.

We do, in these tough times, have to focus our resources, government's resources, on the people who need the services the most.

S. Fraser: You deceived the public. You deceived the artists. You deceived the public.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Take your seat for a second.

Member for Alberni–Pacific Rim, will you withdraw those comments?

S. Fraser: I withdraw.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Member.

INTERNET GAMING

S. Simpson: The minister talks about people on welfare and out of work. Well, there are 6,800 organizations in this province that last year received some of this money, including a number of arts groups, and what the conduct of this government has done is ensured that a number of people who work for those groups are going to be out of work.

Before the election the government said that the social contract around gaming was in place. There would be gaming. Money would go to the groups to do good work. They said, "Don't worry about it," before the election. "Everything's fine." After the election they ripped that promise up, just like they ripped up that contract. All the time they did this, they're increasing Internet gaming levels from $120 a week to $9,999 a week as a cash grab that's going to hurt problem gamblers.

Will this minister tell us: why on earth would the government choose to do this at this time, and does he feel any responsibility for the increasing cynicism British Columbians feel about the conduct of governments like yours?

[1410]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: As I understood the question, it is properly put to the Minister of Housing, and I'll take it on notice for him.

SCHOOL DISTRICT FUNDING

K. Corrigan: My question is for the Minister of Education. Since 1988 school boards across this province have been receiving an annual facilities grant in the spring to do repairs, refinish gym floors, install playgrounds, upgrade mechanical services and achieve energy savings required by government.

Burnaby's allocation this year should have been at least $4.3 million. The planning, the budgeting and the contracts for these projects start as early as January. The contracts are signed by June, and the money is spent by the end of summer.

Last week a letter was sent by the ministry to school boards across the province telling them, after the fact, that the money that was already spent would not be available, that the facility grants would be cut and cancelled this year.

Does the minister really think that it's okay to renege on its obligations to school boards and to leave parents and students out in the cold?

[ Page 132 ]

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: With respect to the annual facilities grant, first I'd like to say that safety is our number one priority, and if any of the school districts contact us to let us know that there are issues around that, we'll certainly work with them.

These are difficult economic times, and the Ministry of Education has had to make decisions just like all others. What we have done is decided to make our top priority funding that flows to students in the classroom, and that is what we have done.

It's important to note that back in June of this year, the ministry spoke with school districts and let them know that there was concern around these grants and that what they should be doing is using their reserves. There was $98 million in reserves at the end of last fiscal year. They were advised to use those resources and to go slowly. If there were projects that could be delayed, that should be what would happen. Again, our top priority being that funding go to students in the classroom.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

K. Corrigan: The minister well knows that by the end of June, any solidly planning district would have already let the contracts out, and they already would have spent the money.

The minister is certainly misleading the public when she claims that school districts have surpluses or reserves for facility grant funding. There are no surpluses. These so-called surpluses are simply an advance payment given to districts so they can sign the contracts for the summer months when the work needs to be done. The money has already been spent.

My question is: why did this government wait until after the election and one week before the school year begins to tell boards the grants were cancelled, and why did the minister knowingly mislead the public when she claims that there are reserves and surpluses?

Mr. Speaker: Member, the last part of your statement. Do you withdraw that?

K. Corrigan: I withdraw the word "knowingly."

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, do you unconditionally withdraw the end of your statement?

K. Corrigan: I do.

Mr. Speaker: Stand, please.

K. Corrigan: I withdraw.

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: The ministry has had to make a number of difficult decisions, as have all other ministries. We live in a time when our budget realistically is not what it was before, but what we have been able to do is maintain funding in the classroom. We've talked with our partners in school districts. We've talked with teachers and parents….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister, just take your seat for a second.

Continue.

[1415]

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: What we're hearing from our partners is that they value what we value, and that is our classroom teaching. These are difficult times. It is not business as usual.

But certainly, it has been possible for many of the school districts to go ahead with some of their projects while others have been put on hold. One of the things that I would like to say is that we continue to be committed to seismic upgrades. We continue to be pushing ahead with capital projects, and just this morning on the radio from the school….

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

D. Thorne: The Kamloops school district was told in the spring to go ahead with their yearly building repairs. This was before the election. After the election the money for repairs and upgrades never showed up. In July, with the work underway, they checked again with the ministry. But instead of being honest about their intentions, this government continued to let the school district believe that they would be getting their funding.

I would like to ask the minister to please explain how destabilizing school districts in this manner protects education.

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: I've certainly had some feedback about these annual facilities grants, and what I've heard from some individuals is that we've made exactly the right decision. We've made exactly the right decision.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: When we're faced with difficult decisions about where we should put our priorities and how we should deal with our financial realities,

[ Page 133 ]

the support I'm getting is to say that the top priority should remain that we are able to put that funding in the classroom with students — that students' learning and achievement is the top priority. That remains our priority.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

D. Thorne: Right now it looks to me like the top priority of this government is promising funding that never comes. The Kamloops school district was led to believe that $3 million would be coming to pay for the repairs they did over the summer. This government knows full well that most school districts — particularly those not in the greater Vancouver regional district — where the weather is worse in the winter…. They spend most of their money in the summer. Yet they led them on until the election and right up to before the school year begins.

This is a retroactive cut. The bills must be paid. Again, I ask the minister: how does blowing a hole in the Kamloops school district's budget, one week before classes start, live up to this government's promise to protect education above everything?

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: I stand here, and I am proud of this government's achievements in the area of education funding.

I would like to remind the member opposite that since 2001, a total of $3.8 billion has been spent or committed to capital and seismic projects for schools. Schools and the education of our children and our young people remain a priority for this government. It is a place we will continue to invest, and I am proud of our accomplishments.

[1420]

J. Kwan: Well, this is fast becoming the summer of deception, from the B.C. Rail corruption trial to the community grants to the HST. And now school boards are caught in this government's web of deceit.

Vancouver school board will lose $10.6 million in facilities upgrades. Jules Quesnel is currently undergoing seismic upgrades. The Vancouver school board had planned to change the old and unsafe electrical system with the facilities grant. Plans are done, drawings are completed, but now the government is reneging on its commitment. Local schools and local school boards have no way of making the payments for this work.

Does the minister think that it is okay to leave school boards and parents and children out in the cold, or will the Minister of Education keep the promises before the election and reinstate the facilities grant?

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: I can assure the member opposite that we will not be leaving any students out in the cold. As I said previously, students' safety and their health will be a top priority for government, and if there are any projects going ahead where the safety of students is in jeopardy, we absolutely will work with those school districts without question.

With respect to the seismic upgrading, I'd like again to point out the fact that this government has made huge commitments in this area, and we continue to go on with those projects.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: The issue that the Vancouver school board has raised about their seismic project and the fact that they'd like to do some other work at the same time is something we will discuss with that school board. But generally speaking, our commitment remains, as it has before, to maximize on classroom funding, and we'll continue to do that.

GOVERNMENT FUNDING PRIORITIES

M. Farnworth: The Minister of Tourism said during question period that there are few easy choices in tough times. Well, one of the choices that this government has been making has been to cut grants to seniors programs that keep vulnerable seniors in their homes.

Given that priority, can the Solicitor General tell us why it should be a high priority to provide more than 100 flat screen TVs to inmates in the North Fraser Pretrial Centre?

Hon. K. Heed: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take that question on notice.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call second reading debate on Bill 3, Supply Act (No. 2), 2009.

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 3 — Supply Act (N o . 2), 2009

Hon. C. Hansen: I move that Bill 3 be read a second time now.

This bill is required to provide for the continued delivery of government services to the public.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, if you just want to wait one second.

[ Page 134 ]

Members, I know you have other duties. Could we get a little bit of silence in the chamber?

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: Tomorrow I will be tabling the updated budget for the fiscal year 2009-2010, and an appropriate amount of time must be set aside in the Legislature for the estimates to be presented, debated and passed.

During this period, government ministries will carry on providing the vital services that British Columbians rely on. However, existing interim supply will be fully spent before the upcoming estimates can be presented, debated and passed. Therefore, government is requesting a three-month extension to interim supply from this House.

[1425]

This supply bill is consistent with the traditional practice for interim supply bills. It requests approval for 3/12 of the total amount of the votes of the main estimates for 2009-2010 as laid before this House on February 17, 2009. The sum requested is in addition to the amount authorized under

section 1 of Supply Act (No. 1), 2009, which was 5/12 of the voted expenses in the estimates.

Introducing a second interim supply bill is not new to this Legislature. Second interim supply bills were introduced in both 2005 and 2001, when elections delayed estimates debate.

B. Ralston: I rise to address the issues raised by Supply Act (No. 2) very briefly.

It is significant that we are debating a supply bill here at the end of August. Ordinarily and certainly, the House rules, both in the House of Commons and here in the Legislative Assembly, make provision for the passing of a supply bill while debate on the budget takes place. What is different about the procedure since 2001 has been that, given the fixed election date, interim supply has been extended. In this case, when this bill passes, it will have been extended eight months from the end of the fiscal year, leaving only one-third of the spending proposed to be scrutinized prior to the passing of the budget itself.

The historical tradition of the House of Commons, when one examines the rules, is that interim supply is to be used sparingly and basically as an interim measure, a bridge measure, while debate on the budget and the main estimates takes place. There is an opportunity here at some point for this assembly to consider addressing this issue, since I think it's clear that the government proposes to continue with fixed election dates.

Although the rules clearly say that by the opposition and the government passing this bill, no member is precluded or taken to have supported any individual budget measure or any individual estimate or any individual spending measure…. The opposition still has the full right to question, to challenge, to probe the individual estimates of ministers, which we will begin in due course and in several weeks. But it may well be confusing to the public and really not the best of public policy to be approving by interim supply two-thirds of the budget prior to the completion of the debate on the main estimates.

It's an opportunity for parliamentary reform, perhaps, at a future opportunity. I know that Mr. Enns has been asked by the minister to review the budget process, and Mr. Enns, notably, prepared a report that was put before the assembly in 1998. He's been asked by the minister to complete a review of the budgeting process, and he's due to report, I believe, at the end of September.

I may contact Mr. Enns directly myself, but I'd ask the minister to join with me in asking Mr. Enns, in his review of the budget process, to consider making this the subject of proposed reform. Certainly, that would be, I think, good practice, good public policy and something that Mr. Enns might well be prepared and be able to provide the assembly with some answers to.

This interim supply bill, when it's passed, will provide for payment for the ongoing operations of government over the next three months. I don't want anyone to suggest that we on this side are opposed to that, and indeed, we do support it. I support the bill as proposed, with the qualifications and suggestions that I've set out.

Mr. Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, Minister of Finance and Deputy Premier closes debate.

Hon. C. Hansen: I won't make lengthy concluding comments. I appreciate the member's comments, and we are certainly, as well, looking forward to the report of the committee that is being chaired by Mr. Enns.

With that, I move second reading.

Motion approved.

Hon. C. Hansen: With leave, I move that Bill 3 be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

[1430]

Leave granted.

Bill 3, Supply Act (No. 2), 2009, read a second time and ordered to proceed to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

BIll 3 — Supply Act (N o . 2), 2009

The House in Committee of the Whole on Bill 3; L. Reid in the chair.

[ Page 135 ]

The committee met at 2:31 p.m.

section 1.

J. Horgan: It's a pleasure to rise and participate in the debate of Bill 3, Supply Act (No. 2), 2009. Of course, the minister will know that we did pass a sizeable amount of supply just prior to the House recessing and, in fact, the prorogation of the last parliament. Here we are again at the mid-point — in fact, past the mid-point — of the year, approving some $8 billion and change.

I'm wondering. The minister, in his response to some pointed questions about where in the world the notion of a harmonized sales tax came from, made reference to the all-party Finance Committee suggesting that perhaps a study might be a good idea, to get some pros and cons.

That same all-party committee unanimously supported the notion of funding a commuter rail service from the Western Communities here in Victoria into the downtown core. I'm wondering if the minister could enlighten me on whether or not, within this $8 billion, any of that fund will be allocated towards transportation alternatives in my community to reduce greenhouse gases and achieve some of the objectives that allegedly the government was interested in prior to the election.

Hon. C. Hansen: With tomorrow's budget we'll be tabling main estimates for the fiscal year. We will be going through an estimates debate, ministry by ministry, and that would be the appropriate time to ask a detailed question of that nature.

I think, as the member knows, that question is not within of the scope of the debate that would be expected during a committee on interim supply.

J. Horgan: Well, we did have a fairly detailed discussion of the supply bill the last time the minister was in this place, and members on this side of the House did ask the odd question about where in the world we were going to be spending all that money.

The minister had answers to some of those questions, and I'm curious as to why it is now that — a pig in a poke, $8 billion — the minister can't give me an indication of at least some of the programs that might be funded by this. Perhaps he could start a shopping list for me.

Hon. C. Hansen: I think if the member goes back and reviews Hansard from the first supply bill that was passed — in April of this year, I guess it was — he will find that there was similar, very limited scope in the debate that would be expected in the House during that as well.

J. Horgan: I hear the minister twice now, but when I go back to my constituency this evening, were someone to ask me — a constituent, a taxpayer, someone who's financing a portion of this operation — what we are going to spend that $8 billion on without any detailed debate, what would the minister have me say?

Hon. C. Hansen: This member has been around this Legislature now for many years, and I think he knows the answer to that question as well as I do. This is interim supply, and interim supply is not a time when we go through detailed debates of line-by-line spending.

What I'm saying is that there's no reason why interim supply at this time, at the end of August 2009, should be treated any differently than an interim supply bill at any other time.

The Chair: I will caution the members that the scope of debate on interim supply is somewhat limited.

J. Horgan: Thank you, Chair, and I take that to heart.

I'll pose, then, a question to the minister. It was raised at second reading debate not that long ago in this place by my colleague from Surrey-Whalley.

[1435]

He raised the concern that constituents of his and mine have that here we are, the day before September, approving — without any understanding of exactly where the money is going to be going — $8 billion in expenditures of tax money.

I appreciate the minister knows that I have been here for a while, not necessarily in this place but around this place, and I do recognize and realize that there is limited scope in this regard.

Perhaps the minister could advise us whether he thinks that it is in the public interest and in the interest of good public management to have, in August, a second go-round, that now…. I think we're probably up to about — if you count, I think it was $22 billion the first time around — $30 billion in expenditures, and the public has no idea where that money is going. Is that good public policy?

Hon. C. Hansen: You know, we recognize that interim supply is a very important tool to make sure that government has the legislative approval before spending is undertaken.

A supply bill is something that has been used many times. In fact, I think there was one year — I believe it was in 1991-1992 — that that government of the day didn't pass interim supply, I think, until there were basically only a couple weeks left in the fiscal year. But because of the fact the election has occurred and it did not give time for the full estimates debate…. Although we certainly offered to the opposition at the time that if they wanted to push through the full estimates discussions and votes, we would have been able to deal with that prior to the election. The member will recall that that offer was made.

I think that if the member is asking me, "Is it appropriate for us to continue to pay our bills as of next week? Is it appropriate for government to continue to pay for

[ Page 136 ]

the wages and salaries of our dedicated public servants as of next week?" the answer is yes, and that's exactly what this bill is about today.

J. Horgan: I certainly would want to ensure that the government meets its obligations. I certainly wouldn't want to stand in the way of that, although I do know that there are school boards across British Columbia that will not be able to meet their obligations with respect to facilities upgrades. I do know of cultural organizations and arts groups and others across British Columbia who will not be able to meet their obligations as a result of actions of this government.

I don't think it's unreasonable in that context to ask the minister if he could give me one example of where these funds are going to be expended. I understand they won't be expended on an increase in salaries for paramedics and ambulance workers in British Columbia. Fair enough. But $8 billion…. When I go home and someone in my constituency says, "What are you spending it on?" I'd rather not guess. Maybe the minister could give me one thing. It's pretty easy. Pick one.

Hon. C. Hansen: I won't give the member one thing. I'll give him a whole book of things. If he wants to refer to the main estimates table of February 17, 2009, he will see ministry by ministry what the main estimates were at that time deemed to be covering.

Tomorrow, as I indicated, we'll be tabling new main estimates. They will largely reflect what was tabled on February 17. This bill today allocates 3/12 of the amount that was in the main estimates from last February.

Sections 1 and 2 approved.

Preamble approved.

Title approved.

Hon. C. Hansen: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 2:39 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

[1440]

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 3 — Supply Act (N o . 2), 2009

Bill 3, Supply Act (No. 2), 2009, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. B. Penner: I call continued debate on the throne speech.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

N. Simons: I'm once again honoured and privileged to have the responsibility of representing the beautiful constituency of Powell River–Sunshine Coast from Gambier and Keats islands, Langdale up to Lund and beyond to Bute Inlet, Toba Inlet — beautiful natural assets that we all can be proud of in this province, wonderful opportunities for many, many people in this riding.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

I'd like to acknowledge the Sliammon First Nation and the Sechelt First Nation, Chief Clint Williams and Chief Garry Feschuk respectively; directors of the regional districts that do an admirable job of managing the scant resources that they're allocated to conduct the people's business — Colin Palmer, chair, Powell River regional district, and Donna Shugar, chair of the Sunshine Coast regional district.

I'm proud to have one city, one town and one district in my riding as well. It's the only constituency in this province that's entirely ferry-dependent, so we've been impacted by a number of things this government has done in the past.

As is the tradition in the throne speech, we acknowledge people who have passed away, and I'd like to add my condolences to those expressed by His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor on the passing of Chief Viola Wyse of the Snuneymuxw First Nation. She was a strong leader and advocate for child welfare, first nations child welfare in particular, and her community mourns her loss.

Also, I'd like to acknowledge that a couple of tragedies have hit the first nations communities in my constituency in the last couple of months — two unnatural deaths. A young woman in Sliammon passed away some weeks ago, and then just this past weekend a young man lost his life.

It serves to remind me and serves to remind my colleagues of the importance of the work we have to do here to ensure that we can bridge the gaps that exist between communities and attempt to be like the tide and raise all the boats in the harbour. Unfortunately, we've been leaving our first nations brothers and sisters behind repeatedly, despite words to the contrary. Actual successes are too few, and we need to get past the promises and get into actual provision of services.

If that's not successful, I'd like to remind the provincial government of their important role in convincing the federal government of their responsibilities as well. I believe that the federal government has been left off without accountability to our province. Somehow

[ Page 137 ]

our first nations people are being left behind. It's our responsibility to speak on their behalf, despite the fact that many of their regulations and much of their lives depend on the Indian Act and federal legislation. I don't think that gives us the excuse to leave it to the federal government.

The housing conditions, educational outcomes and generally the well-being of our first nations brothers and sisters, our aboriginal brothers and sisters in this province, need the attention of this government with more than just words.

[1445]

I'd like to also acknowledge the passing of a wonderful man on the Sunshine Coast, Don Savien, who spent his life working hard for his community in so many ways. He was a custodian in school district 46. He died suddenly a few weeks ago, and in honouring him I believe we honour those who commit themselves not just in their work but in their other time — for their commitments to their communities and for the value they bring and the richness they add to all our communities.

The throne speech was, in a word, a little depressing. It was not unexpected, but it did capture so much of the frustration of British Columbians when they see a throne speech read in this chamber so soon after the government prided itself on being the best of everything, being the best place to live — just one slogan after another. Six months later the cupboard is bare, and we're looking at service cuts, program cuts, cuts to fundamental elements of our society due to what I consider to be bad management practices.

Many people are saying: "Well, where's the money?" It's not just in the reduction or the lower-than-expected revenue. We had an opportunity. We had an opportunity to invest in the people of British Columbia, to invest in the services that strengthen our communities. We had that opportunity. We had surpluses. We had a crowing government taking full credit for every aspect of our economy that was good, and now they take no responsibility for the mess that we find ourselves in.

I find it very weak to suggest that perhaps this government isn't at all responsible for the mess we're in. But I'll tell you we've had hundreds of schools closed in this province. We've seen reductions in services, in health care in many parts of this province, and denial isn't going to make it right.

We still see a government that's trying to make the public service as weak as possible, eliminate the need for public input, reduce the opportunity for the public to have a say in the public policy that affects them. That's why I consider the throne speech somewhat depressing.

The questions that we need to ask are not necessarily: "How bad is it going to get?" but "What could this government have done had they thought ahead to the winter and not simply played around when they should have been collecting nuts?"

It concerns me because the impact of that mismanagement is felt most strongly by those least able to deal with it. If you're an MLA that reads letters sent to you through e-mail or through the regular mail, then you have heard from seniors living alone in their homes or seniors living in care facilities. Then you've heard from parents of disabled children worried about the most simple of services. Then you've heard from parents of students who are struggling to find their way into post-secondary education.

You may not have heard from the families that are being left at the wayside, the families that are not as capable as others to deal with the stresses put on them by this sinking economy.

[1450]

Just looking around my communities, you can't argue against the longer lineups at the food banks. They are there. You can't argue about the overcapacity of our transition houses. Violence is increasing. You can't argue with the facts as they are evidenced in our communities.

When we see cuts…. Sure, we get the old line that you have difficult decisions to make. Yes, there are difficult decisions to make, and I'm pleased that the minister opposite agrees. It is difficult.

Let me ask that minister, if he wants to talk: how do you explain it to a group of seniors sitting in a room in the basement of a church, talking about how hard it is to look after their spouse who has dementia, who for the first time in their 80-year life is taking antidepressants because they can't handle the stress? How would you tell that senior citizen…

Deputy Speaker: Member, through the Chair.

N. Simons: …that the three hours that they had of respite, when someone would come into the house and allow that person to get a lift to the supermarket…? What do you tell that person when those three hours are cut? Let me ask you that.

Let me ask as well: how do you explain to the 20 senior citizens who twice a month get to have a meal with a friend, because we have volunteer drivers bringing them out to a restaurant? Oh, the seniors will pay for their lunch. They'll pay for the gas. And twice a month, they'll reduce their social isolation — at a cost of $7,500 to the community. That's worth a cut. Three visits to the emergency ward, Madam Speaker, would make up that foolish cut.

Yes, there are tough choices. I don't have a problem with that statement. I have a problem with the choices that are made by this government. It is shortsighted at best, and mean-spirited at worst, to make cuts to social programs that support our seniors, that give them the most basic feeling of importance, that give them a sense of belonging and a sense of being part of a community.

It doesn't help that the regional government has had to cut the handyDART service. You're promoting isola-

[ Page 138 ]

tion among seniors, promoting isolation among young people with developmental disabilities. These are not the areas where British Columbians that I know want to see cuts.

We have a number of areas that have seen dramatic reductions in funding. If the minister believes that it's always a choice about where he would cut versus where I would cut, then his government is reflecting that attitude by making cuts unilaterally without discussion, by making cuts unilaterally without even talking to the people involved in the programs.

They select those individuals to come to them, managers who may not have been on the front line for some time, who say: "Oh, the lunch bunch program in Gibsons…. That sounds just like a social program. Time to cut it."

I challenge that minister to come to the Sunshine Coast and speak to the residents face to face. I don't make this up because I intend to make anyone feel bad, but I do believe that the government responsible for making these cuts must be aware of the impact of those cuts. They can't be recharacterized as funding increases, like they try to do in other areas. These are cuts.

The seniors in my community, like the seniors around this province, deserve some respect. They're not getting that respect from this government.

[1455]

What do you say to a young woman whose mother has terminal lung cancer and is dying at home? We say that we'd like people to have that choice, to be able to end their life in a way that promotes their dignity and independence. It so happens that when people choose to have their life end at home, they are less of a burden on our medical system.

So why would it be that a government, after maybe even thinking about it, cuts a program that allows families to reach a doctor any time of day or night — to reach a doctor who might be able to provide you a bit of advice on why your mom is breathing differently or if there's anything you can do to reduce her pain?

If you read your e-mails, you'll know that there are families out there in this province — this province that they are sworn and that we are sworn to work for…. They're talking about these cuts. These are cuts that cause wounds. They're not superfluous. They're not extra. They didn't just come out of the blue and decide that there should be a coordinator to help seniors get together for lunch. There was a reason for it.

So when you look at the throne speech and see nothing for seniors, you can't help but feel a little bit disheartened that this process — where we're supposed to debate legislation, debate policy and debate practice — results in unilateral decisions of a centralized government. I find that problematic.

I wonder how this government and I wonder how members of that cabinet can justify cutting services to people with mental illness. I wonder how they — you know, difficult decisions — pick on the seniors, pick on people with mental illness, pick on people with developmental disabilities. For each person you're picking on, you're picking on their families. You're increasing the burden that the families bear, unnecessarily. To me, that's a sign of bad government — bad management, bad government.

I know not all the members opposite are responsible for the decisions made in the past. They saw those decisions being made, and they jumped on the same bus anyway. I wonder how they did that in good faith. It's a government — we've seen numerous examples, a significant amount of evidence — that is basing the decisions they make on an ideological framework that says government is bad, that private sector is good and that anything you can do to reduce the former will be better for the latter.

We know. We know. You just check the website. You know who donates to the government party. You can see that there's a lot of money coming from certain sectors, and then you see policies. You can do your own assessment and see where the policies benefit certain groups and don't benefit others. It's not rocket science. It certainly adds to the cynicism people have about politics and politicians.

I resent it when I hear the government making decisions and casting all politicians in the same light. We get e-mails saying, "Dear MLA, you're responsible for the HST," and I just try to make it clear that we weren't the ones that said one thing before an election and then did an entirely different thing. That was this government that did that.

[1500]

They can talk about the '90s. Most of the people here had nothing to do with the policies of that time. You can count on the fact that we don't make promises we're not going to be able to keep. Don't let the actions of this government taint your views on all politicians, because that would just make it all the more depressing.

Another program that was cut, which I found really troubling, was the Premier's Excellence Awards. You know, it was a program that encouraged young students in our province to succeed in their educational pursuits, staying in British Columbia and contributing to the fabric of our community. That was cut without fanfare, without notice. The two students from my constituency who were chosen found out when the website disappeared. Is that good management? It's bad management — no two ways about it. It had been in existence since 1986, the Premier's Excellence scholarship awards — 1986. It has disbursed funds to over 300 British Columbians since then.

In 2005 this government introduced a new category for disabled students — to be commended — but a few short years later, after 20 years of a successful program,

[ Page 139 ]

at the slightest hint that they'd be making cuts everywhere, they cut this one quickly.

The former Minister of Advanced Education said that these students who benefited from the program will strengthen British Columbia's economy. The minister responsible at the time talked in glowing terms about the students, saying that it was important to reward these young people, encourage them to reach their educational goals so they can be future leaders of the province.

You know, when words are spoken like that and then within a couple of short years the entire program disappears, to me, that's sort of a quintessential example of this government's style over substance.

The Premier himself said that his Excellence Awards "recognize young British Columbians" and that the program encourages their "best and brightest students" in B.C. to help "achieve our goal of making the province the best-educated jurisdiction in North America." No, that was the Premier who said that. It's just cheap. It's just cheap words — cheap words to protect health; cheap words to protect education.

We see in the evidence just by what this government has done that they don't do what they say they'll do. In fact, they'll do some things that they say they won't. Either way, there's deceit. I would like to suggest that there are very few in British Columbia who buy the government's argument that everything happened so fast that we weren't aware what was going on. The ten-point action plan to fix the economy way back in September…. It didn't work very well.

One of the elements was restoring the 6:20 ferry sailing from the Sunshine Coast, and we were pleased about it. We were very pleased about it. It was the first recognition that this government had that B.C. Ferries might be part of our highway system, and maybe they needed to be involved. B.C. Ferries is our only way off the Sunshine Coast or off the upper Sunshine Coast. It's the only way in between the Sunshine Coast too.

When you privatize our only method of transportation, certain things will happen. If you have a government that is uninterested in protecting the public interest, they will stand idly by and watch it happen — which is what they did.

[1505]

The people of Gibsons are now facing a $500,000 bill to build a dock next to the existing dock of B.C. Ferries so that people wanting to go to their cabins or their houses on Gambier and Keats Island will use their own dock because B.C. Ferries, after 50 years incident-free, said that they don't want people using their dock anymore. That wouldn't happen if the public interest was protected.

So the people of Sunshine Coast will have to bear an extra burden due to public policy. We don't see government stepping in to say: "Continue to use that dock as you have for 50 years without incident." Instead they say: "You better build another dock."

We have learned that our antiviolence programs on the Sunshine Coast, Powell River, are being trimmed, and to me, it's just yet another example of what you shouldn't be doing when the economy is tanking, and that is, removing the supports that kept vulnerable families from disintegrating.

As a former child protection social worker, I can tell you — my colleagues can tell you — that over 95 percent of the calls we get have something to do with poverty. When we see poverty increasing, we know that there are going to be numerous calls to the ministry that will add a burden to them. So if we remove our antiviolence programs, we're creating a deficit. We're creating a deficit for future generations.

Now, this government will talk endlessly about their deficits or not having…. This government passed a law saying: "No deficits allowed in our budget." Then when there was going to be a deficit, they changed the law to say: "We're allowed a deficit for two years." And when they realized it was going to be four years, they changed the law again — changed it to four years.

It's like playing a game with your little sister if you feel like cheating. "Oh no, that's the rule now." You know: "Oh no, that's the rule now." Yeah. "No, I can hit it twice" or "Four strikes" or "Five strikes." It just cheapens the entire process.

It's fine to have legislation that's supposed to make a statement, but I don't think the people of British Columbia are being fooled, really. It's a government that tends to focus a lot on public relations while, at the same time, neglecting the public interest.

You know, cutting the arts is another one of those areas that just makes me shake my head. My eyes are tired of rolling. In the past few weeks we've heard such announcements, to make you think that once again arts and culture are some sort of a frill in our community. We have to make sure we don't undercut the artists that make our communities worth living in. They're the ones who perform on stage or work in our restaurants, depending on their level of success. I just think it's very shortsighted to make a difficult life more difficult for British Columbians.

There's so much. It's almost like a smorgasbord of issues that this government is neglecting. It's very difficult to be able to summarize it in a few short words. But I would urge this government and cabinet to take their responsibility seriously and not be afraid of consultation, not be afraid of engaging in discussions with people providing services, to find out if cutting programs like the Nobody's Perfect program for isolated parents is really a good choice.

I know that when I implemented the Nobody's Perfect program, we reduced the number of apprehensions significantly. If you can avoid a conflict in the child welfare

[ Page 140 ]

system by a less expensive, friendlier program, you're doing well.

[1510]

I'm sure there are colleagues of mine on the other side of the House who understand the importance of preventative programs not just in health but in social services as well. If we decide that it's too difficult to plan too far ahead or you don't get the accolades from planning far enough ahead, then we just won't do it. I think British Columbians are ready for something entirely different.

With that, Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity.

Hon. J. Yap: Madam Speaker, hon. Members and fellow British Columbians, it's a great honour and a privilege to be recognized and to speak in this House in response to the Speech from the Throne.

I'd like to begin first to express my thanks, especially to a few people who are instrumental to my being an elected representative. I want to start off with thanking the people of the great constituency of Richmond-Steveston for their confidence, their trust and the support that they have given to me in re-electing me as their MLA.

I want to thank my campaign team members led by Nicole Hamilton, Matt Pitcairn and Mark Douglas, three up-and-coming British Columbians who were an awesome triumvirate of grass-roots election campaign leadership.

Also, my thanks to Michael Chu and John Taggart for their loyal friendship and enthusiastic support as members of my constituency riding executive. Of course, I thank my family: my wife, Suzanne, for her patience and loving support and my daughter Lisa, and son Michael, for their love and support. To them I say thank you for allowing me to spend precious time away from family to serve the people of Richmond-Steveston and British Columbia.

Last but not least, I would like to thank my constituency assistants Paige Robertson, PoWah Ng and Christiana Wu for their support and service. They are my presence in Richmond-Steveston whenever I'm in Victoria, and they do a great job serving our constituents.

Richmond-Steveston, as you know, Madam Speaker, is a special place. From its humble beginnings as a fishing village over 100 years ago to the vibrant, cosmopolitan community and tourist destination that it is today, Steveston has a special place in the past history and is well positioned for the future of our province.

The commercial fishing fleet, still based in Steveston, is still one of the largest on the west coast. While the wild fishery has not seen its best days in many years, we have not forgotten as a community where we have come from. We celebrate our heritage and our history as the hub of commerce centred on fishing and fish canning.

Just yesterday, in fact, my community came together to celebrate the official opening of the Steveston legacy project. Thanks to $200,000 in funding from the province's BC150 program, we unveiled a life-sized bronze sculpture depicting three fishing-industry workers circa 1930 in front of the Gulf of Georgia cannery, a national historic site.

I'm proud that this government did so much this past year to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the founding of the Crown Colony of British Columbia in 1858 through the BC150 program. As part of the year-long celebration of this great milestone in our province's history, we funded programs like the B.C. Spirit Squares, local museums and the arts, school programs and new exhibitions creating legacies for generations to enjoy.

I'm particularly proud of the significant difference this program, the BC150 program, has made in the communities it touched and of the boost it has given local artists — local artists like Norm Williams, a graduate of Steveston high school. He is a sculptor who conceived, designed and created the Steveston legacy project, and his sculpture that we unveiled just yesterday will be a focal point for our community and a must-see destination for generations to come for visitors to Steveston.

[1515]

While celebrating the past in Steveston, we also take an active role in building the future of British Columbia and Canada. In this regard, I'm looking forward to the official opening of Steveston London Secondary School on October 16. It is perhaps unusual to officially open a school after it has been operating for two years, but that is what we are going to do.

Steveston London Secondary is worth celebrating. This is my community's newest secondary school, bringing together two successful schools, Steveston Secondary School and London Secondary School, to create a new school which will serve as a great model for all future schools.

The new Steveston London Secondary School is an environmentally green facility. It is expected to be one of the first LEED gold-rated public school buildings in Canada. As such, it uses such innovations as building materials with recycled content, a high degree of wood in its construction and a geothermal energy system. Moreover, the Richmond board of education sustainability team will be based out of Steveston London in a purpose-built facility on the school grounds.

By modelling a lower carbon footprint, Steveston London will help lead the way in sustainability and in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It will be uniquely positioned to teach students about sustainability, preparing them for the greener, new, lower carbon future.

The outstanding environmental success story of Steveston London Secondary is something very important to me. I am making this statement in my new role as Minister of State for Climate Action. The creation of this

[ Page 141 ]

new ministerial post for climate action shows that this government continues to put a high priority on reducing our province's carbon footprint.

As Minister of State, I will be working closely with the Premier, the Environment Minister and across government. I am charged with making sure that British Columbia deals with climate change head-on and that our province takes advantage of the opportunities that the new green economy will give us. And as the throne speech indicated, climate change is not just a challenge; it is an opportunity.

Before I talk about the future of climate change in this province, I'd like to briefly look at what we've achieved so far. We have come a long way in a short time. Following on the heels of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the huge success of Vice-President Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth , climate change became fully formed in the public consciousness. That's why in 2007 in the throne speech this government outlined a bold vision for responding to climate change. It's a vision that sustains our climate change work today.

Many will probably already know that our government is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from 2007 levels by 33 percent by the year 2020 and by 80 percent by the year 2050. We are serious about reaching these goals, serious enough that we've entrenched them into law with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act. To meet these long-term goals, we've set two interim targets to use as measuring sticks. The first is to reduce GHGs by 6 percent by 2012 and 18 percent by 2016, both below 2007 levels.

To reach these goals, we have been at the very forefront in North America on acting on climate change. We have been pioneers in Canada in introducing a revenue-neutral carbon levy. This levy puts a price on carbon emissions from the consumption of fossil fuels and sends a clear price signal throughout the economy.

Everyone in B.C. knows about the opening two weeks ago of the Canada line. I know that my colleague from Richmond Centre is very proud of this accomplishment and has already spoken about it more than once in this House. The Canada line links downtown Vancouver to Richmond and the YVR Vancouver International Airport. Not only did we open the Canada line ahead of

schedule and on budget, but we employed thousands of British Columbians with this investment.

[1520]

We're also taking tens of thousands of tons of GHG emissions out of the atmosphere with the Canada line. All of the visitors to B.C. now, in 2010 and beyond will see a province that is serious about giving people low carbon alternatives. This government's $14 billion transit plan will give British Columbians many alternatives to get out of their cars. There are plans for three more rapid transit lines, rapid bus services in all of B.C.'s major centres as well as investments in cycling and clean energy buses provincewide.

I'm proud to restate for all the hon. members that our public service will be the first in North America to be carbon-neutral. That means that by 2010 every person who attends school, visits a government office or goes to the hospital will know that they are in a carbon-neutral facility.

We're also working with local governments so that they, too, will become carbon-neutral. We are on track to hit our goal of carbon neutrality for local governments by 2012. I can tell you we are on track because we have 175 out of 183 local governments that have signed on to the climate action charter and are on their way to becoming low carbon communities.

To develop the carbon offset market here in B.C., the province has created the Pacific Carbon Trust. This Crown corporation will deliver quality cost-effective offsets to anyone or any organization who wants to be environmentally responsible and to become carbon-neutral. Buying offsets in B.C. will create a new offset market and will also steer money to B.C. companies who are finding low carbon opportunities.

As you can see, we have momentum behind our climate change agenda, and the throne speech shows that we are going to continue acting on the momentum behind this agenda. Being a clean energy powerhouse and being a climate action leader are synonymous. By building up our capacity in run-of-river hydro, wind, tidal, solar, geothermal, bioenergy and biomass, we are not only creating jobs in British Columbia, but we are also displacing fossil fuel use and lowering our GHG emissions.

B.C. has enormous natural resources under its stewardship. These resources represent an immense potential for developing a renewable energy market. We want that market to be homegrown, and we want it to be an example to the world of how we can power our lives, our businesses and our communities with clean green power. Investing today in these types of projects means that B.C. is ahead of the curve in transitioning to lower carbon energy sources.

That transition is underway. We have set aside $25 million annually with the innovative clean energy fund to spur the development of the green technology market. These funds will help clean energy entrepreneurs show that renewable sources can be commercially viable. With the right mix of innovation, entrepreneurship and government support, low carbon renewable energy sources can be the future success stories for any community in B.C.

We all know the importance of the forest sector to our province. It's a sector that is in hard times, but it is looking for ways to adapt to the turbulence of global markets. The province has immense tracts of forests under its stewardship. They represent an enormous opportun-

[ Page 142 ]

ity in a low carbon energy world. We want to use these value-added wood products as bioenergy inputs so that we can turn waste from one industry into fuel for another.

Tightening these energy supply lines means keeping the forest sector vital and making full use of the energy potential in our natural resources. This is why we've also established the $25 million bioenergy network. The network will work with forestry, agriculture and the tech sector to make sure we are getting the most out of our timber while using low carbon content fuels.

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

It is this type of cross-cutting work that we have been very successful at here in this province. Building the capacity to deal with climate change is something that B.C. has been very successful at, and it's something that we intend to continue doing.

[1525]

We will do that through our roles in national and international bodies working on developing a cap-and-trade system. Currently, B.C. is co-chair of the western climate initiative, and we are chair of the International Carbon Action Partnership. Both of these bodies present us the opportunity to have B.C. shape the discussions of what the emerging economy will look like under a cap-and-trade system. As we can see with the interest shown by the Obama administration in the U.S., cap-and-trade has a lot of currency south of the border.

The throne speech lays out a bold vision for confronting climate change and capitalizing on the challenges it brings. We are faced also with another significant challenge, the challenge of getting British Columbia through the most serious recession we have seen in 27 years and making sure that B.C. comes through stronger than ever.

There is no doubt that these are tough economic times, and British Columbians are concerned about their jobs, their prospects and how we can get through these times. During the election campaign I clearly heard from my constituents that the economy is their number one concern.

I heard this when I went from door to door in Richmond-Steveston. Each time I would assure constituents that the B.C. Liberal government would continue to make the economy the priority, and our team would keep B.C.'s economy strong. That is what the harmonized sales tax is about — keeping B.C.'s economy strong.

My government's decision to harmonize the provincial sales tax with the federal goods and services tax to create the HST is about improving productivity, about attracting investment, about economic growth and about creating jobs that will strengthen communities, especially those that are more deeply affected by this recession. The move to HST is the single most important economic policy change that government can effect at this time.

I had the privilege to serve as a member of the Finance and Government Services legislative committee during the last parliament. At prebudget consultations our committee heard from business leaders and expert advocates about the economic benefits of a harmonized sales tax. We heard about how the PST has become a drag on productivity — complicated and expensive to administer. We heard about how most modern industrialized economies have moved to a value-added sales tax, which is what the HST will be.

The Finance Minister has spoken clearly as to the reasons for why now is the right time for harmonizing the PST with the GST. Three key reasons resonate for me.

Firstly, Canada's largest province, Ontario, is going to HST in 2010. For British Columbia to not follow suit would mean a competitive disadvantage. In fact, Ontario will have an HST of 13 percent while B.C.'s will be 12 percent, the lowest in the country.

Secondly, the federal government provided more flexible terms for B.C. in dealing with rebates to effectively exempt goods from the HST.

Thirdly, Canada offered transition funding of $1.6 billion to recognize the value of B.C.'s increased productivity with the move to HST. These funds will help us preserve the important programs which British Columbians rely on, programs like health care, education and key social programs.

Here is what business leaders have to say about the move to HST. John Winter, B.C. Chamber of Commerce: "This measure saves business money and reduces government expenditures while providing protection for those on low incomes. In addition to these savings, the consumer will also be a winner, as business will pass the savings they make, such as $150 million annually in compliance costs alone, onto the consumer in the form of lower prices."

From the Retail Council of Canada, Diane Brisebois says: "Harmonization will result in a simpler and more efficient tax system for B.C. businesses. This will help smaller retailers in particular, who find administering two separate tax systems difficult and costly."

Another quote from Richard Rees of the Chartered Accountants of B.C., who says:

Harmonization will reduce compliance costs for businesses, save consumers money, maintain the province's competitive position within Canada, reduce barriers to doing business interprovincially, improve productivity and reduce administrative costs for government. We have been calling for harmonization for several years. Given the current economic climate and Ontario's recent move to harmonization, there is no better time than now to take this important step.

[1530]

The move to HST will benefit not just business but all British Columbians through a stronger economy, invest-

[ Page 143 ]

ment and job growth. I can assure you that I know the move to an HST is far from the most popular decision this government has ever made, but for the reasons I've outlined, I'm convinced that it is the right decision.

As we heard in the throne speech, the people of B.C. spoke clearly on May 12 and made it known that they want a government that will live within its means, provide stability for the economy, and improve and protect vital services. To do this, we have to make difficult decisions, and this requires the responsibility and maturity to do what is right and not always what is popular. I am very proud to be part of a team and to have a Premier who understands this.

I am proud also to be from a city that, as mentioned by the hon. member for Richmond Centre, has its best days ahead. It can be said that Richmond is probably the most Asia-Pacific-connected city in the province of B.C. About half of my constituents have roots in the Asia-Pacific, many do business there, and most have some familial or cultural ties.

The throne speech refers to the establishment of an Asia-Pacific gateway authority which will help further develop trade with the Asia-Pacific region by encouraging better access to the northern corridor of our province. I look forward to the support of the federal government in this endeavour. It will mean more investment, more economic growth and jobs for B.C.

In 165 days the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games will begin in British Columbia. The 2010 games will be our time, B.C.'s time, to shine. Not only will British Columbian and Canadian athletes have their chance to compete for gold in front of the home crowd, we have the unparalleled opportunity to share with the world our great communities, our accomplishments and what we have to offer.

During the games 8,000 athletes, coaches, officials and other team members will come to British Columbia, 10,000 journalists will come to British Columbia, and 250,000 visitors from around the world will come to British Columbia and spend time right here. The games will bring to B.C. a worldwide audience of three billion television viewers.

Between now and the 2010 games, $1 million a day is flowing into British Columbia. What a timely economic stimulus the games are for our province.

Excitement is building in my city, Richmond, as we count down to the 2010 games. Richmond is a venue city with the magnificent Olympic oval hosting long-track speed skating. The oval has been in operation for eight months and has already hosted a number of elite-level speed skating events and many other sporting and community events, thanks to the efforts of the city of Richmond and the many community groups — for example, Richmond Spirit of B.C. Committee.

As Minister of State for Climate Action, I am very proud that the 2010 games will be one of the greenest and sustainable Olympic and Paralympic Games ever held.

The throne speech makes it clear where we have to go when it comes to our climate action agenda. We know that the costs of inaction far outweigh the costs of action, when it comes to climate change. We also know that the challenges of climate change aren't going away, but the throne speech points out the many opportunities to innovate, to adapt and, ultimately, to effect positive change.

We will capitalize on these opportunities by continuing to be leaders in North America on climate action. In doing so, I echo the throne speech in stating that B.C.'s competitive advantage will continue by innovating, adapting and developing new markets. We will be stimulating industry and employment with these new investments, and we will be putting B.C. in the vanguard of the low carbon economy of the future.

[1535]

K. Corrigan: It's an honour to be here today as the first representative of the new provincial constituency of Burnaby–Deer Lake, formerly Burnaby-Willingdon, and it's a great honour to be here as a New Democrat.

My riding extends from Boundary Road on the west to Highway 1 in the east, from Imperial in the south to Canada Way and Deer Lake Parkway in the north. It's a very diverse constituency in many ways. We are about 52,500 people, 42,000 of which are Canadian citizens.

When I was campaigning, I ran into many people who were not eligible to vote yet because they are not Canadian citizens. So we are a community of newcomers and ethnic diversity.

It is where my friend Angel and her son Paul Chang can take me to exercise class in Central Park in the morning; where I can go to the Portuguese senior centre for a delicious lunch on Friday and any number of Chinese, Korean, South Asian, Greek or Italian restaurants for dinner; where I can attend a potlatch; or where I can glimpse life as it was for early Europeans settlers with a visit to Burnaby Village Museum.

We are a community of mosques and churches and temples. Door-knocking is a surprising adventure each and every day.

[ Page 144 ]

Burnaby–Deer Lake is also very economically diverse. A significant proportion of residents live at or below the poverty line, but the riding also includes the beautiful neighbourhood of Buckingham, with some of the most expensive homes in Metro Vancouver.

There are many other well-established single family neighbourhoods, like Cascade Heights and Garden Village in the Kingsway-Imperial neighbourhood area. The riding also includes Metrotown, which itself is very diverse, with a good supply of rental apartments and affordable housing that our city wants to protect.

Many of my constituents also own condos, including a relatively new trend where an increasing number of families with young children have chosen apartment living. In B.C. generally, seven out of ten homes are owned and three out of ten are rented. In Burnaby–Deer Lake almost half of housing consists of rental properties. About two-thirds of my constituents live in apartment buildings.

Many longtime residents, often seniors, are afraid they're going to lose their homes as perfectly good apartment buildings are either torn down or converted to condos, and many of my constituents are finding it increasingly difficult to access affordable apartments. Despite vigorous efforts by the city of Burnaby, the stock of social housing just can't keep up.

The city of Burnaby has asked that it be given zoning power to protect against conversions to condos, but it has been turned down by the Liberal government.

While the city of Burnaby includes many areas which are densely populated, we are also very proud that 25 percent of the city is parkland. In Burnaby–Deer Lake we are fortunate to have Central Park, which is close to my home; the stunning Deer Lake Park, where I often walk my dog Rusty; as well as dozens of other smaller community parks.

I would like to take a moment to thank a few people for their support. I'd like to thank the great team in Burnaby–Deer Lake that helped me get elected, including my good friend and colleague-cum-campaign-manager, Roseanne Moran.

I'd also like to thank the amazing and wonderful Carol Ribiere, in addition to all the countless many others who spent countless hours working on my campaign and who generously donated to it.

I'd like to thank my constituency president, Dave Myles, for all his support and hard work; Lorraine Shore, my riding treasurer, who also took on the task of being my financial agent; and thanks to everyone who worked hard to help get me elected and who work hard for the constituency. Thank you not just for your contribution but for the laughs we have had in the constituency and campaign.

[1540]

I also want to thank my colleague Raj Chouhan, who continues to work closely with me and has….

Deputy Speaker: Member. Can I just remind you, Member, that you don't use names.

K. Corrigan: The member for Burnaby-Edmonds has been kind enough to share not only to share his constituency office, but also his CA, the incomparable Cate Jones.

I want to thank my dear husband, Derek Corrigan, mayor of Burnaby and my best friend, for his support. He is a man with a stunning mind, personal strength, integrity, great creativity and vision. We are fortunate in Burnaby that he has chosen to devote much of his life to the development and betterment of our community. I'm sorry. I wish he was here today, but he's arranging a family funeral.

Derek and I met many years ago at UBC law school and have been married for 33 years. We moved to Burnaby in 1977 and raised our four wonderful children — Sean, Darcy, Patrick and Kelsey — in Burnaby, where they all went to Nelson Elementary School, then Burnaby South Secondary School. I love and am very proud of all four of them.

I also want to recognize Derek's mother, Vivian Gibbons, who has also not only been a tremendous support for me in raising children but a dear friend. Derek says she always takes my side, and that's generally true. And my own mom, Marguerite Henry, who has recently come to live in Burnaby. Mom, I love you.

After practising law for a short time, I went on maternity leave. With having four children, I kind of forgot to go back to work for many years. I was lucky to be married to a man who made a good income, so we could afford to have me stay at home. Most in my riding and throughout B.C. are not that fortunate and struggle each and every day just trying to make ends meet in raising a family. It's to that average family that makes up most of this province that I dedicate myself over the next four years.

I spent about 18 years at home raising my family. It was during those years that I learned the value of community, that it is the health, the life, the strength, the warmth, the support, the familiarity, the textures of our local community that nurture us as individuals, as families, as neighbourhoods.

I think that is the crux of the difference between those of us on this side of the House and those on the other side. We get it that healthy individuals and healthy communities are the strength of this province and that every decision should be looked at not only as a fiscal choice but through the lens of the impact it is going to have on the health of the communities that make up this great province.

Just as important as ruptured economies are ruptured communities, and there are wounded communities across British Columbia. When I volunteered for years in the local parent participation preschool and then ele-

[ Page 145 ]

mentary and high school; when I coached ringette for the Burnaby New West Ringette Association, ran hockey tournaments or was a parent volunteer for the Burnaby Minor Hockey Association; when Derek coached lacrosse and soccer; when we spent those countless hours driving our children and others to water polo practices, swim meets, piano lessons; when our house was grand central station for the kids in the neighbourhood, we weren't just investing in our children's futures. We were investing in the health of our community.

This is the lifeblood of communities — the support and the caring that we provide to each other. Members on the other side of this House sometimes profess those values. They may live them in their personal lives, but they do not act on them in the way they have governed over the past eight years.

I don't think I ever would have become involved in politics if my husband, Derek, had not led the way. Like most people, it probably never would have occurred to me to go into politics, but it ended up being a natural progression from volunteering in my community, particularly in the schools, to running for the school board. I was very honoured and certainly enjoyed my nine years on the board, including the last two as chair of the Burnaby school board.

I have to give great kudos to the Burnaby school district. For almost 25 years the majority of seats on the Burnaby school board, now called the board of education, have been held by the NDP-affiliated Burnaby Citizens Association — 25 years of good, stable, sensible, effective, fiscally responsible and efficient NDP leadership.

Last year we had our biannual provincial review. The team was, frankly, awed by the Burnaby school district and said that we were a leading-edge district both provincially and internationally. I give great credit not only to the strong political leadership but, most importantly, to the amazing staff, who appreciated and thrived in an atmosphere of support and stability.

[1545]

While there was often no discussion on future directions with the provincial government, and we never knew what change was going to be imposed on us next, it was the local innovation, the excellence of our district staff, administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students themselves that made and makes our provincial education system so strong. It was school districts working with each other that improved public education and strengthened public education.

There are obviously some very strong people at the provincial level, staff at the provincial level, but all too often programs or policies would be imposed without any collaboration or consultation. More often than not this leads not only to resentment and resistance but to bad policies. I often said we would do just fine if the provincial government would just get out of the way and let us get on with doing our jobs.

It is absolutely critical that we continue to support public education. We cannot tolerate erosion of our public school system, and we must not bleed resources from the public system to the private system, because if we lose the middle class of this province to private schools, if people believe that private schools are going to better serve their children, they will leave, and that is not fair.

There cannot be two tiers of education in this province or any province in this country. The playing field has to be even, and our public education system does do an amazing job. In fact, UBC science, the science department, tracks the performance of public school graduates as compared to private school graduates in university, and consistently and continually, public school graduates achieve higher marks at the university. So we must fiercely defend and protect this great public education system.

I want to speak a bit about last week's elimination of the annual facilities grant as absolutely typical of how this government operates. We apparently have a new minister that is fitting in quite comfortably with the Liberal way of doing things. The member directed that a letter go out advising boards that the annual facilities grant is eliminated.

Boards have been receiving the annual facilities grant since 1988. It's used for things like re-roofing schools, installing playgrounds for kids, refinishing gym floors and making schools more energy-efficient. Typically, we receive the grants in the spring, or early summer at the latest.

For the Burnaby school district the amount of funding would have been $4.3 million this year. The money was targeted for projects like reconfiguring the parking lot at Cascade school, where the parents had been concerned about significant traffic problems, and for a field installation at Marlborough school, where the parents raised well more than $50,000 as a contribution towards that project.

Obviously, it makes sense to do the bulk of this work in the summertime, and in order to properly plan and get the best prices on contracts, districts tender the contracts as early as possible — January or February. The commitment for the money comes in the spring and has generally been paid as an advance so that the work can go ahead at the appropriate time.

Districts count on and plan for that money. Many districts have it all spent or committed by March or April. It is included in our budgeting process in the spring. It is ludicrous to be told at the end of August that the money is simply not coming. It is bad management, and it's bad planning.

I want to point out how misleading the minister was. The letter to school boards said that $98.6 million of this funding was not spent by the end of the fiscal year, suggesting that there is a surplus. This is playing very

[ Page 146 ]

loosely with the facts. The money is advanced at the end of the fiscal year for work to be done in the summer. It isn't a surplus. It's simply sitting in the bank for a couple of months or a couple of weeks till the bills have to be paid. How cynical to suggest that an advance payment for work to be done in the next few months is surplus.

Here's an even more disturbing aspect to this. I said earlier that we typically received the money in spring. Recently we've been told somehow by the straight-faced Finance Minister that they didn't know the state of our finances in the spring during an election. If that is the case, if there was apparently no problem, then why was this facilities grant not released in the spring, as it always was? The answer, of course, is that they didn't release the money because they knew the state of the province's book.

They knew they were not ever going to fund the annual facilities grant, and they knew it would send districts into planning disarray after the election. What a shoddy way to treat your educational partners and the citizens of this province.

[1550]

As an aside to this, many of the people in Burnaby–Deer Lake who supported me partly supported me because of another example of the Liberal government acting arrogantly, deceitfully and high-handedly.

Last August the Solicitor General announced that a remand prison was going to be built on the Willingdon lands in Burnaby and that there would be consultation about it. Sometime later, as opposition boiled up in the community, with people like the PAC — the parent advisory committee — at Cascade Elementary School, led by people like Ivy Yu….

The government produced a glossy brochure that said there would be no other site considered and no consultation because a comprehensive review had determined there was no other viable location for the prison. We now know that this oft-repeated statement was simply fiction and that no such study had been done.

There is no time to go into the number of misrepresentations and half-truths I heard over the next several months, particularly during the election period. Here was a tremendously visible example of the way this government does its business — steamrolling over communities, not consulting with communities and being factually misleading.

If the Liberal way of doing business had been exposed to the people of this province prior to the election on issues like the HST or the actual size of the deficit or the plans to slash services the way it was with the prison in Burnaby–Deer Lake, we would have had a different government right now.

Shortly after I was elected to school board, I was also very fortunate to come back into the workforce as a researcher for the Canadian Union of Public Employees. I want to thank the president, Barry O'Neill; my good friend Colleen Jordan; Mark Hancock; Sharon Prescott and my colleagues in the research department at CUPE; and all my other friends and colleagues at CUPE and at the Hospital Employees Union.

CUPE is a great union, and I am proud of the work that we have done. And thank you to all of you in the union movement who devote your lives to protecting and improving the lives of working men and women in B.C. and across Canada.

Noam Chomsky said that labour unions are the leading force for democratization and progress, and frankly, I think that's why the Liberal government hates unions. It's not about costs. De-unionizing the province or squishing unions like a bug, to quote one of the Liberal transition team, is about getting rid of a strong voice for democracy and fairness and social justice.

It's a threat to the Liberal plan to make the rich richer and to abandon the average person. It's about getting rid of those that oppose the wholesale privatization and selling off the public assets that our parents and grandparents worked so hard to build. That's what getting rid of unions and other progressive voices in this province is really about. It's about getting rid of people who point out that there is a connection between, year after year, having the highest child poverty rate in Canada and not increasing the minimum wage for eight years.

But I believe we can do things to support the average person and support a robust economy at the same time. The Burnaby Board of Trade is a stellar example of an organization that represents its members' business interests but at the same time recognizes that in order to be attractive to business, you must have a healthy community as well.

A while ago UBC President Stephen Toope put together a meeting at city hall in Burnaby with representation from the university, from the city of Burnaby, from the board of education and from the board of trade. He commented about how we all knew each other so well and how we obviously worked so well together — and we do.

The Burnaby school board works closely and cooperatively with the city on projects, on shaping our community. It makes us a more effective community. We all work closely with the board of trade to talk about how we can best serve each other. This is not rocket science. It's how government should be run.

In fact, the city of Burnaby, a city with a local government dominated for more than 20 years by an NDP-affiliated civic party, the BCA, in July was named the best-run city in Canada. "Lean, debt-free and offering great public services, Burnaby is a model for the country." That is the headline in last month's Maclean's magazine story naming the city of Burnaby the best-run city in Canada, after undertaking an extensive survey of 31 cities across the country. According to the survey, Burnaby scored at or near the top in areas like environmental health, recreation and culture, and economic development.

[1555]

[ Page 147 ]

Maclean's also noted that its overall cost of government, $148 per person, is substantially below the $235 national average. As an aside, Burnaby has determined that it is more effective to provide services in-house rather than privatizing them, and they apparently seem to know.

The Maclean's

article notes that spending on economic development initiatives is also modest, "yet it has reaped an A-list of knowledge-based industry giants, including Telus and video game–maker Electronic Arts" and that:

"Members of the region's development community heaped praise on Burnaby's planning department this year, rating it as the best in the Lower Mainland, 'based on competence and ethical professionalism.'

"While many Canadian citizens are hamstrung by borrowing costs, Burnaby is not only debt-free, it sits on $633 million in financial reserves and a municipal land bank worth hundreds of millions more."

Again quoting the article, Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan said: "We always save for what we're going to buy." He said: "If we buy a fire truck, we immediately start saving for the next one."

In Burnaby local government is about balance, stability, continuity, collaborative spirit and consultation, qualities that I do not see in this government. Burnaby isn't slashing services even during the tough economic times. It is continuing to provide great government — good NDP government.

The Liberal provincial government has had eight years to diversify the economy, eight years to address the needs of all of its citizens, eight years to create an atmosphere of respect for local government, an atmosphere of cooperation for all its citizens. Instead, it has created chaos because of its inability to innovate and diversify and because of its confrontational and condescending attitudes towards local governments.

We shouldn't be facing cuts of excellence scholarships for our best and brightest young students. We shouldn't be pulling the rug out from under organizations like Burnaby Family Life and the South Burnaby Neighbourhood House and the countless other organizations that provide social and other services to people in Burnaby.

It's outrageous that programs like the seniors wellness program — which, for a few dollars a month, keeps seniors healthy in my community — are in jeopardy. It's all about planning. It's all about priorities. It's about strong management, and it's about what you care about. I care about my community and communities across this province, and I and my NDP colleagues will continue to fight for those communities.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

I would like to remind all members that they are to be in their seats when they're speaking. If they're going to be heckling, they should also be in their seats.

Hon. K. Krueger: Thank you, my friends, and thank you, Madam Speaker. Congratulations on your recent appointment. It looks good on you.

I think I'll just mention that the members on the other side…. A whole bunch of them were sitting in the wrong chairs just then. We let a lot of things go during maiden speeches, but some of the things that were just said we can't let go, and I'll be addressing those.

I do want to follow the course of the throne speech itself as I respond to it. I am always touched by the reference to great British Columbians who have ended their lives, sometimes through accident, sometimes through natural means — people who have died after the last throne speech and before the one that we're addressing.

There was one from Kamloops that is mentioned in the third paragraph of the throne speech, an absolutely wonderful man, David Ross. He was a pillar of our arts community.

I have beside me here — he's doing me a favour, sitting down with me — the former mayor of Kamloops and now the member for Kamloops–North Thompson, a name which is very dear to my heart, and so is he. He's a wonderful person to have run with and to be elected with.

The member for Kamloops–North Thompson and I knew David Ross well and loved him, love his theatre company, love our community where we have the Kamloops Symphony orchestra, Western Canada Theatre, Kamloops Art Gallery, Kamloops Interior Summer School of Music, Tournament Capital of Canada — all the facilities to back it up.

[1600]

Right across the spectrum, we have a community that anybody would be happy to live and work and play in, raise their families in, and that's what doctors tell us when they come to Kamloops and the Thompson valleys, from across the country and around the world — that we've got all the attributes of a big city but none of the problems. A very low crime rate, an RCMP detachment that works like a well-oiled machine, and everybody focuses on the few bad guys in town and keeps such a clamp on them that they, hopefully, turn to more honest ways of making a living, Wonderful health services. A wonderful volunteer force.

We stage huge events in Kamloops like the 1993 Canada Games and the Brier, and always we have more volunteers than we need to bring them on. We're so proud of our community.

I was glad, too, that the throne speech referred to the heroic efforts of our firefighters in the forests this past season — well, this ongoing season. The Minister of Forests sits to my left in this House, and I know he has publicly commended them, publicly honoured pilot Robert Woodhead who lost his life flying a firefighting helicopter. The throne speech names him as well. They take that risk every day. Like the heroes of 9/11, they go out and do whatever it takes to get the job done, and sometimes they lay down their lives.

[ Page 148 ]

I'm so pleased with the emphasis in the throne speech on our children and grandchildren who are inheriting this wonderful province and these wonderful communities. I feel every bit the pride in Kamloops that the member who spoke before me feels in Burnaby. We're proud of our cities, proud of our communities, and we're getting everything ready for our children and our grandchildren.

I think about grandchildren a lot now that I have seven of them. The oldest turned seven years old today — so seven, seven and under. Sydney is her name. Then there are Marcus and Noah and Austin and Linden, Ava and Samuel. I love them all dearly, and I feel like they can be anything they want to be. They are so amazingly different in spite of coming from the same gene pool. My wife and I met when we