2006 Legislative Session: Second Session, 38th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(Hansard)

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 2006

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 7, Number 5

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of

Bills

Forests and Range Statutes Amendment

Act, 2006 (Bill 9)

Hon. R.

Coleman

Supply Act (No. 1), 2006 (Bill 7)

Hon. C. Taylor

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

International Women's Day

K. Whittred

C. James

Awards to Parksville citizens

R. Cantelon

International Women's Day

C. Trevena

IIG-All Nations Institute project in

support of aboriginal women

R. Lee

Role of women in society

B. Simpson

Oral Questions

Government computer system security and

role of Information and Privacy Commissioner

C. James

Hon. M. de

Jong

M. Farnworth

Government liability in security of

personal information records

L. Krog

Hon. M. de

Jong

Investigation into release of

government records on personal information

H. Lali

Hon. M. de

Jong

Ban on sale of government computer

equipment

B. Ralston

Hon. M. de

Jong

Appointment of Brian Berglund as chief

information officer for Community Living B.C.

A. Dix

Hon. M. de

Jong

Raw log exports

S. Fraser

Hon. R.

Coleman

B. Simpson

Eligibility of forest workers under

Forestry Revitalization Trust

B. Simpson

Hon. R.

Coleman

Petitions

G. Coons

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. O. Ilich

G. Coons

Hon. P. Bell

C. Puchmayr

Hon. J. van Dongen

C. Evans

G. Hogg

H. Lali

Hon. L. Reid

A. Dix

Hon. S. Bond

Proceedings

in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Finance

(continued)

J. Kwan

Hon. C. Taylor

G. Gentner

D. Chudnovsky

G. Robertson

D. Cubberley

[ Page 2819 ]

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 2006

The House met at 2:04 p.m.

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

C. James: I have the pleasure of introducing a constituent from my riding. Tara Ehrcke is a teacher at Spectrum high school, a very fine high school that I also graduated from. She teaches information technology to students in grades nine to 12, and she's involved in the BCTF as a member of the Professional Issues Advisory Committee. Would the House please make her welcome.

[1405]

Hon. J. van Dongen: I'm pleased to introduce in the House today two friends of my ministerial assistant, Bill Hepburn. Visiting us are Adam Defala and Steve Taylor, two bright young men studying in eastern Canada and visiting our capital today. I'd ask the House to please make them both welcome.

J. Brar: I am pleased to introduce Victoria Bartlett. Victoria is a resident of the Surrey–Panorama Ridge constituency. Victoria is also a provincial media and legislative liaison for the Christian Science Church in British Columbia. Please make her feel welcome.

Hon. C. Taylor: I'm very pleased to welcome a number of members of the public affairs bureau who are visiting us today. They're attending our parliamentary procedure workshop to understand better how the Legislature works, and the budgeting process. So I'd like you all to give a very warm welcome to Brian Decker, Ron Lees, Julianne McCaffrey, Sherri Patterson, Grace Van den Brink and Deanna Krywy. Please make them welcome.

B. Ralston: I'd ask the House to welcome Glen Lucas, the general manager of the B.C. Fruit Growers Association, who is in the precinct today for meetings.

B. Lekstrom: It is my pleasure today to introduce to this House Ms. Charlene Hodgson, who is a teacher from my riding. Charlene is down with the BCTF and is a member of the Professional Issues Advisory Committee. Charlene has been a teacher for 26 years, 16 of those in my hometown of Dawson Creek. Certainly both of my daughters have gone through the system, and Charlene has done a tremendous job for us on behalf of school district 59. Will the House please make her welcome.

M. Sather: Joining us in the galleries today are Gerald and Beverly Wells, who are successful farmers from the Peace River country. I have known them since childhood. They're down visiting friends here on the Island. We had the pleasure of having lunch and talking about some of the challenges in agriculture today. Will the House please make them welcome.

I. Black: I have four guests in the gallery today. It is with distinct pleasure that I welcome back my mom and dad, visiting from Cobble Hill on Vancouver Island, and two guests — old family friends visiting from Winnipeg, David and Noreen Henderson. Would the House please join me in making them feel most welcome.

D. Routley: Joining us today in the precinct and currently touring the buildings are many of the staff, parents and students of Crofton Elementary. I'm feeling safe, with the new tenor, to invite the children in to witness democracy done differently. I hope we'll all welcome the students of Crofton Elementary School.

S. Hawkins: Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure of making an introduction on your behalf. A constituent from Penticton–Okanagan Valley, Karen Litke is with us in the gallery. She's a resident of Penticton, who teaches grade four at Uplands Elementary School. Mrs. Litke has been teaching since 1980 and is the chair of the Teacher on Call and Underemployed Teachers Advisory Committee. I would ask the House to make her welcome on your behalf.

[1410]

Hon. G. Abbott: It's my pleasure to welcome today three visitors in the gallery from the Ministry of Health. They're here to drink up the civility and decorum that is now so inherently a part of this chamber, as part of the parliamentary procedure workshop. Allow me to introduce Craig Fuchs, Leanne Warren and Scott Barillaro. I ask the House to please make them all welcome.

Mr. Speaker: I would like to take this opportunity to introduce 28 public servants seated in the gallery, who are participating in a full-day parliamentary procedure workshop offered by the Legislative Assembly. This workshop provides a firsthand opportunity for the public service to gain a greater understanding of the relationship between the work of their ministries and how their work affects this Legislature. Would the House please make them welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

FORESTS AND RANGE STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2006

Hon. R. Coleman presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Forests and Range Statutes Amendment Act, 2006.

Hon. R. Coleman: I move that Bill 9 be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

[ Page 2820 ]

Hon. R. Coleman: Bill 9 proposes amendments to five forest statutes to deliver sustainable forest and range resources in an efficient and effective manner. Amendments to the Forest Act will create a forest revenue audit program enabling government to inspect and audit records to ensure the correct amount of stumpage is being collected, protecting revenues from the Crown forest to the taxpayers of British Columbia.

Two other changes to the Forest Act will streamline administration as a result of changes to interior log grades and will provide regulation-making authority specifying how and when government may enter into a master licence to cut. Amendments to the Forestry Revitalization Act will extend the current deadlines for ministers' orders relating to area-based tenures. This will provide more time to consult with first nations about new tenure opportunities.

Bill 9 also proposes amendments to the Forest and Range Practices Act to provide a smooth transition from the former Forest Practices Code and the Forest and Range Practices Act.

Changes to the Wildfire Act will clarify that the act applies to cultivated grasslands and will further clarify the obligations of those who carry out fire hazard assessments. Compensation for forest licensees who carry out fire control will also be addressed.

In June 2005 the Ministry of Forests was renamed the Ministry of Forests and Range. Bill 9 updates the name in the Ministry of Forests Act and other acts to reflect the importance of the range management to the ministry's mandate.

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

Bill 9, Forests and Range Statutes Amendment Act, 2006, 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.

SUPPLY ACT (No. 1), 2006

Hon. C. Taylor presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Supply Act (No. 1), 2006.

Hon. C. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. C. Taylor: This supply bill is introduced to provide supply for the continuation of government's programs until the government's estimates for 2006-2007 have been debated and voted upon in this assembly. The bill will provide interim supply for government operating expenses for the initial two months of the 2006-2007 fiscal year. This will allow time to debate and pass the estimates.

This interim supply is required because the existing voted appropriations expire on March 31, 2006. This bill will also provide interim supply for other financing requirements. This bill seeks supply for two-thirds of the year's financing transaction requirements for capital asset expenditures and loans and investments, and 100 percent of the year's financing transaction requirements for revenues collected for and transferred to other entities. This will allow time to debate these requirements. This interim supply is also required because existing voted appropriations will expire on March 31, 2006.

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

[1415]

Bill 7, Supply Act (No. 1), 2006, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY

K. Whittred: Today is International Women's Day. It is a day for all of us to reflect on where we've been and where we're going. Women across the globe — although separated by ethnic, language and cultural differences — all strive to achieve similar goals of peace, equality, justice and opportunity.

No celebration of International Women's Day would be complete without acknowledging the contribution of women who open doors. We are reminded of Lysistrata, who initiated a strike against husbands in ancient Greece in order to end war; the women of Paris, who marched on Versailles to demand women's suffrage; the suffragettes, who had the temerity to hold up a banner calling for votes for women.

In Canada we have Alberta's Famous Five — Emily Murphy, Henrietta Edwards, Louise McKinney, Irene Parlby and Nellie McClung — nation-builders who changed the destiny of Canadian women by changing the definition of one word: person. Imagine the significance of that. A woman is a person. They opened the door so that in British Columbia today, women participate in all aspects of the economy, the community and government.

B.C. women have one of the highest rates of small business ownership. Today women make up 57 percent of students in universities and are increasingly joining the trades. Over $6 million is provided for early learning and child care opportunities. For women with challenges, there are employment and bridging programs. Programs have been expanded for women who are escaping violent situations.

Today those of us who live in the western world generally enjoy freedoms and opportunities free from discrimination. But there is still work to be done.

C. James: I also rise to recognize today as International Women's Day. Thirty years ago the United Na-

[ Page 2821 ]

tions set aside March 8 as the day to pause and consider the condition of women in our global society. An important milestone in the struggle for the equality rights of women, the U.N. charter in 1945 marked the first international agreement to proclaim gender equality as a fundamental human right.

It's the day we honour the social, economic, political and spiritual contributions that women make to our communities. It's the day to mark our progress, to reflect on how far we've come and to reflect on how far we have yet to go. Women have made great strides in the last 30 years. From voting rights to abortion rights to the participation of women in politics and the economy, women have come far in three decades.

But there are huge challenges yet to overcome. Poverty and oppression continue to mar the progress made by women around the world. Wars and informal armed conflict now kill more civilians than soldiers. The international trafficking of women and children is on the increase.

Here in Canada, women have yet to close the gap in wages and employment. B.C. also has the highest child poverty rate in Canada, and as we know, with women being the primary caregivers, that means too many women in British Columbia are also living in poverty.

Today we celebrate and honour women and reflect on the progress we've made. But today is also a reminder that we have much work to do to achieve equality. We must continue the efforts of the women and men who have worked hard to build fairer and stronger communities. International Women's Day is a day and a reminder that we must continue the work today and into the future.

AWARDS TO PARKSVILLE CITIZENS

R. Cantelon: The Parksville and District Chamber of Commerce recently honoured eight of its citizens for outstanding achievements in their community — for achievements in business, to be sure, but also for their significant contributions to the greater good of the community. They were feted, and their efforts were properly recognized at a gala community awards dinner which was attended by several hundred citizens of the Parksville community.

[1420]

Paulina Alexander received the Outstanding Service award for providing blue-ribbon customer service at the Tigh-Na-Mara Seaside Spa and Resort.

Alex Fras received the Entrepreneur of the Year award for taking a risk and seizing an opportunity with his new business, Island Low Cost Movers. His business has been thriving as people are moving back into Parksville.

Bill Ormiston received the Small Business of the Year award for Parksville Home Hardware. Bill combines a personal, friendly approach with a great product selection and consumer advice.

Don Hirsch received a Big Business of the Year award. Again, it was the Tigh-Na-Mara Seaside Spa and Resort — a double winner. This business is big on its commitment to community projects as well as being an outstanding resort. Make a note of it. It's a great resort.

The Society of Organized Services was declared Newsmaker of the Year for the society's leadership of the Crystal Meth Task Force. This group led the province as one of the founding organizations to lead the charge against this scourge.

Charlotte Robertson, a student at Ballenas Secondary School, received the Youth of the Year award for a long list of community and school events that would wear out most adults.

Louise Wall was awarded Volunteer of the Year award. Louise founded the Parksville Garden Society, which is beautifying the old railway station as a 2010 project — the railway gardens.

Bill McKinney best epitomized the can-do, let's-get-it done attitude of this community and received the prestigious Citizen of the Year award. Whatever the community event, Bill will be there leading but also rolling up his sleeves to do whatever it takes to get the job done.

I ask the House to add their congratulations to those of the Parksville chamber in honouring these outstanding citizens.

INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY

C. Trevena: I too, like my colleagues, rise to mark International Women's Day, because International Women's Day is a time to make statements to talk about the importance of women in our society, about equality and about women's rights.

The day, as we have heard, took root in the early years of the last century, where women were becoming more vocal, demanding our rights — rights which many women still strive for around the world. It is a political event, but it's also a celebration. It's a celebration of all women.

I grew up in England, and there we had Mothering Sunday — a day in late March when kids across the country would give burnt toast to their moms in bed. Here we have Mother's Day, a day in May when kids across the country give burnt toast to their moms in bed. It's great for the mothers.

But International Women's Day is a day for mothers and for all women. During the communist era in Europe, March 8 celebrations would lead the newscasts. Still, in homes and offices across eastern Europe, it seems a chance to celebrate women — by children, by husbands, by partners, by colleagues, by friends. Women are given flowers, often a single stem by male colleagues. It is not seen as sexist. It's seen as right.

I felt embarrassed the first time this happened to me in the Balkans, when a Bosnian colleague gave me a flower. But a few years later in Kosovo, I was out buying flowers for a Serbian team member who couldn't risk going into the streets of Pristina, nor could he go home without flowers for his mother and his girlfriend.

In the often drab days in the end of the winter in eastern Europe, March 8 is a sign of hope as flower

[ Page 2822 ]

stalls spring up across the cities. Women display the flowers they've been given on their desks or proudly in the streets, and March 8 is a day for all women to celebrate.

IIG-ALL NATIONS INSTITUTE PROJECT

IN SUPPORT OF ABORIGINAL WOMEN

R. Lee: Burnaby is home to an increasing number of excellent education facilities. Recently, students in Montecito Elementary School topped the B.C. Foundations Skills Assessment, and students of Burnaby North Secondary School performed the best in the Advanced Placement programs in North America.

Simon Fraser University and BCIT continue to expand their skill training programs, research, as well as physical facilities. Last week I attended the launch of the BCIT aerospace technology campus project and the grand opening of the Institute of Indigenous Government-All Nations Institute with many of my colleagues. IIG-All Nations Institute provides a first- and second-year university program, with a focus to aboriginal students.

[1425]

I had the opportunity to talk to Gloria Larocque, a student in the criminology program. She has been working on a special project to raise awareness regarding the missing and murdered aboriginal women. Her studies and personal experience led her to voice concerns about the treatment of aboriginal women in Canadian society generally. She is currently organizing a conference known as The Gathering to be held on the 2006 spring equinox. The Gathering is intended to remove any stigma these women face in choosing their fates, promoting a more humanized, generalized societal view toward aboriginal women. This day would be known as indigenous women's empowerment day.

On this International Women's Day, I would like to commend the women for their contribution to our education system and to pay tribute to the aboriginal women for their efforts to remove stigmas in our society.

ROLE OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY

B. Simpson: I was born in Scotland where, to quote Robbie Burns, "a man's a man for a' that, an a' that." I was raised in a household of five boys, an uncle and my dad. The fact that my mother survived that testosterone-laden environment with her sanity intact is a testament to her intestinal fortitude.

It took many years of travelling the globe and university schooling to chip away at my chauvinistic view of the world. It also took the patience and courage of many women along the way, who challenged my thinking and took me to task about my unconscious attitudes and beliefs about women, and to them I owe a debt of gratitude. Some of those women….

[Applause.]

I've only got two minutes.

Some of those women were leaders in the public and not-for-profit sectors whom I had the pleasure of working with as an independent management consultant. These women showed me that leadership was more than simply overpowering people with your will or your intelligence or the fact that you had a title that ought to demand respect independent of your actions. These women taught me that leadership was really about giving people space to grow, and it was about bringing out the best in people through true collaboration and consultation.

Shortly after joining Weldwood of Canada in 1996, I had to give a speech at our managers' conference in Whistler. As I stood at the podium and scanned the audience, I knew something wasn't quite right, but I couldn't place my finger on it. A few minutes later it dawned on me what was wrong.

After years of working with women in various leadership roles, I was now looking out on a sea of white male faces. The entire management group at all of our mills and at our head office was made up of only white males. The only two women in the room were in the far back corner. One was taking notes, and the other was responsible for the logistics of the meeting — i.e., getting coffee and snacks.

Unfortunately, the circumstances have not changed in B.C.'s forest sector in the intervening ten years. In too many companies and in too many boardrooms, women still have a long way to go.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT COMPUTER SYSTEM SECURITY

AND ROLE OF INFORMATION

AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

C. James: Yesterday the Minister of Labour and Citizens' Services suggested in this House that there had been previous successful attempts to breach the security of government data. My question to the minister: could he please outline for the House how many successful attempts have been made?

Hon. M. de Jong: The furthest back I was able to get records was for 1997. I can advise the House that according to those records, attempts similar to what was raised by the opposition yesterday apparently took place with this degree of regularity: on January 15, 1997; January 27; February 13; February 25; April 4; April 15; April 29; July 22; July 24; July 25; July 29; July 30; August 5; October 28; October 29.

In fact, there are apparently nefarious people out there who, on a regular basis, try to gain unauthorized entry to other people's records. What I'm proud of is the fact that this government has put in place a system whereby we're able to detect and prevent that from taking place and people's privacy being compromised.

[1430]

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

[ Page 2823 ]

C. James: Well, I'd like to remind the minister and government that the reason the public found out about this is because it was on the front page of the newspaper on Saturday morning, not because the government in fact informed the public that this was an issue.

I appreciate the history that the minister provided, but my question is the same question to the minister. How many successful attempts have this government and this minister followed up on when breaches have occurred?

Hon. M. de Jong: If the Leader of the Opposition would like, I will take her on a delightful journey, picking up where I left off. The fact of the matter is that people attempt to gain entry. We prevent….

Interjections.

Hon. M. de Jong: Members don't want to hear this. But I'm happy to share it….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Go ahead, minister.

Hon. M. de Jong: The Leader of the Opposition, I'm sorry to say, is trying to portray as a failure the fact that we have systems in place. In fact, since we became government, a common information technology system for the entire government — not the ad hoc system that was in place under the previous administration — whereby we are better equipped to detect where those attempts are made and to prevent them from occurring….

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

C. James: Once again, we see from this minister the same thing we've seen from this government for the last five years, which is that they never come clean with the truth for the public. This was very serious information that was breached. We learned about this information from the media, not from government itself.

Yesterday we learned of another breach of computers that, again, we did not hear about from the government itself. There is no accountability from the government. We found out, as well, yesterday that the Office of the Privacy Commissioner knew nothing about the case yesterday. In fact, it looked like the government was busy trying to cover its tracks instead of coming clean with the public.

So my question is again to the minister. Can he tell us why the Privacy Commissioner was not brought in to investigate as soon as it became clear that there was a breach in government security?

Hon. M. de Jong: You know, I spent a few years in opposition. Sooner or later, the Leader of the Opposition is going to learn that if you're going to cast about allegations of the sort that she is today, she'd better be prepared to back them up. The reason the Privacy Commissioner wasn't notified is that there was no breach of privacy.

The Leader of the Opposition may be desperate enough to want to play cute politics with something that this government and British Columbians take very seriously. But if she is not prepared to make those specific assertions…. There was no breach of people's privacy. It was an attempt by someone from outside to deposit material onto the government's network. We have passed that information on to the police, and they are investigating that individual and the attempts they made. Hopefully, the opposition's recklessness hasn't put that investigation in jeopardy.

M. Farnworth: What is reckless is making statements that privacy was not compromised. The minister cannot guarantee that, because one thing is for sure. If you can write a program to access a system, which in this case was done — that access was obtained for two months — then you can read the files on that program. You can read the files that you have accessed. So let's be clear about that, and the government should be upfront about that.

[1435]

Yesterday the minister said that the Privacy Commissioner was not told, because there was not a serious breach of privacy information. Can the minister tell this House who advised him that no personal information was at risk and whose contract would be on the line if personal information was at risk? And can he explain why the government, when computers were open for hackers to do who knows what — that he did not, to be on the safe side, personally insist that the Privacy Commissioner be called in at that time…?

Hon. M. de Jong: As I have, of late, spent considerable time tracing some of the history of how governments present and past have dealt with these matters, it is interesting to see how attitudes have changed. The reason I can provide the House, as I always try to do, with the best information I have at my disposal is because we have a system in place staffed by professional, dedicated civil servants whose task is focused on protecting the security of the private information that the government holds on behalf of British Columbians.

Something took place last week, or was reported last week, that no one was proud of. But to suggest, as the opposition is trying, that the constant attempts by hackers to intrude and deposit viruses somehow mean that the computer network that this government maintains on behalf of British Columbians isn't secure is a stretch and is completely out of step with the tack they took when they were in government.

We've spent $6 million upgrading the security of our system, and we're proud of the work that those people do.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain has a supplemental.

[ Page 2824 ]

M. Farnworth: We're all proud of the work that those people do, but what we're talking about is not an attempt. We're talking about a successful penetration of the government's computer systems that lasted for more than two months and allowed illegal criminal activity to take place. What I said before was that if you have the ability to write a program to access the system, you have the ability to read the information on that system.

The minister said yesterday that the Privacy Commissioner should only come in when it's appropriate. Well, we know that there was an intrusion. We know that if you intrude into the system, you have the ability to read the information. We know that the minister said that the files were erased. If that's not an appropriate time to call in the freedom-of-information commissioner, I don't know what is.

Again, will the minister tell us when it is appropriate for the freedom-of-information commissioner to come into an investigation?

Hon. M. de Jong: Well, the Opposition House Leader seems to be in possession of a great deal of information, seems to have drawn a great number of conclusions. I suppose the question I am obliged to ask is whether or not he…

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. M. de Jong: …and his colleagues have provided that information to the police investigating this matter.

He has drawn certain conclusions about the nature of the criminal activity taking place. I presume, therefore, that he has a basis upon which to draw those conclusions and assume that he has provided that information to the investigating authorities.

GOVERNMENT LIABILITY IN

SECURITY OF PERSONAL

INFORMATION RECORDS

L. Krog: In 2002 this government lost confidential documents on the softwood lumber dispute. Four years ago government hard drives were sold, and confidential information on them was read by the buyer. More recently we learned of a long-term access of the supposedly secure government computer network by outsiders. This weekend we learned of the auction of the taped records of 77,000 British Columbians containing private health records and other personal information.

Has the Attorney General conducted any assessment of the government's liability around these issues?

[1440]

Hon. M. de Jong: The reference to matters in the Forests Ministry is interesting, given that it was only in 1998 that the Ministry of Forests was hacked into. The computer in that case was used….

Interjection.

Hon. M. de Jong: Members don't want to hear this stuff, Mr. Speaker, but they asked the questions.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: Again, it's an interesting example because it is similar. No personal information was accessed, but the computer system was utilized to disseminate information — again, similar to what we're dealing with in that case. The interesting thing there was that the issue was first noticed by a computer consultant in Maryland, who tried to contact the government of the day, got no response and ultimately turned the situation over to the media.

The point is this. The member wants to conjure up this notion that people are willy-nilly gaining access to the computer network and gaining access to private information. That is not so. Further, the government has introduced and established a far more effective way of coordinating security for our computer network than was ever in place under the previous administration.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member for Nanaimo has a supplemental.

L. Krog: Seventy-seven thousand British Columbians' personal information — 77,000. We may hear the term "willy-nilly" in this House, but it's not very satisfactory to British Columbians.

Having heard the response, my question is to the Crown's senior legal adviser once again. What liability does the government now face in relation to these gross breaches of security? I would like to hear it from the Attorney General.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Listen to the answer.

Hon. M. de Jong: The member has asked the question. The member is learned counsel. He knows what the provisions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act are. It's there. There was a contravention not just of the provisions when, inadvertently, tapes were sold containing the information of private British Columbians, but no one is proud of that fact.

The member takes an incident that is very serious and attempts to link it to a challenge that computer networks of the size operated by the B.C. government face on a daily basis — and that is the nefarious attempts by people to gain access — and conjures up this notion that somehow people are walking in at will to gather information on individual British Columbians.

[ Page 2825 ]

It's not the case. We've got dedicated professionals. If anything, the incident the opposition raised regarding February 3 of this year proves how vigilant those officials are and the success of the system that's in place.

INVESTIGATION INTO

RELEASE OF GOVERNMENT RECORDS

ON PERSONAL INFORMATION

H. Lali: What started out as sensitive personal information of 77,000 British Columbians on 41 computer tapes being sold by this government at an open auction for a fistful of dollars turned into more tapes and more sensitive personal information being sold for a few dollars more.

Hon. Speaker, it is shockingly evident that the government has no handle on the security of personal information in its possession, that it is ignorant of what equipment and what information they're really selling. Under this Liberal government, the security of sensitive information of British Columbians has been breached — has seen breach after breach after breach followed by cover-up after cover-up after cover-up.

Will the minister stop covering up and finally tell this House: how many more computer tapes containing more sensitive information has this Liberal government auctioned off since taking office, after 2001?

[1445]

Hon. M. de Jong: I was wondering when the opposition was going to let the critic get in on the act today.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

[Applause.]

Hon. M. de Jong: That's interesting. I usually have to make a response before they clap, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Minister continues.

Hon. M. de Jong: Look, I appreciate that at a certain point in the session, the opposition will cling to an issue if they have nothing else in their reservoir of questions. I understand all that. In fairness, I have heard from a number of British Columbians with ideas, in the aftermath of what has taken place. I had a call the other day from someone who suggested we employ the new DBC-designed fifth-generation synaptic lockout technology with 4000 series mainframe interface. But of course I wouldn't do that without first canvassing the views of the opposition critic.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Member for Yale-Lillooet has a supplemental.

H. Lali: It seems that from the government side of the House, they don't want to take this issue very seriously. It also appears that cover-up and denial are the order of the day. All we get from this Liberal government is denial after denial after denial.

Yesterday we learned that government BlackBerrys containing sensitive information were also sold without purging. This House wants assurance, the people of British Columbia want assurance, that their government and the minister responsible for safeguarding their most personal and sensitive information have not further breached the security of that information or auctioned off any other tapes at fire-sale prices.

This government and this minister have failed to live up to their collective responsibility by allowing breach after breach and cover-up after cover-up. Will the minister responsible for safeguarding the people's sensitive information commit today to investigating this matter pertaining to any additional tapes being sold at fire-sale prices since 2001, and bring back the findings to this House?

Hon. M. de Jong: I am at a loss to explain how the member would not accept or understand that not only does the government take this seriously…. And I would have hoped, from the nature of the response that was offered in the immediate aftermath, that that would have been abundantly clear. But I would also hope that the member and his colleagues would derive some comfort from the fact that we have moved to eliminate all of the risk by imposing a ban on the sale of any of this equipment — in ways, quite obviously, that didn't exist previously. That's in place. That's how seriously this government takes the privacy rights of British Columbians.

BAN ON SALE OF GOVERNMENT

COMPUTER EQUIPMENT

B. Ralston: The minister refers to a ban on the sale by the government of computer equipment, and in a radio interview he said this ban applied to government departments within the control of government. As the minister knows, much of the personal information that British Columbians have is stored in the hands of private contractors. Will he commit today to extend that ban to private contractors like Maximus?

Hon. M. de Jong: To the member: thank you for the question.

To the extent that the various partners and contracted agents are bound by the terms of contracts that we have an ability to amend and in which we have the ability to extend that kind of ban, we certainly will and have.

[1450]

So the intention is to ensure that the private information that government holds — and needs to hold, quite frankly — on behalf of British Columbians is secured and that notwithstanding any of the technology that's out there — any of the scrubbing, any of the sani-

[ Page 2826 ]

tizing — never again do British Columbians have to fear that through the mistake of some hard-working public servant, their information will be inadvertently sold into the open market.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Surrey-Whalley has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: I just wanted to clarify what the minister's answer was. Is the minister now saying, and he's committing, that the contracts with private contractors…? He's made those inquiries, and those contracts will be amended to include that ban? Is that what the minister is committing to here today?

He referred at the end of his question to public servants. My concern is with those private contracts and those private contractors. So can the minister confirm that and clarify that answer here today?

Hon. M. de Jong: Again, fair question, and to the extent I created any ambiguity…. The intention is to extend the ban as far as we can into the network of partners that we have delivering the service, and where that requires alteration to contract, we're committed to so doing.

APPOINTMENT OF BRIAN BERGLUND

AS CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

FOR COMMUNITY LIVING B.C.

A. Dix: My question is to the Minister of Labour in his responsibilities as minister responsible for information systems in the government. This week Community Living B.C. announced that Brian Berglund had been appointed their chief information officer. Mr. Berglund was a principal actor in the Doug Walls affair, mentioned some 62 times in the Pricewaterhouse inquiry into the scandal.

I recommend in particular to the minister appendix D28 of the inquiry, which shows Mr. Berglund and Mr. Walls invoking the Premier's office to successfully pressure government officials to write off a private debt owed to the taxpayers.

My question to the minister is this. Why was Mr. Berglund hired as chief information officer, and what is the value of his contract?

Hon. M. de Jong: Actually, this member's expertise with computer technology is well known to this House, so I'm….

The member has questions relating to the appointment of an individual to a chief information officer position. It's an important position, and I'll take the question on notice.

RAW LOG EXPORTS

S. Fraser: Yesterday in the House, the Minister of Forests and Range stated that he'd spoken to communities regarding coastal forest policy. What he failed to do was listen to those communities.

This morning in Port Alberni there was a substantial protest on the highway — 200-plus people in the rain. These were environmentalists. They were forest workers — displaced forest workers — and community members. They were walking because raw logs are being shipped out of the region — a lot of raw logs — while forest workers have lost their jobs, and while mills are operating with great uncertainty and with sustainability and environmental issues being raised.

To the minister: will the minister agree to meet with the workers and residents of Port Alberni and listen to what they have to say about the impacts of this government's forest policy on coastal communities like Port Alberni?

Hon. R. Coleman: The protest today was with regards to some private land issues on private land forests within the farm licences. They're managed under forest development plans. Once removed from a tree farm licence, private lands are managed under the Private Managed Forest Land Act. The Private Managed Forest Land Council is an independent provincial agency established to administer the managed forest program and has held talks with the alliance that has some concerns about this.

The council is investigating the complaints about the effect of the logging trucks and the issues in and around water quality, as I understand it, and I understand that process is continuing.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

The member for Alberni-Qualicum has a supplemental.

[1455]

S. Fraser: Yes, I do. I take it that is a no, so I'll try something different.

In Port Alberni, logs are being shipped out at record high levels from private lands. Members of our caucus met with the Private Forest Landowners Association. They informed us that they will be lobbying the federal government to remove the surplus test requirements around raw-log exports. Will the minister be supporting the private forest landowners in lobbying the federal government to remove the surplus test requirements on private lands, essentially allowing unfettered exports?

Hon. R. Coleman: The member is referring to Notice 102, which is a federal statute that has to be removed by the federal government. I understand the private land owners are talking to the federal government, and they have spoken to me. I've made no undertaking to go to the federal government to have Notice 102 removed with regards to log exports from private lands.

There have always been issues in and around log exports in British Columbia. As the member knows, there is an export test. There is a test on the Vancouver

[ Page 2827 ]

Log Market with regards to pricing and the amount of logs that can be exported and for what reason.

That has always been a fairly dynamic situation in British Columbia, long before this government came to office. But it isn't an unfettered access to an export market anywhere in British Columbia.

B. Simpson: The previous member's question was very specific, and what this side of the House would like is a specific answer. Will the minister be supporting the lobby efforts on both private and public lands to remove the surplus test from whole-log exports from this province?

Hon. R. Coleman: Well, it's two questions in one. The export test is Notice 102 for the federal government on the private lands, as the member knows. We haven't said either way that we would go and support that because, frankly, it's a federal jurisdiction, and they're going to have to deal with that and come back to us at some point in time.

We've never said, and…. We have no intention of opening log exports in British Columbia. We have an export log market in B.C. It is established on the Vancouver Log Market. There's a test that's put and applied to that with regards to whether there's a surplus to market. If somebody comes in and bids for the lumber and has a use for the log, it isn't exported. But there are sometimes logs in B.C. — which, frankly, are not applicable to a particular market or use within our forest sector and our milling capacity — that do get exported, and there are some logs that actually get imported into British Columbia for other uses.

The reality is that we do not have a policy that says we're going to export logs in B.C. We're continuing the policy that has been in place for many years, and we're not about to change it.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Cariboo North has a supplemental.

ELIGIBILITY OF FOREST WORKERS

UNDER FORESTRY REVITALIZATION TRUST

B. Simpson: Well, thank you for the mini-lecture on whole-log exports. The issue is that the federal government will at some time ask the minister what the minister thinks about removing the surplus test on federal jurisdiction, and I'm hoping the minister at that time has an answer.

The other question in the Port Alberni situation is not just whole-log exports. There's a question of TFL 44 and whether or not 150 crew members of the Franklin River crew are eligible for compensation under the forestry revitalization trust. The minister has been asked that question by both the trust administrator and by Steelworkers. Will the minister answer that question today in the House? Are those 150 workers eligible under the trust? If not, why not?

Hon. R. Coleman: I will look into the details of the second part of that question. But let's be clear about something. We support jobs for British Columbians. Maybe the other side of this House doesn't want to see any capital investment and jobs for loggers to work in the bush and cut down trees and feed their families, but we support people that work in the forest sector in British Columbia.

[1500]

[End of question period.]

Interjections.

G. Coons: I seek leave to present a petition, hon. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Leave granted. Proceed.

Petitions

G. Coons: I have a petition from over 1,300 citizens of Prince Rupert, Port Ed and region asking to open all the necessary beds at Acropolis Manor to accommodate seniors that are on the wait-list.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, I have to consult my hard drive.

We're going to have throne speech debate in this chamber. In Committee A, it will be continued Committee of Supply — for the information of members, the Finance Ministry estimates.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. O. Ilich: I appreciate the opportunity to address the House and comment on this year's throne speech, which was delivered on February 14. This is an exciting time for our province. With the 2010 Olympic flag flying proudly in B.C.'s skies, the international spotlight has now turned squarely upon us.

Rather than shying away from the attention, though, now is our time to shine, to show the world we are leaders not just in the sport arena but in the cultural and social arena as well. It's our time to show the world we've got what they're looking for in terms of infrastructure, natural assets, employment and quality of life.

British Columbians are known for our ability to capture the positive energy of transformative change, and this year will be no exception as we prepare to mount a provincewide celebration in 2008 to celebrate British Columbia's proud 150-year history. We'll also be preparing for that worldwide celebration in 2010.

So I'm pleased to see that the throne speech outlines a vision of transformative change that includes my ministry's vision for further developing a creative economy in our province. A creative economy is one that attracts innovative, skilled, well-trained workers and thinkers to our province. It's vibrant and inclusive, and it thrives on arts and culture.

[ Page 2828 ]

I'd like to focus on those areas of the throne speech that are of particular interest to our ministry's many partners in the tourism, sport and arts sector, as well as those that benefit my constituency of Richmond. As a British Columbian and a mother, it gives me great comfort to see a renewed focus on support for our province's greatest asset. That's our children and our youth. As we strive to maximize our creative potential across the province, we must not overlook our young. They are the source of new insights, fresh ideas and uninhibited creativity. New measures outlined in the throne speech will help ensure they are safe, healthy and ready to learn.

Health care also figures prominently in the throne speech. As our population ages and technology improves, our health care system requires the very type of innovative management and solution-finding that a creative economy can provide.

I believe that our forward thinkers, with the input of British Columbians, will come up with a workable solution to keep us at the top of Canada's health care system. I know that both health care and children's services are priorities the people of Richmond share with our government.

[1505]

I'd like to move now to talk a little bit more about our government's vision for the B.C. economy. It can be summed up in two words: innovation and creativity. We believe that in all types of endeavours, success is built on creative and innovative ways of doing things better. We are committing significant resources to help build and grow our knowledge sectors throughout British Columbia. The lower mainland and some other parts of the province are already leading in this area, and we would want to extend its benefits to all regions.

Our creative industries now include film and television production, video game development, software, satellite communication, medical technologies, biological research and more. I'd like to note the recent success of some of our homegrown talent at the Academy Awards the other night, when one of our companies got the best picture award for a homegrown film.

In this new economy, our greatest assets are not our natural resources or buildings or machinery. Our greatest assets are our creative people. In that respect, our high-quality British Columbia lifestyle and world-class natural environment are major advantages in making this province a desirable destination for talented and well-trained people.

It takes competitive tax policies to create a competitive business environment, but it takes strong, progressive communities featuring desirable lifestyle opportunities to attract and retain the best creative people. Our Ministry of Tourism, Sport and the Arts has a vital role to play in strengthening culture and innovation across the province. The quality lifestyle activities and cultural opportunities provided by these sectors help make B.C. a place where creative people want to live and work.

This year's throne speech supports our vision for B.C.'s creative economy by identifying it as a provincial priority. For example, to encourage emerging industries and to attract, train and support highly skilled researchers, this throne speech provides an additional focus on research and innovation. We are also establishing a world centre for digital media education. In partnership with industry, the throne speech provides for the development of a new graduate program in digital media to capitalize on B.C.'s position as Canada's largest digital media hub.

Innovation is not restricted to these new knowledge-based industries. Many companies and entrepreneurs in tourism, manufacturing and resource industries are also highly creative and cutting-edge. Research and development, creativity and innovation are essential in all sectors of our economy if British Columbia hopes to compete with the best in the world. Tourism, sport and the arts, by their very nature, are highly competitive endeavours. The pressures of the entertainment and travel marketplace demand a creative and innovative response and do not allow for any other way of doing business.

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

As Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts, I am pleased to note that the throne speech includes many new priorities that will help us develop these vital sectors of our economy. British Columbia aims to double the tourism industry by 2015 and take advantage of its international exposure as host of the 2010 Winter Olympic Games, and Balanced Budget 2006 adds more money over three years to help meet that goal.

Key investments include: new funding for tourism investments; new money to build Gateway tourism centres at the Peace Arch and Merritt border crossings; $5 million more to help develop all-season resorts, adventure tourism and public recreation opportunities as part of the provincial resort strategy; and $3 million more to support hosting major international, national and community-based sporting events.

As well, the throne speech sets out a plan to promote foreign direct investment in B.C. and take advantage of economic opportunities presented by the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games as part of our government's Asia-Pacific focus. More precisely, it calls on the province to make B.C. the destination of choice for Asian tourists and to open our airways with direct flights to India, China and other Pacific nations. This is great news for the tourism industry, and it's great news for the city of Richmond.

To bring this closer to home, more than 15 million passengers annually pass through Vancouver International Airport in Richmond. YVR is the most important gateway in our province, and it's a vital component of my community's economy, providing jobs for many Richmond residents. Any increase in traffic through YVR is good news for Richmond and for British Columbia's tourism industry.

We believe we are in the beginning stages of a major increase in the number of visitors from China. The number of Chinese travellers coming here is expected to continue to skyrocket once Canada receives ap-

[ Page 2829 ]

proved-destination status, which will allow Chinese travellers to obtain tourist visas for Canada.

[1510]

Beijing agreed last year that it would grant the special status, and negotiations are underway about the details of the federal government level. With the approved-destination status, the Greater Vancouver area is expected to see half a million Chinese visitors in 2015, an increase of 600 percent from what we now receive in the greater Vancouver area. Vancouver International Airport has already seen air capacity jump last year to accommodate growth in Chinese travellers, and it will continue to be prepared for that.

As we prepare for that influx of visitors from China, the B.C. tourism industry has told us that one of their major concerns is the growing labour shortage in our tourism sector. As my colleague the Minister of Finance said a few weeks ago, it's a nice problem to have. Instead of people looking for jobs, we've got jobs looking for people. She pointed out that B.C.'s unemployment rate, already at a 30-year low, is expected to stay that way for another decade.

The demand for labour is ahead of supply in many sectors, particularly in tourism, and it's a challenge we are going to be very aggressive about as a government. With its focus on skills and training, the throne speech provides a direction to help meet this demand for skilled and trained people, particularly in tourism but in other sectors of our economy as well.

On the supply side, by providing major new funding for training, the provincial government will help more British Columbians connect with opportunities and achieve their potential. Our government, for example, will create 25,000 new student spaces in post-secondary institutes by 2010. That's the largest expansion in advanced education in 40 years. Many of these spaces will be in tourism-related programs offered in our post-secondary institutes, like the Richmond campus of Kwantlen University College.

In the same week as the throne speech was delivered, B.C.'s tourism sector kicked off a $500,000 campaign to recruit an additional 84,000 workers. That's about 23 jobs a day over the next decade. This demonstrates the magnitude of the challenge we must meet in order to be ready for the 2010 Winter Games and beyond, as B.C.'s tourism industry makes a quantum leap in growth.

Balanced Budget 2006 includes good news for our resort industry. The budget allocates $6 million to enhance capacity in the Ministry of Environment to assess permitting requests and to increase the ability of the environmental assessment office to conduct assessments in a timely manner.

Our resort industry employs 26,000 British Columbians and generates about $2 billion in direct and indirect spending every year across the province. Time truly is money, and while environmental assessment is important to preserving B.C.'s natural assets, time saved in that approval process helps ensure that the industry remains strong and competitive on the international playing field.

As the tourism sector grows toward doubling by 2015, keeping up with transportation infrastructure will be important. I'm pleased to note that the throne speech and the budget speech continue to recognize the significance of public and private sector investment in such projects as the Sea to Sky Highway, the Bennett bridge in Kelowna, the Cariboo connector in northern B.C. and the Trans-Canada Highway through Kicking Horse Canyon.

All of these are major arteries that open our province both for tourism and industry. Major improvements in the Sea to Sky Highway are of particular importance to our tourism industry, as this route is the key land link between greater Vancouver and the Winter Olympic sites in Whistler.

Of course, the province's $435 million commitment to the RAV line will play an important role in our Olympic hosting capacity, while also directly benefiting the people of Richmond by reducing congestion in our community. Our government's ongoing commitment to improve traffic flow in the lower mainland's Gateway region will also greatly improve travel for visitors and residents alike.

With 2010 now approaching faster than ever, sport performance is a growing priority here in B.C., and I know that goals of owning the podium are spreading at the federal level as well. Our government recognizes the inherent value of amateur sport, from beginners to the elite ranks, and I'm proud that our government continues to make sport participation a priority.

We have found innovative ways to direct more resources to our amateur sport system in all parts of the province. Through Sport B.C., PacificSport and other provincewide sport organizations, we will dramatically expand funds available for Kidsport, sport travel assistance programs, support for coaches and coaching, and new resources to give our most competitive young athletes a winning edge.

[1515]

We are hoping that those programs will translate into more medals for British Columbia and for Canada at the 2010 Olympics. We know we were very proud of the athletes these past few weeks in Torino, and we want to give them all the support we can for the Olympics coming up.

Cross-ministry programs like ActNow B.C. continue to encourage all British Columbians to pursue active lifestyles. Our government is also increasing funding this year by $1.2 million for the sport, recreation and volunteer

section of the ministry. That funding will help boost sport events hosting, sport tourism and volunteer capacity across the province. Again, this will help B.C. communities prepare for the 2010 Winter Olympics and Paralympics and the opportunities for longer-term growth that this event will create in regions across the province.

Art and culture are well provided for in the throne speech. In fact, plans to celebrate B.C.'s 150th anniversary as a colony in 2008 are featured prominently and early. This will be a birthday to remember. Starting this year, we will be aggressively marketing this event throughout the province.

[ Page 2830 ]

This is going to be a provincewide celebration, and you can be sure we're going to be showcasing B.C.'s strong creative talent. British Columbians of first nation, Asian, European, Sikh and Punjab descent, along with all other people, young and old, who've had a hand in making B.C. a better place to live over the past 150 years, are invited to the table. We want to make sure every British Columbian has a chance to share and participate.

Last year our government supported artistic and cultural programs in 225 communities across the province through the B.C. Arts Council grants. These included everything from art galleries to symphony performances to literary festivals to book publishing.

My own community of Richmond is rich in diverse culture, with a wealth of recreation facilities, heritage sites, parks, trails, libraries, galleries and performance spaces. Many of these have been supported over the years by the B.C. Arts Council, and I am pleased that this year's throne speech continues to recognize the importance of arts and culture in our province by setting directions to initiate projects like the new Asia-Pacific museum of trade and culture, a northwest aboriginal art and culture centre and a new world women's history museum.

In 2005 our government provided a grant of $25 million to establish the B.C. arts renaissance fund under the auspices of the Vancouver Foundation. The purpose of this fund was to provide matching funds for arts and culture organizations to help secure their future by helping build permanent endowment funds.

The response to this fund has been tremendous. Nearly $5.5 million was distributed in the renaissance fund's first year of operation. That happened just last week. I'm very proud that the money has gone out to community arts organizations. We're going to be seeing that fund continue to be a positive force over the next number of years. Forty new permanent endowments for B.C. arts organizations have been created as a result of that fund in this year alone.

From Vancouver to the Kootenays to our northern communities, these endowments will help secure the future for these vibrant cultural organizations. It's the right kind of investment, and it recognizes the need for partnerships, reward, innovation and long-term vision while also helping provide stability.

British Columbia's tourism, sport and art sector are more than just multimillion-dollar contributors to our provincial economy. They are the foundation for the kinds of creative cities and towns where the most talented and creative people from around the world will want to live, work, play and invest. They help provide British Columbians with a quality of life based on good health and fitness, a rich culture and heritage, and unmatched natural beauty.

It is a way of life that creative people around the world want to share, as I found out recently when I had the honour of representing British Columbia in our official delegation to the 2006 Winter Games in Torino, Italy. The hit attraction at the Torino games was B.C.-Canada Place, our log house pavilion. It was a huge draw.

In the few weeks I was there, it drew more people to the log house than attended the opening ceremonies of the games. There were long lineups to get in, and everybody was very much impressed not just by the log house but by the technology inside the log house.

[1520]

As I see the response to that log house, I can see we're going to have a lot of visitors in 2010. People are willing to stand in line to see a log house. I can imagine how many people are going to come to visit us. This suggests to me that as B.C. prepares for the next Winter Games in 2010, we already have great momentum to work with. It's a great example of the synthesis that can occur when tourism, sport and the arts work together.

The throne speech gives us direction to create more of this kind of international presence and a high profile for British Columbia. The 180,000 people and the more than 50,000 families in my community of Richmond understand that transformative change is both necessary and desired if British Columbia is to maintain its leadership position in Canada and the world.

Our province is rich in culture and vibrantly creative. We claim many natural assets that attract visitors from all over the world, and we strive for athletic excellence. I'm glad to see that this year's throne speech continues to set a vision that builds on these strengths and recognizes our leadership capacity within the greater creative economy, but only by building on the innovative, creative economy will we reach our future prosperity.

Madam Speaker, esteemed colleagues and honoured guests, I appreciate this opportunity to comment on the 2006 throne speech.

G. Coons: Members, fellow British Columbians, those in the gallery, I rise today on the occasion of responding to the government's throne speech and how it impacts on a diverse riding such as the North Coast, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank the constituents of the riding for allowing me to represent them.

I would also like to recognize that today, March 8, is International Women's Day. Today is an occasion marked by women's groups around the world, commemorated at the United Nations, and is designated in many countries as a national holiday. When women on all continents — often divided by national boundaries and by ethnic, linguistic, cultural, economic and political differences — come together to celebrate this day, they can look back to a tradition that represents at least nine decades of struggle for equality, justice, peace and development. Let us take today to honour the work of the women that have come before us to build stronger communities and a stronger society.

Madam Speaker, being new to the political scene, it is one with many ups and downs. The learning curve is more of a brick wall, it seems, as one struggles to find outcomes that best represent where we all really want to be. It's interesting that when someone walks into my constituency office or phones my ever-talented constituency assistant in Prince Rupert, Pauline Woodrow, it seems it's not big business and the well-to-do but the component of our society that needs and deserves the

[ Page 2831 ]

most help and support. We are forever running into the policies and regulations that seem to assault the rights of the most disadvantaged. Whether it is the poor, the students, seniors or workers, we need to treat people with dignity and respect.

The Speech from the Throne delivered on February 14, 2006, outlined the direction of the provincial government for this year and identified a number of priorities relevant to B.C. first nations: regionalization of aboriginal child and family service delivery; modernization of the provincial curriculum to give students a better understanding of aboriginal heritage and culture; creation of new incentives to help aboriginal students complete high school; establishment of an aboriginal internship program to provide learning opportunities in the public service; recruiting of qualified aboriginal people in the public sector; and providing new options for housing.

The speech also described new courts for communities and first nations, stating that the provincial government will work with aboriginal leaders to examine the potential for correctional facilities that better meet aboriginal cultural needs. As a member of the Select Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs, I commit to working on the advancement of these vital issues with the minister responsible to ensure that first nations throughout this province have advocacy when and where they need it.

The only indication of the plight of seniors in the throne speech is the government's intentions to deal with the transformational force of our aging population and create a Premier's Council on Aging and Seniors Issues. I can imagine the makeup of this B.C. Liberal hand-picked advisory council. This government seems to favour those with few dissenting opinions, as is evident with the Premier's Progress Board, consisting basically of CEOs and big business and with little representation from labour, communities, youth, first nations or seniors.

[1525]

The Minister of Transportation made it quite clear to British Columbians in last week's question period that he does not represent those constituents who are not card-carrying B.C. Liberal members. He wouldn't meet with concerned ferry-dependent community members from Quadra and Cortes islands, because he thought the protest was organized by someone who was not a Liberal.

Mr. Jim Abram, the electoral area director for area J of the Comox-Strathcona regional district, was accused of partisan politics by the Minister of Transportation, and he, along with many others throughout British Columbia, found that offensive — so offensive that Mr. Abram penned a letter to the Premier. I'd like to share a few of those comments. These are Mr. Abram's comments to the Premier:

Your minister felt it necessary to turn the valid concerns of more than 200 people, many of them my constituents, that were gathered outside of the Legislature in peaceful and respectful protest into a partisan mockery, dismissing their valid concerns while trying to bring personal politics of individuals to the forefront. I found this behaviour to be absolutely unacceptable and despicable.

When the public is forced to deal with the providers of their marine highway service requirements and that entity refuses to be accountable for their actions and decisions, then the public expects to go to the body that created that entity — our government — no matter what their political stripe may be. When they go to their government and are told that they cannot meet with the appropriate party in that government — your Minister of Transportation — I would like you to tell me where they are supposed to have their concerns addressed.

They, of course, come to me and other local represen tatives as their voice to other levels of government, but this is not the jurisdiction of local government. So I ask you once again, Mr. Premier, where are they to have their legitimate concerns addressed?

Madam Speaker, this is a vital question that both the Premier and the Minister of Transportation need to address, and I hope they do, to the satisfaction not only of Mr. Abram but of all British Columbians.

Just a side note. Both the Premier and Mr. Abram had the honour and privilege of being presidents of the UBCM. I would hope that the Premier answers his letter.

If I can get back to the Premier's Council on Aging and Seniors Issues, I would like to consider the chances that the members of the Premier's advisory council are going to be geographically and income-neutral. That is probably as good as hearing the Premier say he wouldn't rip up contracts. As a tribute to seniors, I would hope that all seniors groups and organizations are involved in the seniors council — from every region of the province, not just those whose current B.C. Liberal memberships are up to date.

During the provincial campaign I was approached by many seniors with numerous concerns. Issues of health, housing and income for seniors were high on the priority list. I continually heard about the negative impacts of this government's policies on seniors, and the views of seniors were based on the promises made by the Premier and his government.

Seniors and seniors organizations throughout British Columbia reported on this Liberal government's term in office in three areas. They reported on health, housing and seniors' income. In the case of health, the Premier and this government closed public intermediate and long-term care facilities, closed hospitals and emergency rooms, cut home support and home care.

In the case of housing, they separated married couples who lived in intermediate care facilities. They froze seniors supportive housing projects. They used federal money dedicated to housing for private assisted living.

In the case of seniors' income, the Premier and this government increased Medical Services Plan premiums by 50 percent. They dramatically hiked the cost of prescription drugs to over 80 percent for seniors. They increased energy bills and forced 80 percent of seniors to pay for medical services previously covered.

Madam Speaker, seniors throughout this province have indicated that this government has failed on every test in these three areas. What is even worse is that these cuts came as a complete surprise to seniors, because the Premier and his government were elected on the promise of improving health care, seniors housing and increasing their income.

[ Page 2832 ]

Seniors deserve better than not being told the truth about having their retirement plans substantially undermined. Never before in our province have seniors gone through humiliating situations where couples are being separated or lack sufficient income to pay the deductible on vital prescriptions. Something has gone terribly wrong in this province if a government allows situations like this to occur, and this government has failed seniors. If you are a senior who is healthy and lucky enough to escape the impact of these policies, I would consider that senior fortunate.

Seniors deserve respect and security. A friend of mine who is a senior reminded me of an appropriate Franklin D. Roosevelt quote:

Governments can err, Presidents do make mistakes, but the immortal Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the coldblooded and the sins of the warmhearted on different scales. Better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omission of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.

[1530]

Seniors throughout the province, prior to the last election, let all candidates know that B.C. Liberals promised to deliver health care when and where British Columbians need it. The Liberals also promised to protect society's seniors and the most vulnerable. but the seniors tell the real story of the Liberal record on health care.

They promised 5,000 new intermediate and long-term care beds for seniors by 2006, but they closed many beds. They closed 1,270 hospital beds from 2002 to 2004. They closed or downgraded services in over a dozen hospitals, including hospitals in Kimberley, Delta, Sparwood, Enderby, Lillooet, Summerland, Vancouver, New Westminster, Richmond, Kootenay Lake, Castlegar, Ladysmith, Burnaby, Shuswap Lake, Victoria and Cumberland.

Wait times increased by 30 percent on average since 2001. The Vancouver Coastal Health Authority alone reduced home support services to over 5,000 residents requiring assistance in their homes. We're seeing that in my home community of Prince Rupert, as cuts are taking effect as we speak.

Pharmacare costs increased for over 400,000 seniors; 17 drugs from Pharmacare were cut; MSP premiums increased by 50 percent. This government raised Pharmacare deductibles for the poor. They privatized MSP billings to Maximus, an American company, potentially making private B.C. records subject to disclosure under the USA Patriot Act.

They delisted physiotherapy, chiropractic, acupuncture and eye exams for MSP coverage. Diagnostic services like MRI and CT scans were contracted out. Also contracted out were more surgeries to private, for-profit clinics after promising to make this unnecessary. Seniors continued to see further undermining of our public health care.

This government also cancelled bus passes for seniors but later reinstated those after intense public outcry. They cancelled the audio book program for the blind. Mind you, Madam Speaker, they partially restored the funding — again, after public outcry. Our seniors are too important to be pushed aside and treated as a commodity, as they have been for the last five years.

There was also an indication in the throne speech that several steps had been taken to protect women against violence, and more steps will be added. After years of cuts to government and social programs into women's centres, this is far too late — far too late for the 34 missing and murdered young women along the highway of tears.

It is clear that the recent murder of a 14-year-old aboriginal student has not only stunned aboriginal communities in the city of Prince George, but it has also brought to the forefront the critical issues of race, poverty, women's rights, the isolation of youth and our justice system.

Professional criminal profilers have recently stated publicly that many of the murders that have occurred along the highway of tears may be the work of a serial killer, and the Lheidli T'enneh Nation is issuing an urgent call for a community symposium about the highway of tears. This symposium will be March 30 and 31 in Prince George.

I call on this government to take a leadership role, not just another band-aid approach, concerning the deaths along Highway 16 from Prince George to Prince Rupert before any further atrocities occur to young aboriginal women in the north.

I must also acknowledge a courageous woman who is partaking on the highway of tears awareness walk, which will be leaving Prince Rupert March 11 — this weekend — and arriving in Terrace on March 17. Florence Naziel is a 56-year-old grandmother who has two daughters and six sons. She is Frog clan from the Wet'suwet'en Nation, and she lives in Moricetown.

One of Florence's cousins has a daughter who is missing from Highway 16. Florence plans on walking from Rupert to Terrace, challenging herself to walk 20 to 30 kilometres per day in honour of the families of the missing women on the highway of tears and to keep the awareness and concern in the forefront.

Florence states: "As an aboriginal person, my heart goes out to all the missing women of all nationalities throughout British Columbia and across Canada." She challenges any aboriginal or non-aboriginal to continue the walk with her, as they will tag off with teams walking not only from Rupert to Terrace but from Terrace to Prince George later on in May. "People can pitch in and help us walk," she says.

I participated last September in the highway of tears walk organized by the Hope Haven Transition House in Prince Rupert, and I will be joining Florence in her brave struggle to raise awareness.

[1535]

I remember way back — way back — when the B.C. Liberals and their supporters ran ads claiming "B.C. is back." Unfortunately, they were right. Under the Liberals, B.C. has moved back. It's disturbing to realize how far back we've moved. B.C. is back to 1993, the last year the minimum wage was $6 per hour. B.C. is back to

[ Page 2833 ]

1987, the last time there were no class-size limits for grades four to 12. B.C. is back to 1979, the last time people had to work more than 40 hours a week without overtime. B.C. is back to 1927, the last time employers could hire 12-year-old children.

Where we really need to get back to is making our public education system the highest priority. Children cannot and should not have their education depend on how well the economy is doing while they are in school. The education we provide in the K-to-12 system is a foundation for the life and future of the individuals in our classrooms at any given time. Funding for that education must be stable and adequate to ensure that every student gets the resources and necessary support that he or she needs to be a successful learner and future citizen.

Over the last five years of this government, the Liberals have underfunded public education; downloaded major costs of school boards, forcing them to cut services; changed school calendars; closed 113 schools; increased class sizes; reduced the services of specialist teachers; and terminated the employment of over 2,500 young and able teachers. The Liberals didn't have to do that.

The decision of this Liberal government, immediately after the election in 2001, to give tax cuts to a well-to-do segment of the population set the stage for the underfunding and resultant cuts in education that are the hallmark of their five years in office. And 28 one-time education funding announcements in 26 months are symbolic of this government's inability to manage secure and stable funding for one of our most important public services.

When there were minor legal victories against this Liberal assault, the Liberals simply changed the law. They have created an imbalance at the bargaining table in favour of the employer that takes us, again, back 20 years. There were favourable rulings against this government's actions from the International Labour Organization of the United Nations, but the rulings have been ignored by the Liberals.

Key to its education funding cuts was government legislation that stripped from teachers' collective agreements existing provisions on class size and composition and specialist teacher staffing ratios. That forced school boards to cut services to students that were protected by the agreement. The government also completely eliminated collective agreements in a number of teacher locals in amalgamated school districts.

Respect comes when rights are recognized and accepted. It is not possible for a government to say that it respects teachers and the work they do in the classroom, when it is not prepared to grant the basic rights accessible to other organized employees and professions in society. This government needs to go back to the classroom and learn how to work with teachers and elected trustees to ensure that public education is a highest priority.

The Minister of Education may want to tighten the leash, if she controls it, on her deputy minister as he sneaks around the province giving secret and covert workshops on how to create schools as corporations. This, coupled with a hidden agenda of eliminating or regionalizing out of locally elected trustees…. The importance of locally elected trustees is that they know what is happening in their communities and make decisions based on the needs that are out there. In northern B.C. decisions for regionalized areas do not work for health care, and they certainly will not work for educational decisions.

[1540]

I'm truly disappointed that a key missing component of the throne speech was how this government was going to protect and oversee our environment — not one mention of the impact of climate change, despite having it as one of its five great goals: to lead the world in environment management. The brief reference to alternative energy forming an integral part of the government's expanded energy, in my mind, will hopefully put to rest the pipe dream of offshore oil and gas exploration along our pristine coast lines.

Water and oil do not mix. The unanimous coastal first nations report concerning offshore exploration highlighted the need for all levels of governments to respect cultural heritage and tradition. First nations communities up and down the coast say no to any seismic testing and any exploration. The moratorium must stay in place.

Two weeks ago the Tofino–Long Beach Chamber of Commerce passed a unanimous motion opposing the lifting of the moratorium that bans drilling for oil off the west coast of Vancouver Island. This motion also follows the same sentiments passed by the district of Tofino earlier in the week. The Tofino–Long Beach Chamber of Commerce, which represents over 240 businesses on the west coast of Vancouver Island and is one of the largest regional business organizations on the Island, opposes the moratorium. Local Vancouver Island artist Gail Ryon sums it up quite well with the comment: "Oil belongs on canvases, not on beaches."

The Priddle report, which the federal government undertook, clearly echoes the sentiment of the majority of British Columbians. Over 75 percent say we must maintain the moratorium. The B.C. public has been pretty consistent about their desire to avoid the environmental disasters that would come with offshore oil and gas development along B.C.'s rugged, wind-swept, earthquake-prone coast. It's time to end the uncertainty and legislatively ban offshore oil and gas development on Canada's Pacific coast.

I found it…

Interjection.

[ Page 2834 ]

Deputy Speaker: Order, members.

G. Coons: …an interesting presentation, as I mentioned before to the minister responsible, at the Waves of Opportunity conference last October. This government, under the integrated land management bureau, presented a workshop or a presentation on oil spill risks in B.C. from hydrocarbon exploration and development. "Separating Myth from Reality" was the name of the presentation. The statement "the B.C. coast is globally significant, and therefore offshore oil and gas activity should be prohibited" had this conclusion from the government:

B.C.'s marine communities are not globally significant in terms of biological composition, structure and vulnerability to oiling. However, they are globally significant in terms of their intactness and importance to first nations.

It continues, saying:

In addition, coastal complexity may magnify the impacts of a spill

on first nations as resources are concentrated in a small geographical area.

I trust that the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, whose responsibility it is, will include this information in his response or the ministry's response to the consultation process about the possible impacts of offshore oil and gas.

Other environmental priorities that I believe need to be addressed over the next few years, as do many others throughout the province, include enacting provincial endangered species legislation. We must also keep public lands in public hands. Through our opposition caucus, the member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows has brought forth a very progressive motion that underlies the true principles that should guide park management.

In addition, we must consider a ban on the B.C. grizzly bear hunt. Also, many think that salmon farms must be kept out of the ocean and on the land in an ecologically responsible manner. That is something that we need to work towards in our select committee.

In my conclusion, I'm thankful for the opportunity to speak to the throne speech, and I look forward to working with all the members in the House in making British Columbia the best place in the world for all of us to be.

[1545]

Hon. P. Bell: I'm very pleased to be able to follow the member for North Coast. It's no wonder that the initials of this member's party are NDP — which as we all know stands for negative, destructive and pessimistic — because that's all we've heard from him. Here's an individual that comes from a riding where we put $185 million in a northern development initiative to allow all of the northern communities to work and develop industries and expand their resources and look at new economic initiatives not fettered by government but actually physically controlled by local communities.

Here's a member who doesn't even know that on Monday of this week in the Port of Prince Rupert, phase one for a new container facility — $130 million — broke ground. Did we hear that? I didn't hear that from him. I didn't hear that from him at all. Why is he so negative? Why is he so destructive? It's a $130 million project — tons of jobs, potential for lots of economic activity. He never even mentioned it. Monday this week.

What about the new college in Prince Rupert that was built under this government? I didn't hear him comment about that. I guess he doesn't want the new college. Is that what we're hearing?

What about the legislative reform that we've implemented as a result of this government's activities — a half-hour question period now…

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, members.

Hon. P. Bell: …and all of the various initiatives around the special legislative committee? He did comment briefly, although I see he has come to the conclusion already that aquaculture is a bad thing.

I'm surprised he would waste his time, because he just indicated to us a few seconds ago that, in fact, his view of the world is not to be tainted by the notion that there may be a successful aquaculture industry out there, if science is able to substantiate that. He just indicated that the only aquaculture industry that he would find acceptable would be a land-based one. So I'm not sure why he's wasting his time.

What about the new LNG plant in the member for Skeena's riding — the new LNG plant that's going ahead?

I simply don't understand why this member is so negative, so destructive and so pessimistic. There are so many good things going on in that member's riding as a result of activities of this government: finally, diversification; a container port that will bring literally hundreds of millions of dollars of investment; the northern development initiative; the physician training that's now happening in the north, which will finally enable us to retain the types of physicians we need.

I just don't get it. I don't understand why he's so negative, why he's so destructive and why he's so pessimistic. Clearly, that member does not look at a water glass and understand that it's far more than half full; it's virtually full in his riding.

I have a challenge for him. I have a challenge for him and all of the members of the opposition. We're going to vote on the throne speech later on tonight, and I want to know something. I want to know if they actually stand up for the five principles of the Canada Health Act or not.

They're going to have an opportunity tonight. That's clearly articulated in the throne speech. They are going to have an opportunity tonight to decide whether or not they stand for the Canada Health Act or not and whether they stand for the addition of a sixth principle, for actually adding the principle of sustainability to the Canada Health Act. I don't want to presuppose what these members are going to vote for.

[ Page 2835 ]

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, order, please. Members, the minister has the floor.

Hon. P. Bell: Let them get it off their chest, Madam Speaker. They just don't understand how the dynamic of this is supposed to work. They actually have an opportunity tonight….

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, members.

Minister, please.

Members, we listened to the member for North Coast. I would appreciate if we could hear the minister speak.

Hon. P. Bell: They actually have an opportunity to tell us tonight whether or not they stand for the principles of the Canada Health Act. Do they think that they should be enshrined in legislation in this province? Do they think we should add "sustainable"? If they do, then they will stand up and vote in favour of the throne speech tonight. We're going to find out just in a matter of hours, and I throw that challenge out to them to find out whether or not they actually do stand up for the Canada Health Act.

I am proud of what's been represented in the throne speech, specifically around health care but collectively around many different issues, and I want to spend a few minutes talking about these individual issues because I think they are very, very important.

British Columbia has a tremendous history over the last number of years around health care — the fact that we've added physician training seats and nurse training seats around the province, and the fact that we haven't been afraid to think outside the box and look at new opportunities in health care. I want to talk about one of them that actually is located in my riding, and that's in the district of Mackenzie, a community of about 5,500 people.

[1550]

They had a very nice hospital in Mackenzie — underutilized, inefficient in the way it was being utilized. We went back and took a serious look at it under a previous Health Minister — how we could approach a new and innovative set of services and provide those to Mackenzie. They did some renovations in the hospital. They added some physician offices in the hospital, so the doctors actually work in the hospital, but I'll tell you a couple of other things that happened.

They have added an office now so that a chiropractor can come up from Prince George, on a weekly basis, and actually work inside the hospital and provide those services — very innovative; never had access to chiropractic services before, and now a very efficient way of delivering those services.

Physiotherapy. The hospital has been able to partner up with industry in the Mackenzie area and actually bring in a physiotherapist on a regular basis as well. Instead of people having to drive two hours from Mackenzie down to Prince George to get those services, they're actually able to have them in the community. It's brought some very real stability to physicians in Mackenzie, because they know that they have a series of services being provided to them.

It was difficult to make that change. It was not easy, but the district of Mackenzie pulled together and realized that they needed to start thinking out of the box, and they brought those suggestions to us. We took them to the Minister of Health. He reviewed them. He looked at the opportunities, and we moved ahead and developed a model — through a partnership with constituents in Mackenzie — that is providing exceptional health services at this point. I'm telling you, it's worked extremely well and can work well in many other communities around the province.

The throne speech asked a question…. I think this is another interesting challenge out to the members opposite. It asked the question: does it really matter to patients where and how they obtain their surgical treatment if it's paid for with public funds? So is this actually about how you pay for services or who provides the services?

I think members on this side of the House think that's an appropriate question to ask of our constituents. We're going to find out tonight, in a couple of hours, whether or not members opposite believe that's an appropriate question to ask, because they're going to have an opportunity to vote on it. I think it's going to be interesting to see whether they actually want to engage their constituents and ask those questions and see if it is appropriate or not to go out and talk about: is the issue who pays for the service or who provides the service? I think it'll be interesting to find out where they sit on that question.

There have been some very good, positive shifts, I believe, in the education system just over the last few months in particular — certainly articulated in this throne speech. The Premier and the Minister of Education have committed to visiting every single school district in the province and talking to educators, students, administrators, school trustees, parents and everyone in the education system, and really getting a sense on the ground of what the key issues are.

I know my colleague from Prince George–Mount Robson, the Minister of Education and Deputy Premier, has already relayed some very interesting comments to me that she's received in the education system — simple things we can do that will make a huge difference to the quality of education that we're providing.

We should be proud of our education system. We've got a great education system, and we're continuing to increase the amount of money in the system year over year over year. Certainly, each individual student is receiving far more funding than they ever have historically. Even though there's reduced enrolment, we're seeing the expansion of education funding.

The new virtual school that's being brought forward by the Minister of Education, I think, will be an excellent example of how you provide technical ser-

[ Page 2836 ]

vices to remote communities. I represent a riding that's almost 400 miles long from bottom to top — very, very small communities located in isolated areas; communities that we've been able to link up through high-speed Internet services. This virtual school will make the difference between some of those students being able to take something like a physics 12 class at home or having to travel 300 or 400 miles to a secondary school where they can get that class.

The notion of a virtual school is something that is very appealing to MLAs such as myself, who have very small, diverse communities throughout their riding. I think it's going to be a fantastic service.

I'm also very excited in the B.C. Hub for technology strategy to integrate research and commercialization. This is something that is very near and dear to my heart. I think it's extremely critical that we look at how we continue to build sustainable resource industries.

[1555]

In my riding there are no fewer than five pulp mills, six sawmills, a chemical manufacturing plant, an oil refinery and — my favourite — a brewery. It is a very diverse riding. A tremendous amount of industrial activity takes place in the riding, but the vast majority of it is related to the resource sectors. We need to continue to build those resource sectors if northern British Columbia is going to be strong. That means a focus on mining technology, a focus on energy technology and a focus on forest technology.

The member for North Coast actually came clean, and I'm kind of glad he came clean, because not more than 15 minutes ago he told us that he's against offshore oil and gas under any circumstance. That's good. We now know that the member for North Coast does not support offshore oil and gas under any circumstance.

I can't understand why a member would have such a closed mind, why he wouldn't want to look at the science and the technology. I'm not sure that he actually wants to have big oil tankers going up and down the coast. Maybe that's the alternative to offshore oil and gas, as opposed to being able to extract it in an environmentally friendly way. So why not think outside the box? Why not take a look at the science? But that member has clearly closed his mind to any of those opportunities — again very negative, destructive and pessimistic. I guess that stands for NDP, if I'm not mistaken, Madam Speaker.

The notion around the launch of the B.C. foundation for natural resources and engineering research is very positive, I think. It will pay big dividends to my communities as we continue to work in the resource sectors, whether it be mining, energy, forestry or agriculture.

One of the other points that was made in the throne speech — which I guess we're going to find out in just a couple of hours whether or not the members opposite support — is our commitment to push for a longer minimum sentence to serious offenders. It's going to be interesting to me, because we're going to have an opportunity to find out where they stand on this issue.

I can tell you where I stand. I stand for longer sentences for criminals who commit serious crimes. There is no question about that. I'll stand all day and defend that. We're going to find out in a couple of hours whether the members opposite actually agree with that notion or whether they think that perhaps there should be shorter sentences. Maybe that's their view of the world.

We're going to find that out in a couple of hours, because every one of them is going to have an opportunity to stand up and tell us whether or not they think it's appropriate to ask the federal government to support longer sentences for serious criminals. Again, it's something that I'll support and defend all day long. I haven't actually heard any of them, whether they think that's appropriate or not…. So we're going to find that out tonight in just a couple of hours.

Maybe they're going to surprise us. Maybe they're going to stand up and join us and say: "We stand for stiffer sentences for serious criminals." We'll find out in just a couple of hours.

Another thing that's very, very innovative and that I'm excited about is the initiatives around the new housing strategy that the Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing will be bringing forward. You know, this is about actually providing services for people, and one of the things I've noticed about the NDP is that it doesn't actually seem to matter, from their perspective, whether or not you're providing services to people. It seems like it's more about the service provider than it is about the services that you provide to people.

I think what they don't understand is that it's actually the electorate, the people we provide those services to, that we're responsible to. It doesn't really matter who it is that provides those services, as long as those services are provided in a way that meets the individual constituent needs. The new housing strategy that's aimed at providing far more choice, far more flexibility and a greater level of services will be, I think, a very, very positive thing.

Another thing that we're going to find out is whether or not the members opposite support our effort to launch a new federal-provincial action plan to provide for increased skills, training and development through national collaboration. Now, I know they've been talking, on the opposite side, about the importance of expanding skills training, and we're going to find out whether their words really are shallow and hollow or whether they actually mean something. A couple of hours from now, they're going to have a chance to stand up and say whether or not they think it's a good thing that we actually try and work with the federal government to develop a national strategy.

I think the focus on the Pacific gateway is critically important. There is a huge shift taking place internationally right now. The economic power base of the world is shifting from North America and Europe to Asia, and we'd better grasp that and understand it, because if we don't, we're going to get left behind. Just think of that for a second, because British Columbia is

[ Page 2837 ]

the only Pacific province in Canada and is located in a very logical place to take advantage of this economic shift.

[1600]

I've actually never heard any of the members opposite talk about the Pacific gateway, talk about the notion that this is an important strategy. You'd think they would come out and support that in their attempt to actually be non-partisan and identify key strategies.

I'm just amazed that the member for North Coast didn't bring up the fact that the Port of Prince Rupert actually broke ground this week for construction of the new container facility. That is incredibly good news, a key part of our Pacific gateway strategy. Yet the member never even mentioned it, never even bothered to mention the good news that was being made there.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

Another key component of the throne speech that I am very proud of — to a new Madam Speaker; we have multiple Madam Speakers — is the fact that we are going to make the spirit bear our new official provincial animal. This is a very exciting opportunity for us. The kermode bear is located throughout the world, but the dominant area of occupancy is on the north and central coast.

What an exciting land use plan that we were able to create just a few months ago — just an incredible resource up and down the coast; 6.4 million hectares in the planning area. We have protected 1.8 million hectares of that. This is an accomplishment, and I actually give credit to both sides of the House for this, because the initiative started under the previous government around 1996, I believe it was — '95 or '96, in that range. They started moving forward with the central coast land use plan. When we came to government in 2001, we added the north coast, as well, to that. There were actually six different ministers that were engaged in that file over time.

Finally, we were able to achieve consensus, and what a remarkable feat. As I said, I give credit to everyone on this particular initiative, because I think it was extremely important. If you think about the total planning area, it was twice the size of Belgium. The protected area is three times the size of Prince Edward Island. That is a huge area to have protected. It makes a significant difference to the total protected area in the province, which I think is just short of 14 percent now.

The planning area on the central coast is now…. Twenty-nine percent of it is protected or will be protected in parks and different forms of protected areas. On top of that, there will be an additional 3 percent that will be out of bounds for log harvesting. So fully 32 percent of the central coast area will be protected. In the north coast area, there's 24 percent of the Crown land, and the planning area will be set aside for protection — a further 10 percent for mining and tourism. So in that part of the world, 34 percent will be protected from log harvesting.

This is a significant initiative. One of the reasons why it's very significant is the representations of the first nations up and down the coast. I think this is what really makes it important. I have a couple of quotes I want to read from…. Actually, I believe they're constituents of the member for North Coast. At least one of them is a constituent of the member for North Coast, but I guess he's not representing this particular constituent because he seems particularly happy with this plan.

The quote is actually from Heiltsuk Chief Ross Wilson, who I've gotten to know quite well — an excellent gentleman, very forward-thinking. He says: "I commend the provincial government for its commitment to this land use planning process. We're looking forward to finalizing and implementing our land use agreements. Completion of the government-to-government land use agreements will ensure the well-being of the lands, the waters and the peoples of our traditional territory."

A comment from Dallas Smith, who represents the KNT first nations, which actually come out of northern Vancouver Island as well as the southern part of the central coast — a quote from him: "This agreement brings an end to the longstanding resource use conflicts over this land." It's pretty significant for Mr. Smith to say that.

"Now our people have a more active role in how and where business is done in our traditional territories, and we can move toward cultural, ecological and economic stability in this region." Testimonies about the importance of this land use plan, fully 25 different first nations either have signed off or we believe will sign off on the land use plan in the north and central coast — the protection of the kermode bear, but still the opportunity for significant economic activity.

[1605]

Again, I know we just heard from him, but the member for North Coast didn't mention any of that stuff in his speech. I didn't actually hear him talk about any of those great-news announcements that came out just a few weeks ago. That all leads to the primary focus, which is the protection of the spirit bear.

Another key component, I believe, of this particular throne speech was the expansion of the Dream Home China project. I mentioned earlier in my comments the notion that the economic base of the world is shifting from Europe and North America into Asia. We're seeing just an incredible expansion of the economy, particularly in China and India, and we're seeing Japan start to move forward as well.

We have made a commitment to expand the Dream Home China project — which we initiated a number of years ago in partnership with the forest industry in British Columbia; I think it was about $17 million — to Beijing and Guangzhou. This provides significant opportunities for us to look to other marketplaces to expand the use of our forest products. I think it's a very exciting initiative.

You know, in China they're building 10 million new homes per year right now. In all of the United States, in a big year they build 1.8 million homes — 1.8 million; 10 million. Just think of the size of that economy. In

[ Page 2838 ]

fact, in all of Canada there are only 10 million homes, and yet that's what they're building in China each and every year. There's huge potential for our forest industry, our mining industry and our energy industry. It is significant and something that we cannot turn a blind eye to if we want to be intelligent. It's something that we have to stay focused on.

As I mentioned earlier, in the throne speech one of the highlights for me is the continued commitment to the development of the Port of Prince Rupert, the containerization port. I can tell you that when I meet with my agriculture minister colleagues from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, they are very excited about the opportunity of shipping, especially grains, out of the Port of Prince Rupert. The notion of actually having that container port develop and provide that extra access into Asia will shift the economy of British Columbia, and in fact all of the prairie provinces, a little bit north.

Now you'll no longer need to be along that southern corridor to maximize the benefit of your shipping.

It struck me, when I was thinking about the 1990s, that the government of the day, the negative, destructive and pessimistic government that we had at that point in time — that stands for NDP, by the way, if you missed that — became known as the government that would increase taxes. There was rarely a budget that would go by when the government of the day did not increase taxes or fees in some way, shape or form. There was just a staggering number of increases.

We did a little tally, because as much as the government of the day became known back in the 1990s as the tax-and-grab government, we've become known as a government that actually reduces taxes. I think it's worth looking back at what some of those tax reductions have been. I just happen to have a list, as luck would have it. I didn't come in prepared for it, but it happened to be sitting in my desk, so I thought I'd pull it out and talk a little bit about it.

Since July 30, 2001, we've had 62 different tax reductions. In fact, if you look….

An Hon. Member: Sixty-two?

[1610]

Hon. P. Bell: Yes, 62. That's an incredible number. If you look, Madam Speaker, at a family of four with an income of $30,000, a low-income family in British Columbia, they actually have had their total taxes — including income taxes, PST, all of the various fees and taxes that they pay in a year — reduced from $3,739 to $2,385. That's a substantial reduction — $1,350 less. A senior couple making the same amount of money, $30,000, has gone from $3,391 in taxes down to $2,373.

The opposition would like to tell you that there have been changes. Yes, there have been changes, but there have been significant reductions. It all started back on July 30, 2001, with a 25-percent cut in personal income taxes, giving us the lowest personal income taxes for people in the bottom two tax brackets anywhere in Canada. That's a pretty remarkable accomplishment.

At the same time, dividend tax credits were reduced. The general corporate income tax was reduced from 16½ percent to 13½ percent, which has created tremendous economic activity.

Clearly, what the members opposite don't understand is that if you're not competitive on the global stage, industry will go elsewhere to invest. There is nothing that is compelling them to invest here in British Columbia except for appropriate regulatory reform and an appropriate taxation strategy. If they can invest their dollars somewhere else because they're more competitive, they'll do that.

That's what the members opposite just don't get. They just don't understand that, and that's why they keep coming back and saying: "You should increase the corporate income tax rate and increase personal income taxes." It's all about tax and spend. We're not about tax and spend.

I have to admit that there have been two tax increases since we've come to office. There have been 62 reductions, and there have been two tax increases. I think, in being fully transparent, it's important for me to make sure I have indicated that.

The two tax increases. The first one came on February 20, 2002. That tax increase moved tobacco taxes from $22 a carton to $30 a carton. That was one of the two tax increases that we implemented.

Interjection.

Hon. P. Bell: The member for Nelson-Creston has indicated that that really hurt.

Well, I'm going to have to hurt him again, because much to his chagrin, there was a second tax increase. I suspect the member will know where that tax increase was. He's probably got that date marked down in his calendar. On December 20, 2003, there was an increase in tobacco tax from $32 a carton to $35.80 a carton. I'm hoping that the member actually has an opportunity to speak next, because I know he's going to want to address some of those key tax changes that we made — 62 tax reductions, two tax increases.

Significant activity in the economic sector is being driven by a competitiveness that we have not seen in this province since the 1980s. I heard a few of the members opposite talk about cycles. I mentioned this in my response to the budget speech as well, but I feel compelled to do it again. What I have noticed about economic cycles in British Columbia is that they appear to revolve around the times that the NDP were in government.

From '72 to '75 the mining industry left B.C. It took ten years to rebuild that industry, to finally get it back to a point where you started to see the economic activity happening again. You know what happened when they were elected in 1991? The same thing.

They'll tell you that it's all about commodity prices, but through the 1990s we had the strongest economic environment globally of any time in our history. Yet British Columbia got left behind. The debt was doubled, and it was doubled because they couldn't control

[ Page 2839 ]

their spending and maintain the economic growth and activity that is necessary to have a sustainable long-term economy in this province.

I have three children. Those three children today are 20, 22 and 24 years old. One of the things that I committed to them was not to leave them with a debt that would burden down their ability to deliver services as I get older. Because you know what? It's not going to be the members in this chamber that are going to be paying for the debt that was accrued through the 1990s. It just won't be us. We're going to be retired, or we're going to be passed on. It's going to be all of our children.

Isn't it our responsibility to make sure that we contain our spending and invest strategically where we have to? But let's be honest about this. Isn't that important? Isn't that what this is all about? Isn't that why we all come to this House — to provide for a better environment for our children for future generations? I know that's why I came here, and the day that I feel we're not delivering that is the day that I'll be gone.

I think that being in government is about providing a future for our children. It's about being positive. And I can tell you what it's not about, Madam Speaker. It's not about being negative, destructive or pessimistic. Unfortunately, that's all I hear from the members opposite.

We won't follow that road. We have a very bright future in British Columbia. Agriculture has huge potential. I'm excited about going forward this year with our service plans and our new budgets. I think we are going to have an industry that will pay big dividends to all of us down the road, deliver high-quality food products throughout British Columbia, maintain a healthy environment and provide the services to children that we need to.

[1615]

I want to see young people get involved back in the industry. I know the member for Nelson-Creston has a long and rich history around agriculture, and I want his kids and my kids and their grandchildren to be able to enjoy that too.

C. Puchmayr: First of all, I'd like to take this opportunity to wish my wishes for International Women's Day to all the women who are watching this telecast right now — a very momentous day. The struggles of women that we have seen over history are still struggles today, and I anticipate that someday there will be true equality in this country and on this planet.

I would like to say that it's an honour, again, to rise on the throne speech, on what is called the children's budget. This is all about children. As we recall, the last one was labelled the seniors budget, and we saw what that did. We saw in the last little while what we've been saying all along — what's been happening to the treatment of our seniors in the twilight of their life. When they're in need of care, when the pioneers that built this country, built this province, are in need of some compassion in the last years of their life, we've seen what happens.

We've seen what happens when they're forced into the first-available-bed strategy and they're separated. We've seen the tragic results of that.

So I'm a little troubled when I hear the children's budget. I look at what is being offered up, and it doesn't even come close to what was taken away by this government in the Ministry of Children and Families, the front-line workers that are there to protect children in need. It's very little that is being restored, and it doesn't equal what was taken away.

In my community I've certainly seen the effects of the seniors budget, with the closure of an entire floor of the Queen's Park Care Centre prior to any alternative beds being built. We've seen the impacts that this has on seniors, where they're basically told: "Your beds are gone. You've got until the end of March to get out. We're going to try to put you on the second floor. In the meantime we're going to put out an RFP and contract you out — some to the private sector." People are bidding on our grandparents, on our parents. "What will you bid to take these parents and put them into your homes?" If those homes are out of the region, that's just the way it goes.

We've heard denial after denial from this government that this is going on, and now we are seeing more and more that this is the case. For the Health Minister to say: "Please, why don't the members just bring me the information…?" I think a week ago he had 200 requests from this House from members who had individual requests about assistance for seniors, and I think last week he had 500. I'm sure that today he probably has 600 or 700.

That is not the way health care is to be delivered in any society, least of all in one as prosperous as ours. That is not the way health care should be delivered. I wonder: why would a minister offer to the opposition a remedy in their community to assist a senior or to assist someone needing surgery who is being denied surgery in a timely manner? Why would he do that? The reason is because it creates an embarrassing situation. It's a health care system that is reactionary to those public opinion pieces, so they will try to resolve those that come forward.

But what about the people that don't know of this new advocacy delivery model that is proposed in this province? Where do they go? What do they do? They suffer. They end up being split up. They end up dying apart. They end up away from their children, their families. That is not the health care system that the pioneers that built this province deserve today.

[1620]

In the last budget, half a billion dollars was given to corporations. That's a lot more than was given to seniors. It's a lot more, even combined, than is given to children today. I called the last budget the corporate budget. The member on the other side who spoke about the taxation and the fear that the NDP will tax everything away has some understanding to do on some of the statistics of those days in the economy when the NDP was going through some very trying times. It was not the NDP; the province was going through some trying times.

[ Page 2840 ]

We remember the Asian flu. T