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 1, 2006

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 6, Number 16

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25 B )

Gil Blair

J. Yap

Protection of provincial parks

G. Gentner

Role of MLAs in assisting constituents

R. Cantelon

Victoria school principal Janine Roy

R. Fleming

B.C. arts renaissance fund

L. Mayencourt

Publications on history of New

Westminster

C. Puchmayr

Oral Questions

Government policies on assignment of

seniors care beds

C. James

Hon. G. Abbott

Role of Interior Health Authority

officials in review of seniors health care

M. Farnworth

Hon. G. Abbott

Care beds for seniors in Kootenay area

K. Conroy

Hon. G. Abbott

Review of seniors care in health

facilities

D. Thorne

Hon. G. Abbott

C. Puchmayr

Emergency services at Royal Inland

Hospital

C. Wyse

Hon. G. Abbott

Review of health care system

D. Cubberley

Hon. G. Abbott

Child protection investigations

Hon. J. Les

Petitions

B. Simpson

Reports from Committees

Select Standing Committee on Public

Accounts

Annual

Review of Auditor General Reports

R. Fleming

Budget Debate (continued)

J. McIntyre

C. Evans

H. Bloy

D. Cubberley

L. Mayencourt

G. Robertson

R. Cantelon

[ Page 2581 ]

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2006

The House met at 2:03 p.m.

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. C. Hansen: It's with great pleasure that I introduce to the House the new consul general from India, Consul General Ashok Kumar. He was here for the budget presentation last week, but this is actually his first official visit to Victoria and his first official visit to the Legislature. I hope the House will make him very welcome.

D. Routley: I wonder if the House could help me welcome a member of Cowichan tribes, Ms. Normaleen August. Ms. August's nephew Matthew Louie is currently employed by the opposition caucus, and she is proud to come and witness her nephew at work here in the Legislature. Please help me make her welcome.

Hon. S. Bond: Canada's Outstanding Principals program is an initiative of the Learning Partnership and the Canadian Association of Principals, in collaboration with the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management. The program is in its second year. The award recognizes the unique and crucial contribution that dedicated principals of publicly funded schools make to students and the local community. Thirty principals were honoured across Canada this year, in 2006. These principals will be inducted into the national academy of principals. We want to celebrate excellence in public education.

[1405]

Today I am delighted to have had the pleasure of having lunch with four of Canada's outstanding principals who actually live and work here in British Columbia. They are here with me in the precinct, in the Legislature, today. I want to introduce them and then ask all members of this House to recognize the excellence of the work they do.

From Kamloops Secondary School, Victor Bifano, who has had 33 years in education, including 18 years as an administrator, and has used the phrase "unity of purpose" as he has worked in the public education system.

From Pearson Elementary School in Kelowna, Susan MacNeil, who took on a school with a poor reputation and results and addressed the areas of discipline and achievement, focused on respect and brought in school uniforms. The results have been incredible.

From Cowichan Secondary School in Duncan, Patrick Duncan guided staff at Cowichan Secondary through the journey of becoming a professional learning community — commitment to success for all. An excellent job. I had the pleasure of visiting the school. It's an outstanding accomplishment.

Finally, Janine Roy from George Jay Elementary in Victoria, an inner-city school in Victoria where 81 percent of the students are identified as vulnerable. The focus was on building hope and improving student achievement and literacy and numeracy.

These dedicated administrators, along with their outstanding staff, have made a difference in the lives of British Columbia students. I am very pleased today to recognize four of Canada's outstanding principals.

J. Yap: We have with us today a group of students visiting from Richmond, led by teacher Ms. Risa Goodman and several parents. We have grade 5 students here with us from the Richmond Jewish Day School. Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

Hon. O. Ilich: I'd like to welcome Mayor Chris O'Connor, the mayor of the village of Lytton, B.C., which is situated at the confluence of the mighty Fraser River and its largest tributary, the Thompson River. Lytton is also known as the rafting capital of Canada and as Canada's hot spot, and it's most recently branding itself as the other Olympic village. Mayor O'Connor is a tireless advocate for resource communities. I ask the House to please make him feel welcome.

Hon. W. Oppal: I have the pleasure of introducing Emma Seckel. Emma is a grade 5 student at Queen Mary Elementary School in Vancouver. She is the daughter of Allan Seckel, the Deputy Attorney General. She's involved in a very worthy project at her school, as are other students at the school. They're involved in a project called Historica Fair, whereby students research Canadian heroes, Canadian legends, Canadian milestones and achievements. They put them together in a public exhibition. Emma is doing her particular project on the history of the legislative buildings.

Hon. M. de Jong: And you.

Hon. W. Oppal: And me — right. Let us welcome both Emma and Allan Seckel.

N. Macdonald: I just noticed two people in the gallery who've come all the way from Golden — Ms. Mino and Ms. Scott. I'd like you to join me in making them feel welcome.

Welcome to Victoria.

[1410]

Statements

(Standing Order 25

B) GIL BLAIR

J. Yap: On February 1, 2006, we lost a great citizen of Richmond and a British Columbian who gave his life to public service. I'm speaking of Gil Blair, Richmond's mayor from 1973 to 1990. Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor made mention of his passing in the throne speech, and I want to expand on his life and legacy.

[ Page 2582 ]

First elected as an alderman in 1970, Gil Blair was the great-grandson of Thomas Kidd, one of Richmond's earliest pioneers. Gil's initial career aspirations were not in the political arena, as he had a keen interest in aviation and actually wanted to join the air force. However, he enlisted in the army during World War II. After the war, Gil earned a degree in agriculture from UBC and began his career as a potato farmer on the family farm.

Gil's early community involvement included being a strong supporter of sports. He coached youth soccer, and he helped organize the minor lacrosse league of Richmond. He was also a chairman of the B.C. Coast Vegetable Marketing Board as well as executive of the B.C. Federation of Agriculture. During Gil's watch, Richmond transformed from a predominantly rural agricultural and bedroom community to a vibrant, urbanized, multicultural city with major commercial, industrial and retail centres.

Major accomplishments of his time in office included the following: conversion of Lansdowne Park from a horse-racing track to a major retail mall, construction of the Knight Street Bridge, construction of the second parallel runway at YVR, construction of the Arthur Laing Bridge and development of the Terra Nova lands.

Richmond adopted its current coat of arms with the motto, "Child of the Fraser," while Gil was mayor. Gil served as deputy chair of the planning committee of the GVRD and also chair of the GVRD. Those who knew and admired him describe Gil as a man of integrity, a true gentleman with high ethical and moral standards, of shy personality who came by his skills naturally. He was passionately committed to his family, to serving people and his community. Richmond, British Columbia and indeed Canada are the better for it.

PROTECTION OF PROVINCIAL PARKS

G. Gentner: Today is Strathcona provincial park's birthday. Strathcona is a wilderness of over 250,000 hectares that dominates central Vancouver Island. Created in 1911, Strathcona is the oldest provincial park in British Columbia and the largest on Vancouver Island. Della Falls, the highest waterfall in Canada, with an overall drop of 440 metres in three cascades, is nearly eight times higher than Niagara Falls.

What does this historic moment of 1911 mean today? Over half a billion dollars per annum is spent in total expenditures related to provincial parks. Of this, over 90 percent of total expenditures is represented by visitors. For every dollar invested by government in protected areas, there is a payback of over $10 in visitor expenditures. Tourism in this province has become a significant economic generator, and when commodity prices and gas revenues fall and when the dollar nosedives, it is tourism with a legacy of world-class parks that sustains British Columbia.

We must maintain and preserve that tradition. For example, mining in the '60s was permitted at Buttle Lake, where today toxic metals leach into what were once pristine waters. In the '80s there was an attempt to introduce mining in Strathcona, which in turn triggered a new renaissance in protection of our parks, followed with an advertising campaign of Super, Natural British Columbia.

Let us acknowledge Strathcona Park as a major benchmark, and let us ensure that our parks remain sincerely natural and that consequently, our economy will remain super. Today and every day let's never forget the principles behind our parks and hold up high the standards they truly represent.

ROLE OF MLAS IN

ASSISTING CONSTITUENTS

R. Cantelon: I rise today to remind the members of this House that we're elected not only to represent our constituents but to help them wherever possible, and I have an anecdote from my office in Nanaimo. A constituent contacted my office asking for assistance on a rather large — several thousand dollars — MSP bill she had received. Her husband had, unfortunately, passed away in December, and he had been the bookkeeper in the family.

It was a very complicated matter. The constituent and her partner had left Canada in '99 without informing MSP about the departure. The couple had an outstanding balance when they left. They continued monthly payments, and they thought it had been cleared up. When they returned in June 2004 and began to use the services, they were presented with a rather large bill.

My office worked with the constituent to ensure that the MSP received tax assessment notices, which helped confirm when they'd left and returned to Canada. This cleared up her outstanding account, and this grateful 90-plus woman was left with a small credit, which went towards her medical accounts. She is now eligible for premium assistance, and my office has helped her apply for Pharmacare as well.

Part of the point is that we all owe our reputation of our good offices not only to our work but to the hard work of all our constituents, and I would also like to acknowledge the very cooperative help that we received from the department of health in this matter in resolving this amicably for my constituent.

[1415]

VICTORIA SCHOOL PRINCIPAL

JANINE ROY

R. Fleming: It is with great pleasure that I inform the House today of an award given to Janine Roy, the principal of George Jay Elementary School in my constituency. As was mentioned by the Minister of Education, Principal Roy has been recognized as one of the top public school principals in Canada for 2006.

This is a wonderful honour. It is a true testament to her hard work as an educator over her 22-year career. It's a significant recognition, I think, of the dedication

[ Page 2583 ]

and commitment she has demonstrated to her students, her staff and the community at large.

As was mentioned, George Jay is an inner-city school. It has some unique challenges. It has been identified by the Greater Victoria school board as having one of the highest percentages of students living in poverty in the city. To support this incredible capacity for academic achievement that principal Roy has seen in her students, she has administered additional supports for her students to improve their learning conditions — things like a breakfast program, a hot lunch program, a clothing exchange program and a parent room.

I know that Ms. Roy would be the first to credit her students and the teachers she works with for the success that occurs at George Jay Elementary, but I think she deserves credit for her tremendous leadership skills and for her daily commitment to improve the lives of her students. Let me just say that I'm very proud to have Ms. Roy as one of my constituents and of the wonderful work that she does in my community. I hope the House will join me in applauding and offering congratulations to Ms. Roy for receiving one of Canada's outstanding principal awards.

B.C. ARTS RENAISSANCE FUND

L. Mayencourt: I take this opportunity to bring some good news to this chamber for members on both sides of the House with respect to British Columbia's arts scene. Today the B.C. arts renaissance fund is handing out $5.3 million for arts and culture groups across the province.

I just got off the phone with the program director, Mauro Vescera, and he tells me that almost $1 million per month has flowed from this fund, which was established in 2005 through a grant from this government. That $25 million fund from the province helps us secure the future of arts organizations across our province.

Over the past year 40 new permanent endowments by B.C. arts organizations and 48 individual grants have made a difference to British Columbia arts stability. I would specifically like to mention the Judith Marcuse projects, the Arts Club and the Arts Umbrella, three agencies that work in my neighbourhood that are receiving money today.

Not only does Vancouver benefit. Many B.C. communities will be getting money, as well, from this fund today. Victoria, Kelowna, Abbotsford, Prince George, Chilliwack, Salmon Arm, Salt Spring, Chemainus, Langley, Castlegar, Surrey, Duncan and Richmond are home to arts and culture organizations that are going to get money as well.

Some 115,000 people work in our arts communities, and it is a $4.5 billion industry. I found out today that seven of Canada's top ten rural arts communities are located right here in British Columbia, starting off with Squamish-Lillooet leading the pack.

I strongly believe in the arts community and how much it does contribute to British Columbia. Sometimes we don't recognize that. That's why it is very important, and I am so pleased, that our government provides funding to ensure that the arts scene thrives. I would also like to thank the Vancouver Foundation and its advisory committee for a job well done.

PUBLICATIONS ON

HISTORY OF NEW WESTMINSTER

C. Puchmayr: It's a privilege to rise here today to speak of two new literary works that were published by authors in my community of New Westminster. The first is titled Royal City: A Photographic History of New Westminster, 1858-1960 . The author is Jim Wolf, a longtime resident and historical activist. The book is a joint project of the New Westminster Heritage Preservation Society, the city of New Westminster and the Arts Council of New Westminster. It has been nominated for the prestigious Haig-Brown book prize.

The second book is titled A New Westminster Album: Glimpses of the City That Was . It's written by Gavin Hainsworth and his wife Katherine Freund-Hainsworth. It, too, has been nominated for the Haig-Brown book prize, as well as for the Lieutenant-Governor's Medal for Historical Writing. It is currently the best-selling book published by Dundurn.

[1420]

Gavin and Katherine bought a character home in New Westminster a few years ago, and while they were doing research on their home, they found an incredible wealth of history. That's what motivated them to write this work. They even document the theft of the Legislature from New Westminster to Victoria, and with no disrespect to my colleagues in Victoria, I'm sort of glad you took it.

Gavin and Katherine are members of the New West preservation society, New West Historical Society, national historical society of B.C, and they were co-conveners of Write on the River, a very successful writers' project in New Westminster. Both publications are available in the Legislative Library. They're also available in libraries across B.C. and in progressive book stores across B.C. If not, ask for them. Please join me in acknowledging those gifted New Westminster residents.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON

ASSIGNMENT OF SENIORS CARE BEDS

C. James: Three years ago seniors were being split up by this government. Three years ago we heard the Premier say, "Never again," and here we are today. The report delivered by the Health Minister today shows that the Premier didn't keep his word to seniors in our province. It shows that the government says one thing and does just the opposite. To the Minister of Health: when the Premier promised three years ago that seniors would never be split up again, why are we finding out today that things haven't changed?

[ Page 2584 ]

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question, the issue of seniors being separated. There has never been, and there never will be, a policy with respect to this government — nor, I hope, any government in this province — that contemplates seniors being separated unnecessarily. That has never been the case. I do hope that it never will be the case.

The first-available-bed policy. I should note that when there is a medical necessity and the frail elderly need to be moved to an appropriate level of care, sometimes for a temporary period they have to go beyond what their preferred facility would be. It is always the policy of the health authorities and this government to reunite those seniors when they have been split up. The first-available-bed policy is not new. It has been around for 30 years, including during the tenure of this NDP government when they were in office in the 1990s.

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

C. James: It is very clear that it's this government's mismanagement of the health care system that has caused the separation of seniors that we see today. I want to quote from the minister's own report. The report shows that medical practitioners cite "a complex array of rules and barriers to accessing resources, unpredictability of commitments made for home care and home support, and…difficulties…supporting patients and families."

In other words, there is a systemic problem, as we have been saying all along. In other words, this government made another promise to seniors and again they broke that promise. The government knew there was a problem three years ago. They promised to fix it then.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

C. James: To the Minister of Health: why are we today reading a report about seniors being separated against their will, three years after the Premier promised that that wouldn't happen again?

Hon. G. Abbott: Again, I appreciate the opposition leader's question. As I noted, the first-available-bed policy has actually been around for about 30 years. In fact, it was utilized all through the 1990s, when this government was in power.

It's not fair, though, to say that they didn't do anything with the first-available-bed policy. On October 1, 1999 they actually added a provision in the first-available-bed policy around client rates for long-term-stay patients awaiting placement.

[1425]

Under this policy, as of October 1, 1999, the NDP government was charging clients, patients, who were resident in acute care facilities and who for one reason or another hadn't found a placement that was suitable for them. The policy put in place in 1999 allowed them to be charged every day that they were not moved on to that facility. This….

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, minister.

Hon. G. Abbott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

C. James: Once again we see the Health Minister, just as we've seen with other ministers in government, refusing to take responsibility for his own actions and pointing fingers elsewhere. This is about accountability — accountability from a government which says one thing and does another.

This is the government that promised health care where and when you need it. They broke that promise. This is a government that promised to build 5,000 long-term care beds, and they broke that promise. This is a government that promised more resources for children at risk, and they broke that promise. This is a government that promised seniors wouldn't be split up, and they broke that promise.

My question is to the minister: what assurance can the minister give to the seniors of this province that the promises he is making now are any more important than the promises he broke three years ago?

Hon. G. Abbott: A week ago I saw a problem. I sent my deputy in to ascertain the facts with respect to that problem. She has provided me with a report. We're going to be taking action, and we will emerge with an even better, stronger health care system as a result.

I think the people of the province can forgive a great many things. One of the things that I think they have trouble forgiving is hypocrisy, and that's what we're hearing from the folks across the way. Not only did this former NDP government allow the situation to deteriorate in the residential care sector such that people were waiting a year to access residential care; they also put in place….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: I'm glad to share this with the House. They also put in place, on October 1, 1999, a policy that provided for daily charges for those frail elderly who weren't prepared to accept what was offered to them under the first-available-bed policy.

ROLE OF INTERIOR HEALTH AUTHORITY

OFFICIALS IN REVIEW OF

SENIORS HEALTH CARE

M. Farnworth: The minister sent his deputy, Penny Ballem, up to the Interior Health Authority to do his

[ Page 2585 ]

investigation. In a media interview earlier today, Ms. Ballem stated that senior officials in the Interior Health Authority refused to engage in her investigation. Can the minister clarify: what does "refused to engage" mean?

Hon. G. Abbott: If the member checks the record very carefully, he will find that Dr. Ballem did not use the term "refused to engage"; she indicated that they had not engaged. That was of concern to her. Again, this whole situation that I was concerned about…. I'm entirely frank when I say that no incident, no situation, has concerned me more in the nine months that I have been Health Minister than what happened with Mrs. Fannie Albo. Nothing concerned me more than that.

We went in. We got the facts. We have not only an understanding of what occurred but also a set of recommendations and directions that will move us forward to having a better relationship between health care providers, the Interior Health Authority and patients and families in the Trail area of Interior Health.

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

[1430]

M. Farnworth: Ms. Ballem felt concerned enough to remark, and she found it remarkable, that they did not engage. So whether it's "refused to engage" or "did not engage," the fact is they did not engage.

I can understand why the minister isn't in charge of the Premier's health mission. But guess what. This was his mission. He sent his top official up to investigate a very serious situation. The fact that the deputy minister felt compelled to remark that senior officials did not engage is more than remarkable; it is appalling.

My question to the minister is this: who is in charge of his ministry — himself or the Interior Health Authority?

Hon. G. Abbott: It's always good to hear the righteous outrage of a former Minister of Health as he tries to assess what actually…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Abbott: …a Health Minister should do in a situation where he sees a problem, steps in and takes action to deal with it. Perhaps the former Health Minister never had any experience with that and as a consequence is going fishing for red herrings here.

The fact of the matter is that we are concerned about the culture that exists within the medical community, within the care community in Trail. We are concerned about that. I'm concerned about many aspects about that. That's why I asked my deputy minister to look at this situation. That's why I asked my deputy minister, who is a widely respected practitioner as well as a widely respected administrator, to give me her best recommendations. I'll be acting on those recommendations. British Columbia's health care system will be the better for it.

CARE BEDS FOR SENIORS

IN KOOTENAY AREA

K. Conroy: Seniors and their families in my communities have been telling this government about the problems detailed in this report. The report today backs up what I have been telling the minister in this House.

What the report doesn't mention is the connection between the chaos in the health authority and the poor treatment of seniors and the fact that this government has cut over 900 long-term care beds and nearly 400 acute care beds in the Interior Health region alone. There are currently several seniors from the area who were forced to move away from their home communities. When will they be able to return home?

Hon. G. Abbott: I think it's unfortunate that the member deals with what I thought was a very thoughtful and comprehensive report by Dr. Ballem with even more hypocrisy and blather about what's actually going on in this province. I think, first of all, that the member should acknowledge that in fact we have remediated or added some 4,900 residential and assisted-living units in this province since we took office.

One of the challenges that occurs when you have facilities that are in large measure composed of three- and four-bed wards and you convert them to single rooms that are actually homes for the frail elderly in their declining years is that it gets tough to make the equation balance. But the fact of the matter is we've invested over a billion dollars in qualitatively and quantitatively improving the lives of the frail elderly in this province, and I'm very proud of it.

Mr. Speaker: Before we continue, I would just remind the minister to be careful in the words that he uses when he's answering a question.

The member for West Kootenay–Boundary has a supplemental.

K. Conroy: I do have to say that the many families I have spoken to do not think it's hypocrisy — the things that we are bringing up in this House. Morris Lessey was moved from Castlegar to New Denver, a four-hour return trip for his medically fragile wife, a woman who is on daily dialysis and has severe osteoporosis. She wants Morris home. He is suffering, and she is suffering.

[1435]

As I said yesterday, Win Guesford's family wants her home. There are a number of families in our communities who are facing financial ruin trying to keep their families home. Why? Because this government closed residential care beds. Not assisted living — residential care beds are what our community needs. It's what those people need. It's what our families need.

[ Page 2586 ]

Now that we know there is a systemic problem in the Interior Health Authority, now that we know what's happening out there, will this minister offer an apology to all those families and give those families the beds they need in their home communities?

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the member for her question. Anytime there is a concern about the treatment or the experience of patients with the health care system that they find unsatisfactory, I do appreciate members on both sides of the House bringing them forward to me. I don't know whether the member has brought this case forward to me previously. I don't know. If she has, we will be dealing with it. If she has not, I'd appreciate her providing me with the details in respect of it.

One thing that I hope comes out of Dr. Ballem's report that I think is very important is around the issue of when it is appropriate or not appropriate to have a medical transfer. Clearly, in the case of Mrs. Albo, it was medically inappropriate and medically unacceptable to do a transfer. I can't speak for the case the member cites, but if she would provide me with the information, I would be glad to look into it.

REVIEW OF SENIORS CARE

IN HEALTH FACILITIES

D. Thorne: Stan and Ruby Shenton have been married for over 65 years and live together in a seniors residence in Penticton. Ninety-year-old Stan Shenton's health is deteriorating, and he's now in need of long-term care. Ruby Shenton, 91 years old, has been informed that her husband will be moved to a care home in Oliver, one hour away. When Ruby raised the concern that she would not be able to visit her husband if he was moved this far, 91-year-old Ruby Shenton was supplied with a bus schedule.

Is this how this government treats seniors who are facing the prospect of being separated from their loved ones after 65 years of marriage — with a shrug of their shoulders and a bus schedule?

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the member for bringing forward the case that she has. Again, I don't have any details in respect of that, but if she would care to provide them to me, I would be glad to look into it.

What we try to do, just so the record is entirely clear here…. We are developing a continuum of care in this province that tries to provide the frail elderly, those people that need that care, with an appropriate level of care, whether it's assisted living or whether it's residential care. What we have tried to do….

Actually, one of the best examples I've seen in the last couple of weeks is in the Leader of the Opposition's riding, the James Bay manor. What we have done there is not only take three- and four-bed wards and create private rooms out of them; we have also created, within that complex, rooms for the frail elderly to live together as a couple, should that be their wish. That is what we try to do in every instance.

There are occasions when medical necessity separates parents, when it separates couples. I lived through that with my mother and father. It is not a good thing when it happens, but sometimes medical necessity happens.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Coquitlam-Maillardville has a supplemental.

D. Thorne: Ruby Shenton was also informed that she can only refuse one long-term care bed for her husband. Otherwise, he will be taken off the list for a publicly funded bed.

My question is to the Minister of Health. We know that seniors are routinely being forced to leave friends, family and their community when they need long-term care in the last years and often the last days of their lives. Will the minister now commit to an expanded review of senior care in the province of British Columbia?

[1440]

Hon. G. Abbott: Again, just so the member understands: by the end of December 2006 we will have had a net increase of 2,800 units of housing for the frail elderly in this province and, of course, 5,000 by the end of 2008. People now are only waiting between 18 days, which is good, and 88 days, which is too long, for residential care. When we took office, it was one year.

Further, the member says the lady in question was only offered one refusal. Well, as it turns out, under the policy that was enacted by the NDP on October 1, 1999, the charges started kicking in without even the first refusal. The NDP tries to talk an exceptionally fine game here, but I'm afraid that when they were in office, reality was a different thing.

C. Puchmayr: My community has just lost 86 care beds in Queen's Park Care Centre. Yesterday a family in my constituency was told they have 24 hours to decide whether or not to take the first available bed for a celebrated New Westminster resident — their father, who is now in need of long-term care.

They were told that the bed might be in Boston Bar, many hours away over treacherous mountain roads. The family was also told that if they refused the placement, the father would be taken off the publicly funded list.

Will the Minister of Health commit to an expanded review into senior care so that families across this province are not being forced into separation at the last and fragile years of their lives?

Hon. G. Abbott: This member has raised this issue before, and I have spoken to the Fraser Health Authority with respect to it. I understand that the Fraser Health Authority has been in touch with this member on at least a couple of occasions to go through this situation with him. I think he understands clearly. I'm disappointed that after care by the Fraser Health Authority to ensure the member understands why the improvements are being undertaken at Queen's Park, he raises it in this particular context.

[ Page 2587 ]

What we are going to do at the Queen's Park Care Centre is add a sub-acute floor. It will be a tremendous improvement. In the interim, while those improvements are being made, the Fraser Health Authority has spent a number of months working with all the patients in the area that will be affected in order that there can be a kind of seamless accommodation for the important renovations that are going to occur.

Again, Fraser Health has made it very clear to this member. I'm disappointed that he would not undertake to share that knowledge with the House.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member, the member for New Westminster has the floor.

C. Puchmayr: Hon. member, I'm sorry. To the Health minister: this is far from a seamless transition. I tell you that, and the minister himself should go investigate. This family is distraught, to say the least. The daughter tells me that if the father is moved to Boston Bar, he will simply give up life. He needs to be close to his family, his friends and, most of all, his cherished granddaughter.

We all know by now that these are not isolated cases. The families know there is a problem. The seniors know there is a problem. The ministry staff know there is a problem. Will the minister expand the review so that at the very least he will know there is a problem?

Hon. G. Abbott: I'm glad to provide the facts here, given that the member doesn't seem to want to do that on the part of the Fraser Health Authority.

The redesign of the Queen's Park Care Centre and a ward at RCH, creating a new convalescent care program and sub-acute rehabilitation program for residents of New Westminster and surrounding communities, is what is aimed at. The new program requires more floor space than the current 87 residential beds operated on the third floor; it will operate out of 45 beds. At the same time, Fraser Health has added 70 new residential care beds in the Fraser north area.

[1445]

Occasionally, when one wants to make improvements to the system, one has to have a transition period. I think, in fairness to Fraser Health, they have approached this with thoroughness and sensitivity, which is entirely appropriate. Again, I'm glad to stand up here and take the lumps on occasion. They are not warranted in this case.

EMERGENCY SERVICES

AT ROYAL INLAND HOSPITAL

C. Wyse: Last December a trauma patient from 100 Mile House was refused admission to Royal Inland Hospital, contrary to the no-refusal policy for such situations. Precious time was lost while the patient bounced through similar refusals at the Kelowna regional hospital and Vancouver regional hospitals, with approximately two to three hours of precious time being lost before finally being admitted to Royal Inland Hospital.

The emergency room at Royal Inland may be new, but there simply aren't enough beds to handle the demand at a regional trauma centre. My question: when will the minister acknowledge that regional bed cuts are preventing the emergency room at Royal Inland Hospital from functioning properly?

Hon. G. Abbott: I thank the hon. member for raising this situation. I have been briefed on the issue that's raised by the hon. member. I can't make a lot of comment on it because of the privacy provisions around it, but I can say this. There are protocols with respect to admittance to hospital. I believe that in the case the member cites, there was an error made, and a protocol was not observed. My understanding is that Interior Health has been working with all of the parties in respect of this to ensure that protocols are observed in the future and that patients do get the timely care that they deserve.

This is not a case of Royal Inland Hospital not being able to manage. They were busy at the time. That does on occasion occur, but there were protocols with respect to the movement of patients that were not observed. That is the core of the problem.

REVIEW OF HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

D. Cubberley: You know, it's interesting to see the minister working so hard day in and day out to avoid acknowledging the impact of bed cuts on care in this province.

Interjection.

D. Cubberley: Well, the minister knows — he has to know, member — that the bed crunch isn't just in the minds of members opposite, as he likes to say. The IHA, his own health authority, says that hospitals are too full and that we need to do something about it. It says: "There is ample evidence that we're overcrowded" Ample evidence. Not scattered evidence; not isolated incidents. It also says, by the way, minister, that alternate-level-of-care patients in hospitals are up by 125 percent over '03-04.

Interjection.

D. Cubberley: It says in the IHA report. Sorry.

Will the minister recognize that the IHA document shows hospitals are stretched beyond capacity and accept that his own government's rash cuts to residential care beds and acute care beds are to blame?

Hon. G. Abbott: I think the report the member quotes from was a report delivered by, I think, the medical director at IH to the board. The board neither accepts nor rejects that report, as I understand it. Not-

[ Page 2588 ]

withstanding that, occasionally we do have a challenge around acute care beds. Just so we're clear, throughout the 1990s the number of acute care beds in this province declined. There is an abundance of….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, members. Let's listen to the answer.

[1450]

Hon. G. Abbott: Through the 1990s the number of acute care beds declined, and that's a fact. It reflected in part the increasing use of laparoscopic and other ambulatory surgeries to deal with issues that used to take days in acute care beds. I think we also have a challenge, because I see it at Shuswap Lake General Hospital, I see it at Kelowna, and I see it at other hospitals on occasion.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, minister.

Hon. G. Abbott: Thank you. I will complete it on the rebuttal.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Saanich South has a supplemental.

D. Cubberley: I do. I find it interesting. One of the biggest problems of the health care system today is that Ministers of Health don't want to hear what their staff are telling them about conditions in the delivery system. Yesterday the minister pointed at the new ER at Royal Inland, and he said that was the solution to the problem. But the IHA report says that increasing the capacity of the emergency room to accommodate more patients without doing other things is like broadening only the large end of the funnel. There is not enough forward movement. There's inadequate capacity, and that, minister, would be bed capacity.

Hospitals overcrowded. Inadequate capacity. Seniors separated. Cancelled surgeries. Patients turned away. Minister, when are you going to acknowledge the crisis caused by your government's cuts to hospital and senior care beds and agree to an independent system-wide inquiry?

Hon. G. Abbott: To complete what I started just before that question…. I think one of the challenges that we have is in areas like the Okanagan and other corners of the province where there are very large retirement communities. We're starting to see some of the impact of that demographic on our hospitals. What that points to is a need to reinvest in the capital side of those regional and other hospitals in those areas where we are beginning to see the front end of the silver tsunami that will be coming at us in even greater force.

We did not see that level of reinvestment in the 1990s. Our government, because we've actually taken steps to ensure that we have a strong economy, is in a position to reinvest. We will have an even better health care system as a consequence of that increased investment.

[End of question period.]

CHILD PROTECTION INVESTIGATIONS

Hon. J. Les: I would like to respond to a question asked of me yesterday by the member for Surrey–Panorama Ridge. That question relates to the tragic case of Halaina Dawn Lascelle, a little girl who was killed in April of 2001 by her uncle. Criminal proceedings against that uncle concluded in January of 2005. As the member knows, no investigation by the coroner can begin until the conclusion of criminal proceedings. It should also be noted that this was also the practice that was followed by the previous Children's Commission.

I am advised that the investigation by the coroner is still ongoing due to the serious complexity of this case. The coroner in charge of this investigation has publicly stated as follows:

It is because this death raises so many important and complex questions that it has taken a significant period of time to conclude this investigation. Identifying the issues and questions in a death is often the easiest part of an investigation. Addressing each issue with the goal of formulating reasonable and practical recommendations that could prevent a further similar future death is the much more difficult and time-consuming part of a coroner's investigation.

She also indicated — and rightly so, in my view — that she would not sacrifice the quality of her investigation and any recommendations because of external political pressure to complete the report faster. I expect that the coroner's office will be making a decision in the near future as to whether this case will be concluded by a judgment of inquiry or whether an inquest should also be called.

C. Evans: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

[1455]

Introductions by Members

C. Evans: A friend and sort of mentor of mine, Joan Reichardt, and her daughter

Cathy Olson are in the gallery. Joan taught me lots about seniors and health care.

Joan, if you hang around for a little while, you get a chance to see if I got it right. Anything I say that's wrong is my fault. Whatever I get right is to the credit of Joan Reichardt.

B. Simpson: I ask leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Go ahead, member.

Petitions

B. Simpson: I present a petition on behalf of 240 members of my constituency. The petition reads:

[ Page 2589 ]

[A coalmine and gasification plant should not be

built on farms, ranches and property in the long-established communities of Alexandria, Australian and Kersley. They would be detrimental to water quality and quantity, air quality and, in general, our health and quality of life.]

The petition asks for the revoking of two coal licence tenures and for the rejection of two that are in application.

Reports from Committees

R. Fleming: I have the honour to present the report of the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts for the first session of the 38th parliament entitled Annual Review of Auditor General Reports .

Mr. Speaker: The question is: is the report to be taken as read and received?

Motion approved.

R. Fleming: I ask leave of the House to permit the moving of a motion to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

R. Fleming: I move that the report be adopted, and in moving the adoption of the report, I wish to make the following comments. I would also like to note that this report addresses the work of the committee from October 6, 2005, to February 8, 2006.

The resulting recommendations of the committee address the following reports: Financial Statement Audit Coverage Plan for Fiscal Years 2006-07 through 2008-09 ; Auditor General report 10, 2004-2005, Building a Strong Public Service: Reassessing the Quality of the Work Environment in British Columbia's Public Service ; Auditor General report 6, 2005-2006, Monitoring the Government's Finances ; Auditor General report 4, 2005-2006, Building Better Reports: Our Assessment of the 2003-04 Annual Service Plan Reports of Government ; Auditor General report 5, 2005-2006, Keeping the Decks Clean: Managing Gaming Integrity Risks in Casinos ; Auditor General report, November 2004, Financial Statement Audit Coverage Plan for Fiscal Years 2005-06 through 2007-08 .

I appreciate the opportunity to move the adoption of the committee's report. I would also like to extend my thanks to all the members of the committee for their diligence and attention to detail and their thorough work at the committee. In particular, I would like to thank the member for Richmond-Steveston, who has acted as the Deputy Chair. We've enjoyed a very good relationship in getting this committee to wade through what I think could be characterized as a backlog of reports that are now before this House.

Motion approved.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call continued debate on the budget.

Just a reminder to all members: pursuant to the rules of this House, the vote on the budget is expected to occur at the conclusion of business tomorrow.

[1500]

[S. Hawkins in the chair.]

Budget Debate

(continued)

J. McIntyre: As I'm continuing from yesterday, I just want to step back to where I was for a moment. After having reiterated the almost $2 billion and $437 million that the government has allocated to health and education respectively over the next three years, I was stating and hoping that the opposition better not continue to perpetuate the myth that this government has cut funding — as the facts, as validated by the Auditor General, certainly belie what they have been saying just to score political points.

I've quickly learned that whatever we do and however much more we add to the pot, their attitude is that it's never going to be enough. So it's increasingly difficult to take the NDP criticisms seriously. And on with my speech, Madam Speaker.

In this budget our government has identified key initiatives to ensure that we will continue with momentum to progress on the right track. These measures include the interministerial focus on children that is designed to improve and expand on services, particularly for those most in need or at risk; efforts to further tackle surgical wait times and expand training and the number of surgeries to ensure health care is available to our aging population; providing new residential assisted living and supportive housing; as well as health prevention, with an additional $15 million for ActNow, for example.

Further, we are harnessing the power of new knowledge and creativity, modernizing education and skills training, and providing supports for our classroom teachers, on-line students and parents. The $400 million committed by the Finance Minister to skills and training programs over the next four years is an outstanding step towards addressing B.C.'s skills shortage and assisting more people to achieve their potential in a timely fashion.

An emphasis on skills training is most important in fast-growing areas of the province, in areas such as my riding of West Vancouver–Garibaldi, where 2010 is approaching quicker than we imagined. Construction at the Olympic venues in the Callaghan Valley and Whistler and the continuing work on the Sea to Sky Highway safety upgrades coupled with fast-growing communities have created significant labour pressures in the Sea to Sky corridor.

However, at the same time, the ever-increasing demand for labour may be beneficial in situations such as allowing workers at Woodfibre, the aging mill that's closing near Squamish, to be retrained and relocated into substantially family-supporting jobs without too

[ Page 2590 ]

much distress. This boom has created new opportunities for apprenticeship opportunities on the highway work, in construction and in the forests for our first nations residents, providing not only an economic benefit but adding to capacity.

Transformation, a predominant theme in the throne speech, is the operative word for the region that I'm so privileged to represent. Virtually all the communities in this region, stretching from Dundarave in West Vancouver up the Sea to Sky corridor to Pemberton and D'Arcy, are undergoing transformation as we speak. There are many competing interests for the land and water resources that I'm optimistic can and will be worked out over time. We must learn to share the resources like never before and find innovative ways to ensure our practices are sustainable.

Going forward, we can all likely take some lessons from VANOC's plans for the venues at Whistler, where they are planning to make the lightest footprint possible with innovative building, heating and waste management techniques. This is all unfolding in a resort community that for years has been dedicated to leading environmental sustainability practices using the natural step framework. So while there are pressures in the corridor, there are also many common interests that can be explored with dialogue and common goals that I believe can be reached with collaboration.

To this end, as the MLA, I hosted an elected leaders forum on February 2, a full-day workshop deliberately planned to follow the municipal elections. Before proceeding, I would like to interject with my official congratulations to all the newly and re-elected local officials in my riding — unfortunately, way too many to name. The forum we held was designed to allow mayors and councillors, school board chairs, Squamish-Lillooet regional district directors and first nations representatives to get together for networking as well as identifying and addressing the varied issues facing us, including the advent of the 2010 games.

[1505]

I'm happy to report that it was a resounding success, with nearly 20 in attendance, including the chair of the Squamish-Lillooet regional district, the chair of the Howe Sound school district and five mayors — all but West Vancouver — all in the same room at the same time, which I think revealed the level of enthusiasm and commitment to constructive dialogue. The primary goals were to identify our strengths and our opportunities, as well as the challenges, and to identify priority opportunities to work together in the short- and the long-term future. William Roberts of the Whistler Forum facilitated and will be reporting out shortly.

When speaking of the Sea to Sky corridor, which is the major link to most of my constituency communities, I would be remiss in not providing the House and any interested viewers at home with an update on the progress of the highway safety upgrade. This is a $600 million, P3 highway project that is making a notorious road much safer and more efficient to travel. I should add that the project just won a gold award nationally.

As a further testament to the innovative construction and well-managed nature of this megaproject, I had the privilege this past November of attending the opening of the seven-kilometre, four-lane, divided stretch south of Lions Bay. The minister was there to open it, and I was there. We opened all four lanes, and the traffic came roaring through. It was completed a full year and a half ahead of schedule, and it's already making a very positive difference for travellers. Any of you who have travelled it will notice the difference.

Communities up the corridor, starting with Lions Bay, are very pleased with the results. We have minimal closures, traffic well managed, public consultation and, most of all, a successful outcome. This highway expansion is opening up the corridor. The mayor of Squamish has been in the media, praising the fact that a safer and more efficient highway is encouraging more families to locate in the community.

This is a good-news story, a megaproject ahead of

schedule and on budget. In fact, in addition to this anecdotal evidence, B.C.'s Auditor General in December '05 provided a review of the value-for-money project report that was released by Partnerships B.C. It concluded, and I will repeat here, that the report fairly describes the assumptions, the context, the decisions, the procurement processes and the results to date.

The Minister of Transportation expects value for money on the Sea to Sky Highway to be achieved due to three main areas: due to a strong competitive selection process; through the efficiencies gained by combining design, construction, operation and financing into one long-term contract, resulting in more accountability; and thirdly, by enabling the private sector to provide additional scope and improvements for a fixed — repeat, fixed — price. Value-added in this case amounted to many additional safety features, including dividers, rumble strips and many additional miles of added lanes.

Construction is now about to start with work on the Eagleridge Interchange and the overland route. Some may have heard via the media that there is a disgruntled local neighbourhood group still concerned about the choice of the route. Well, I'd like to explain the facts. First, our government recognizes how important it is to preserve our wilderness and minimize the impact of highway projects. When the overland route was chosen nearly two years ago, I must add — nearly two years ago — it was based on sound reasons, based on four primary considerations: safety, capacity, fiscal responsibility and the environment.

Both options that were eventually evaluated — and I must add, with the district of West Vancouver's approval — had impacts, certainly, and both were carefully reviewed in a joint provincial and federal environmental assessment. That process concluded that the overland option meets all environmental requirements and can be built to minimize any environmental impact. This, of course, was subsequently proven in court when West Vancouver's legal action failed, with costs.

Let me reassure this House today that many steps are being taken to mitigate impacts, again, despite the

[ Page 2591 ]

unfortunate misinformation being spread by a local, vocal group — and, I must point out, headed by the deputy leader of the Green Party, who unsuccessfully tried to make this an issue in the provincial election — who by their very recent actions now appear bent on tarnishing the Olympic experience.

[1510]

This table of environmental commitments for the Sea to Sky Highway is available on the website seatoskyimprovements.ca, and anyone will see that it's very extensive. Our role now as elected officials — and I call on all municipal officials — should be to monitor that the work proceeds according to plan, rather than to prolong and fan the flames of hope that the decision will be reversed in favour of a four-lane tunnel that was so expensive as to never, never be a serious consideration from the very outset.

I notice, also, during this whole process that no jurisdiction stepped up to the plate, willing to pay the additional tens of millions of dollars that would have been required to blast through the mountain over a fish-bearing stream and under the wetlands, possibly draining it. I think it's pretty easy to criticize when you're not actually paying for it.

I think it's pretty difficult and, frankly, fiscally irresponsible to justify spending fully one-third of that entire $600 million budget in the first kilometre and a half. When members of our communities are losing lives on that highway, I continue to believe fervently that the dollars are much better spent on safety features. Certainly, safety is the number-one priority of the ministry, as it should be. This upgrade, I'm happy to report, is designed to reduce accidents by 30 percent in the corridor, and that is really, really significant.

Now, as planned, visitors and commuters will soon have the absolutely spectacular view as they round that corner, driving up the highway north to Whistler.

I also would like to take this opportunity to note that, despite rumours to the contrary, extensive consultation has taken place, especially with the district of West Vancouver. I understand that they were privy to nearly 30 different scenarios before the final four options went before the general public in meetings way back in 2004. Their four-lane-tunnel exclusive choice was cost-prohibitive and consequently, unfortunately, ruled out, much to their obviously continuing dismay, so I do understand their frustration.

Also, for the record, fixing the existing highway — which would be a logical alternative, as it's essentially being done everywhere else up the highway — was unfortunately not viable in this particular very narrow and steep area as you descend into Horseshoe Bay from the north. For starters, the highway would have to be shut down for many hours, for long periods of time — in effect, shutting down a very busy transportation corridor that's a lifeline to places like Squamish and Whistler.

When this highway upgrade is completed in 2009 and communities like Britannia Beach, Furry Creek and Squamish are three more years into their growth and revitalization plans and Whistler is on the verge of hosting the world, the Sea to Sky corridor will indeed be transformed — and for the better, I might add.

In winding down today, let me say that I applaud the continuing efforts of our government to keep the economy going strong; to ensure a competitive tax regime to attract investment to our province; to boost opportunities for skills training and education; to open serious dialogue on health care; to forge new relations with our first nations; as well as to care for those in need, whether it be children, seniors, those with disabilities or those on lower incomes who need supports.

I'm proud of our balanced approach to governing, I'm proud of our balanced budget yet again, and I'm proud that we are responsibly managing this province. We are moving forward with confidence, with genuine leadership.

C. Evans: I'm pleased to get a chance to respond to the throne speech and to the budget this year. Last year and sometimes in history I've kind of tended to try to infuse moments like this with some humour. I think it's easier to hear what you think if it's delivered without utter seriousness.

[1515]

However, this year I feel that the times — and the government's response to the times that we're living in and the failures of the government's response — require a somewhat formal address. So, hon. Speaker, please don't think I've lost my sense of humour. I just hope you think that I take this opportunity seriously.

To respond to the budget and the implications of the budget this year, I want to start by congratulating the Minister of Finance, firstly, on her sense of timing in becoming the Minister of Finance at this point in the history of British Columbia and, secondly, on the differences that I see that she's put into this budget from those that we saw last year.

I stood here last fall and tended to deprecate the tax cuts to the corporate classes — instead of the resolution of some of the problems that we face, such as teacher bargaining. I was very pleased this year — and I would like to thank the Minister of Finance for the fact — that I read the budget without big tax cuts to the wealthy classes or to corporations.

I was very pleased to find money in the budget for hiring social workers to work with kids, because obviously, that crisis has preoccupied this building and British Columbia. I was very pleased to see money for provincial bargaining, so we perhaps won't see a repeat of the debates we had last year around teachers.

I congratulate her on her timing in getting this job, because this minister has become Minister of Finance at a time in British Columbia that is unprecedented, in my experience. In preparation for this speech I read the budget speeches of every government from 2005 back to 1970 in five-year intervals in order to try to ascertain the differences between this….

Yeah, I know. It's an amazing chore. It's all in the library. If there's anything critical in what follows, please understand that I did the homework first.

[ Page 2592 ]

What's happened here is that this minister has become minister at a wonderful moment — a moment with the explosion of capitalism and growth in China and India, a moment of unbridled commodity prices and a health in our budgetary situation that we have not seen, I would suggest, back since 1970.

I'm going to quote from a couple of the historical budgets — none of them when this party or that party was government, in order that you will see this as a bipartisan comment. In 1970 the Minister of Finance said in the speech: "However, our dependence on world markets for the sale of the greater part of our productive wealth and our lack of control over those economic conditions and certain realism indicates that we should not anticipate an annual growth in provincial government revenues at the extraordinary rates of the 1960s." In other words, in 1970 commodity prices were beginning to go downhill.

Take 1980, in the budget speech. The budget said: "Total natural resource revenue is forecast to decline at 4.3 percent from the 1980 fiscal year."

In 1984 that decline was followed by another, and they said: "By early 1982 forecasts showed a pattern of rising deficits with no prospect of returning to fiscal balance even within the normal cycle of economic recovery. British Columbia, like all other provinces and the federal government, has developed what is commonly referred to as a structural deficit."

In 1984 — again, not a New Democrat or a Liberal time — the Minister of Finance said: "In common with most other resource-dependent regions in the whole world, the provincial economy was weaker than expected and is estimated to have shown little growth in 1984."

Then, we all know about the Asian flu and the crash of entire markets in the 1990s. We know about the crash of the price of coal. We are developing coalmines today that we closed in the 1990s because, of course, the world didn't need the coal. On and on up until the present time when, for the first time in decades, the hon. minister gets to be the Minister of Finance in a moment in our history where there is unprecedented opportunity, and it calls for vision. It calls for a vision, I think, greater than that of the Ministers of Finance for the past 30 years, because this is the moment where you might actually make structural change after a period of falling commodity prices around the world.

Thus, while I praise the budget for the dumb things that it didn't do and the good things that it did do, I would like to criticize the budget and the government for their utter lack of vision and leadership at a moment unprecedented in history — when they could be doing stuff, making changes, to improve British Columbia.

[1520]

For my first example, I went through the throne speeches and the budget speeches back for 30 years. Traditionally in this room the throne speech sets out the government's vision, and then the budget speech says what we're going to do with money to make the vision work. That's how parliamentary democracy works: throne speech, ideas, budget and money.

This year I'm stunned. We have a throne speech that gets up here and basically talks about health care — and then a budget in which health care is almost no part of the presentation. There is the appearance between the throne speech and the budget speech of this year of absolute disconnect in the government between, perhaps, the Premier's office and the Ministry of Finance. If in fact the government in 2005 was interested in fixing health care, I would suggest that the budget would have reflected that and talked about that.

I gave a talk to college students in Kamloops the other day that was essentially on the subject of cynicism. I was begging these young people: "Do not see the parliamentary system and democracy through the vision of cynicism." But hon. Speaker, what else are they supposed to be except cynical when we come into this room and say, "We believe in health care, and we're going to fix it, and add a whole other principle to the Canadian health care policy," and then it's a disconnect? We come back one week later, and in the budget, health care isn't there. Health care — it's no part of the structural changes that the budget intends to make.

I think that kind of disconnect, that kind of lack of vision tends to make people lose faith. I've never been one of those people. There are people out there who in their cynical views tend to think that there might be an intention here in Victoria to make health care not work in order that we as citizens would throw up our hands and say: "Okay, try something else to privatize it." I have never been part of that cynicism, because I don't think people who work here would take apart what their grandparents put together. But in order to fight cynicism, you have to give hope, and in order to create hope, you have to have vision.

I would argue that this budget might then have said something about fixing the problems in health care. This House has been captured for days, maybe weeks, on the subject of health care. Just day after day, through question period, we talk about the tragedies experienced by seniors, especially the folks in Trail. The Minister of Health gets up in his place, and he responds by saying: "Yeah, we're going to fix that. That's an isolated case. Maybe it's four cases, but it's not an endemic issue."

I would argue that where we are with seniors issues in this room is exactly where we were with the tragedy surrounding children when we were debating last year the death of one child — before someone found that in a warehouse there were, in fact, 713 more files that were not being debated in this room.

We are debating seniors as if the isolated case that the deputy minister has reported on was an anomaly, was a failure of somebody's judgment or was an accident — as if it was not a built-in public policy result of the things that have happened in this room in the last five years.

The minister stood in his place just the other day and stunned me by using the word "decrepit." He de-

[ Page 2593 ]

scribed the facilities in which seniors were being housed in British Columbia as decrepit. I couldn't believe it, so I went and looked it up. "Decrepit" is defined in the dictionary as: "Impaired by use or wear; worn out;" — in big letters — "fallen into ruin or disrepair."

Seniors facilities are something I know a little bit about. In the 1990s I worked in this building as an MLA and was involved in the investment in a bunch of those seniors facilities that the minister describes as decrepit. I had the good fortune…. It's good for your soul, hon. Speaker. I lost in 2001, went home and got a job. The job that I got was as executive director of a non-profit society that happened to run home care in the Arrow Lakes.

[1525]

It was a bidder to the hon. minister to provide assisted living in the town of Nakusp. Therefore, I was involved in this room, in the construction, reconstruction or renovation of some of the buildings we're now describing as decrepit and then as an outside, non-government bidder — when I did not work in this building — to provide assisted living and home care services.

I think, therefore, that I am qualified to suggest that I do not think things that happen in Trail and are being debated as an anomaly are an anomaly at all. I think they're the result of direct public policy that happened earlier in this century — in the years 2001, 2002 and 2003. I think the groundwork was laid for what we're debating here as public policy and not as an accident, as surely as the layoffs in human services for children resulted in those 713 files stored in that warehouse, that we now have come to understand.

I imagine — and I was not there; this was not part of my speech that I could research or find in the library — there was a meeting between representatives or officials of this government and of the developer community in the early part of this century. The developers said to the government: "You know what? Yes, we will build long-term care or assisted living facilities. But in small towns in British Columbia there will be no market for the service that we offer unless you, the government, first close the facilities that are there."

I think that meeting happened, and it is the…. I know that this government is not stupid. While I disagree with the hon. members on the other side, I wouldn't say one of them is stupid. If they do stupid things, it has to be because they meant to. Their intelligence and the intelligence of their staff and the intelligence of their political staff and the intelligence of the Premier would preclude them doing this by mistake.

So I believe there was such a meeting, and the developer said to the government: "You're going to have to close the facilities in order that we create a market, because we can't raise capital for assisted living unless you first close government facilities." It is the only rational explanation for what happened.

Now I'll get on to what happened. In 2001, 2002 and 2003, as a result of direct public policy, this government closed long-term care facilities all over British Columbia. That is true. But while three-quarters of the people of British Columbia live within the GVRD, and therefore you would expect three-quarters of the closures would happen in the GVRD, that isn't what happened at all — is it? Nod, even if you disagree with me, because you know the majority of the closures happened in the small towns of British Columbia where the developer class needed to close the long-term care facilities before they could build assisted living.

In fact, between 2001 and 2004, 2,665 government-run long-term care beds were closed in British Columbia, 1,567 of them — what is that? two-thirds? — in the small towns where there are not alternatives, where there are mountain ranges, lakes and highways between one town and another. It's not like closing a facility in Vancouver, where we'll just take the bus over to Surrey. It's like: "We'll close a facility in your town, and you can go over a mountain range and across on a ferry boat if you want to visit your family."

Hon. Speaker, I've got a list of them here — an entire page of closures in small-town British Columbia: Cranbrook, Vernon, Grand Forks, Williams Lake, Fernie, Salmon Arm, Golden, Nakusp, Enderby, Kelowna, Kimberley, Trail, Rossland, Kelowna, Revelstoke, Penticton, Salmon Arm, Creston, Kamloops, Kamloops again, Salmon Arm, New Denver, Lytton, Fernie, Osoyoos, Kelowna again, Summerland, Armstrong and Nelson.

Those are not towns where the family has choices, are they? Those are towns where, if you close the facility, that's it. If you close the facility in order to create a vacuum so a developer can raise capital to fill that vacuum, that's it until the building gets built and the developer raises the money. That's the end.

The minister says those buildings were decrepit. I want to deal with decrepit. He says we had to close those buildings: they were old-fashioned; the doors weren't the right size; there were too many people in a room; they were decrepit.

Mount St. Francis, in my constituency: 80 beds closed. It was built in 1950. It's younger than I am. It's younger than this building. It's younger than the majority of the buildings that we're doing renovations on to run as public schools right now — built in 1950. It was built like a brick…. I'm not going to say it on the record; it's unparliamentry.

[1530]

It's a good building. Proof of that is that the IHA itself is now going to move into the decrepit building that they kicked the seniors out of. It's so decrepit that it's IHA-qualified for their administration staff but not okay to renovate for their seniors.

That was in Nelson. How about Pioneer Villa? It was built in the 1980s in Creston. I was involved in the restructuring of Pioneer Villa in the 1990s. We rebuilt it to accommodate Alzheimer's patients. The 1990s isn't old history. It's just the last decade. We had to close Pioneer Villa because we said it was decrepit. It's so undecrepit that now that they've had a breakdown in the sprinkler system in the other facility in town, the

[ Page 2594 ]

people are moving back into the building that we closed and claimed was decrepit.

How about Halcyon Home? Halcyon Home's dear to my heart. Halcyon Home was built in Nakusp in 1980. It was built, in part, by the community's labour. That means guys with cats came and made a flat place and people volunteered their time to drive nails, and the community and the government built a seniors centre. I've been in the basement of that building, hon. Speaker; it's strong enough to hold up this building. But it was decrepit, eh?

The doors weren't wide enough. I cop to that; the doors should have been wider. We should widen the doors. Half the people in this building have the construction skills to widen the doors in Halcyon Home. It's so undecrepit that the organization I was executive director of said: "Okay, if it's too decrepit for you, we'll run it." The IHA said: "Okay, widen the doors and you can have it back."

The minister…. He's a wonderful man and an honest guy. If he thinks the buildings are decrepit, it's got to be because somebody is giving him briefing notes about an event that he wasn't at, in a time when he wasn't minister, that aren't true. Of course, there are no liars in here and no liars in the ministry, so someone must be mistaken.

I'm just talking about the little towns I live in. Everybody here could tell a story like that — I know about Halcyon Home because I've been there. But there's silence, I think indicating that my story about the meeting between the government's representatives and the developer class has to be the truth, because: (

a) they're not stupid; and (

b) it happened; ergo it needs a reason.

I accept the government's right to govern. I accept that totally. That's one of the principles I hold dear. They won. They have a mandate. They have a right to govern. But if they want to close public buildings to open private buildings, they have to do it in a way that doesn't impose pain on the citizens that sent them here. They have the right to their ideological convictions. If they want to end the public system and replace it with a private system, they can do that. I do not blame them for their ideology. I really, really blame them for closing those 1,700 beds in small-town British Columbia without building the alternative down the street first.

If they wanted to follow through the implications of what they believe was their mandate or their business plan, if they wanted to create private care, they could have said: "Okay, developer class, we'll underwrite the new building. You go build it, and when it's built, we'll close long-term care facilities run by the government." They could have done that, and all I'd have had the right to argue is how they think. I would not have had the right to argue that they had created pain in citizens.

What they could have done is they could have said: "We're going to close these buildings in five years, and in the meantime, we'll double home care so that citizens can be looked after at home while we're building new facilities." Did they do that? No. They walked in here one day, and they closed dozens of facilities around the province, called them decrepit, and then cut home care by 50 percent. I'm not making up that number. I didn't have to look it up in the library. I was running the home care facility when we got our contract — 50 percent. We cut the hours of service from an hour and a half an hour to old people to 15 minutes to serve the same number of people with half the money.

[1535]

They are not dumb. These guys are smart guys. I even think they're caring guys, so somebody is running a number not just on the seniors, but on all these people here — unless you believe that they meant to have it happen.

I'm going to tell you a story. I was running…. I'm going to tell you a story about how it actually feels to be a senior in one of those buildings. I was running Arrow and Slocan Lake Community Services society the day they closed Halcyon. One of the things we did at our society was we offered counselling for mental health folks, for people in emotional crisis. The week after they closed Halcyon Home our counsellors were flooded with requests by nurses, real working nurses.

We had to run groups for nurses — not individuals; groups. Why was that? Because they came and said: "This isn't just evicting somebody from their home — they're 84 years old. They can't remember. They go to sleep at night. They wake up. They say, 'Something's wrong here,' and they say: 'What is it that's wrong here? I can't remember what's wrong.'" The nurse has to say: "Actually, you're evicted again."

Every single day. Starting with 26 people, and they're down to five now — 26 to five. One by one, evicted every day. And then ultimately they pass away. The IHA in Pioneer Villa and Halcyon Home….

Look up, you guys. You're all looking down as if you've got something to study. I'm telling you the results of your presence here, and you can honour my words with at least paying attention, even if you don't believe a darn thing I say.

The results of the closures are: you move from 26 down to 20 down to 19. Now they're down to five. There are these folks living in Halcyon Home and in Pioneer — all over the province — and they know there's something wrong because all the other people that used to live in all the other rooms…. They're not there. The IHA is not going to close the building till they're gone. They don't have to literally evict people, but the helplessness in the place is damaging the community. It's damaging the workers, and more than anything, it's damaging the seniors.

Imagine. We all get old progressively year by year. This all happened four years ago. Every single year there ought to be ten people moving in, but since 2002 nobody has got to move in. That makes 40 people out living in the community, which we ought to be serving with home care, but we cut that in half. This situation that we're discussing in here on a daily basis, these buildings that we describe as decrepit, is not happening in Vancouver or Surrey. It's happening in a little town where if they close the facility in your town, then you've got to go over the Monashee to Kelowna, or if it's in Creston, you've got to go over the steepest moun-

[ Page 2595 ]

tain pass in Canada to Castlegar. Oh, can't go to Castlegar. That's actually where the last crisis happened, so you gotta go over the next mountain range.

This isn't an accident. It's not an anomaly. It's not a case that happened in Trail. It's public policy brought in by the folks in this room, exactly like the cuts to social services and children. Workers with children resulted in the tragedy that we are now dealing with. Of course, I'm dead serious in the debate about this budget, because I think we can avoid this. I don't think it has to be like this.

I would like to make some suggestions. I started out by saying I was thrilled that the Minister of Finance made some changes in this budget different than last fall. I like to think that that's because there are 33 folks working here. We're not too stupid either, so we notice things and bring them up, and she hears that, and then some changes happen from the old days when there was no opposition.

I do not believe that the situation that seniors find themselves in today has to be this way. I think the government could actually fix it. I think the Minister of Finance could fix it. I'll go back to the beginning of my speech. She can fix it, because for the first time in 30 years in this building there's a minister with excess that she could apply to crisis. And because the government created the crisis, and I don't think really wants us to have to keep raising it in here every single day, it seems to me that she might actually want to apply it to the crisis.

There's an easy solution. It would be wrong of me to stand here and criticize the Minister of Health, the Minister of Finance or the government generally and say, "Gee, I oppose. You guys are doing everything wrong," and end it at that. That's just cheap criticism, so I wish to propose a solution. I would like to propose a solution, hon. Speaker, if I could get just one of them to look up.

[1540]

It is possible to fix it now. If the government wanted to follow through with their ideological commitment to the private sector without hurting families or even killing people, all they've got to do is take the funding for home care and double it for three years until the buildings get built so that we can look after them at home.

All they've got to do is provide a budget for home care nursing so those seniors presently in acute care beds in the hospitals could be looked after at home. All they've got to do is run Pioneer Villa and run Halcyon Home and all the other closed facilities in the province that are actually still running and put the staff back in there. There are five people, five lonely people, in there waiting to die. Put the staff back in the building, fill the other 19 or 22 beds, and you will end the crisis while you build assisted living to finish your ideological commitment.

It's all over the province. It's in every single town that we represent. Half those members that aren't interested enough to pay…. You could reopen the beds because the buildings are still there. The staff is still in the town. You treat this as an anomaly, and it's just as if the child that died last year was the only one and not just one of 713 files in a warehouse.

Public policy created this problem. The Minister of Finance has the money to solve the problem. Even if the Minister of Health believes the briefing notes that said the buildings are decrepit, I would ask him to go out and look. Come with me. I'll hold his hand. We can go and look at these buildings and see if they can't be…. If they're good enough to house the administration of the IHA, they are good enough to house those people the IHA is evicting.

They've got the money. I have just explained the solution. The solution is affordable. If you don't do it…. If they — those people in this room and those maybe, I hope, watching from their offices — do not invoke a solution now, then it proves my argument that there was a meeting in which folks opposite committed to hurt people, to create a vacuum, to attract capital. I can't bring myself to believe that about these fine people, so I offer this chance for them to prove me wrong.

Hon. Speaker, I used to be a Minister of Health, and you may have noticed that I have yet to stand in my place and attack the government for killing somebody. That happened to me, and I understand that no minister is responsible for an individual case, but I will come back here as long as they let me work here and attack the government for public….

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member. Take your seat for a moment, please. I'm going to remind members to consider the language that they are using in the chamber. It is verging on unparliamentary, and I would ask the member to please temper his remarks. The other thing I'd like to remind members of is about making personal observations of members on either side of the House. That is not parliamentary either.

Continue, member.

C. Evans: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I apologize for anybody I've impugned, and I thank you for your comments, because it is true I actually care enough that it's possible that I might impugn somebody, and I did not mean to.

I meant to say that I think there's public policy hurting people, and there's a chance to fix it, and there are no lack of resources to fix it. If it isn't fixed, it can only be because my assumption of the excellence, intelligence, commitment and caring of friends opposite is mistaken.

H. Bloy: It's a real pleasure for me to stand here today. Before I start to make some of my remarks, I'd like to refer to a few things from the member for Nelson-Creston. He stated: "This is no humour…." Well, this is serious business running government, and it considers a thought process that might be missing there.

[1545]

Also, this member is totally against the private sector. You know, there's nothing against the private sector. It is the way of the '90s — tax and spend, tax and

[ Page 2596 ]

spend, tax and spend — so that the members can all hear that. They were good at that through the 1990s. They spent and spent and spent. They spent the future of my future grandchildren, of their grandchildren and of their children. It's up to us now, through the prudent management and the thought process that's put in by this Minister of Finance, to make for a better British Columbia for what the NDP did to destroy our province.

The only reason I'm here is because of the great people that live in the riding of Burquitlam. They are the ones. I thank the ones that elected me, that voted for me. The ones that didn't vote for me — I appreciate them participating in the election process. But I am only here for the people of Burquitlam and all the province, but it's the people of Burquitlam that have sent me here to this great House twice. I'm proud to stand and give my full support to the budget speech today.

I want to thank the government team that I'm part of and the cabinet and all the work that they've done to put this budget together.

Before I get into the throne speech, there are some people I would like to congratulate. In Burnaby we have two newly elected council members, Gary Begin and Garth Evans, and in the city of Coquitlam we have a new mayor Maxine Wilson and new councillors, a former colleague of ours in the House, Richard Stewart, former Mayor Lou Sekora and Brent Asmundson and Doug MacDonell.

Federally in my riding, I have one new representative, MP Dawn Black, and re-elected Bill Siksay. As you can tell, the riding of Burquitlam is the only riding with a nickname in the whole province, and I represent part of Burnaby and part of Coquitlam.

In my riding and the cities I represent, volunteers are what make our communities. The volunteers are the heart of our communities and the soul. If it wasn't for them, we wouldn't have the communities we live in.

I'm a proud member of the Burquitlam Lions Club. There we support Jimmy Christmas manor. In fact, we raised the money and helped build the manor. I've worked long and hard to help people to have affordable housing within my riding. This building, Jimmy Christmas manor, and Burquitlam Lions Club long-term care centre are run by Renee Danylcznk, and she and her staff do a great job providing for its many residents.

As a coach and a volunteer for minor lacrosse, which two of my children play, I worked with Rochelle Winterton of B.C. Lacrosse to help them to host the World Men's Field Lacrosse Championships, 2008, and I look forward to that taking place.

I've been a member of the Tri-Cities Chamber of Commerce, and I recently attended the president's gala. At the president's gala each year we present the business excellence awards. I would just like to mention who the winners are. We have: AMEC Dynamic Structures, outstanding business and newsmaker of the year; Ken Woodward from Unistrut Building Systems for chamber member of the year. Linda Balzer is our citizen of the year. Jim McKinley and Robert Farr of PTI Punch Tools for entrepreneurial leadership — and it's that entrepreneurial leadership that drives British Columbia — and Bill Weselowski of InnerVisions Recovery Centre received the legacy leadership award.

I'd like to congratulate all the new winners, and I'd like to congratulate the new president of the Tri-Cities Chamber of Commerce, Brian McCristall. He's also the publisher of the Tri-City News. I'd like to thank all the volunteers who made that a great evening.

[1550]

In my riding for the last two years, I've held gaming seminars. This year I held them with my colleagues from Port Moody–Westwood, from Burnaby-Willingdon and Burnaby North, and we hosted over 400 volunteers in two different seminars. The reason for the seminars…. Non-profit groups volunteer so much time. They're the crème de la crème of the communities, and they give up time away from their families. This is a way to help them fill in the forms and to get by the government. It's really enjoyable.

I just wanted to read a few comments that we got from it. "Thank you very much for your assistance in registering for this course. The speakers, Ursula Cowland and Rick Caulfield, were both informative and enthusiastic about imparting their knowledge." Anna Gallant, Services Canada.

"I just wanted to say thank you for this great seminar. Ursula is not only a very skilled accountant, but she also displays great personal and professional skills. Thank you for hosting this." Annette Faver.

I have more good things to say too. "Last year's seminar gave me the tools to file a successful application with less work and time than holding a fundraiser. Thank you, Harry, for doing this again this year." That's Heather Jack from Burnaby Information and Community Services. Through the different societies that

she runs, they got nearly 100 percent of their requests from ACCESS this time.

"Attending this seminar was the best thing we did last year to help our group." Bernice Macleod, Burnaby Seniors Outreach Services Society.

I want to say how lucky I am, in my job as an MLA, that I get to meet so many great people in my community — people that volunteer, that give up their time and that make a commitment to what we do. It makes my job so much easier.

I wanted to say — again, following on the Premier's lead — that to have the most literate province to ever host the 2010 Olympics, I am giving a book to every kindergarten child in my riding. I go into each class personally, and I talk to the children. I encourage them to take it home and to read it with a family member.

I am busy in the community with lots of volunteers. Just over the past week I visited the Vancouver Japanese Language School and Japanese Hall to celebrate 100 years of education and community spirit. I met with the Canadian Chinese Business Development Association in celebrating their 20th anniversary.

[ Page 2597 ]

I do a lot of work with the Korean community and the many dedicated workers there:

Yonah Martin, Ron Suh, Charlie Kim and Michael Hwang. I'm working to bring funding for a Korean War memorial to be installed in Burnaby's Central Park.

I could not do any of this work if it wasn't for the support that I get from my office staff, Jennifer Duke and Dave Teixeira. They work very hard. They work long hours in helping the community that comes to our office and in helping me in the work I do.

Some of the community work that goes on. This is Red Cross Month, starting today. I would like to read a proclamation in honour of Red Cross Month.

Canada, province of British Columbia. A Proclamation. Elizabeth II, by the grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and her other realms and territories, Queen, head of the Commonwealth, defender of the faith.

To all to whom these presents shall come —

greeting.

Whereas the Canadian Red Cross has been

engaged for over 100 years in preventing and alleviating human suffering across Canada and around the world; and

whereas the Canadian Red Cross has helped thousands of Canadians through its emergency disaster relief and community services, including our own citizens of British Columbia; and

whereas the Canadian Red Cross is a reflection of the Canadian spirit of generosity, caring and selflessness; and

whereas the Canadian Red Cross mission of "improving the lives of vulnerable people by mobilizing the power of humanity" embodies this spirit; and

whereas our Lieutenant-Governor by and with the advice and consent of the executive council, has been pleased to enact order-in-council 903 on October 11, 2002.

Now know ye that we do by these presents

proclaim and declare that March 2006 inclusive shall be known as "Red Cross Month" in the province of British Columbia. In testimony whereof we have caused these our letters to be made patent and the great seal of our province to be hereunto fixed.

Witness, the Hon. Iona Campagnolo,

Lieutenant-Governor of our province of British Columbia, in our city of Victoria, in our province this eighth day of February, 2006, and in the 55th year of our reign.

By command.

[1555]

I believe that the Minister of Finance has brought a unique approach to this budget, and it's moving along. Each budget has a uniqueness, and this one is dedicated to the children of British Columbia.

I want to go through the budget and review it a bit, because there are lots of positive things in our budget. When you listen to the opposition…. You know, the opposition has a job, and I'm one that truly believes in freedom of speech and being able to say what you can say, and I think they should have the opportunity to say that. But the job of an opposition person, an individual, isn't just to speak. It's to provide thoughtful suggestions to the government of the day — to work — but all I hear is whining and whining. I don't know which country they drink their wine from, but there's no cheese with it. There's absolutely no substance to the whining I hear.

Every new budget is an opportunity for British Columbians to take another step forward. Balanced Budget 2006 provides more social workers and other front-line staff, improves support for families at risk and for children with special needs and increases funding for public education to its highest level in provincial history.

Balanced Budget 2006 increases training and skills development; expands post-secondary education; and enhances opportunities for youth, first nations, recent immigrants and those with disabilities. Balanced Budget 2006 helps to keep home ownership affordable and provides a range of other tax reductions for individuals and businesses. On top of all of that, we've also provided $6 billion to settle the public civil servant contracts.

We talk about improving expanding services for children — $421 million over four years. What does this mean? There are 3,050 additional children who will benefit from the infant development program; 5,200 additional children and youth who will benefit from therapy programs; 1,150 additional children with special needs who will receive the support and services needed to include them in their regular child care; 1,000 children who'll receive specialized fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and other developmental behaviour intervention; 800 additional families who will benefit from respite care; and 650 children with complex needs who will receive specialized services.

Skills and training is mentioned in our budget. There is $90 million for a new tax credit program that will work in conjunction with the federal government's program, and this is something that businesses have been asking for all around this province. They say: "Why can't we train the people? Why can't we get more Red Seal programs at our workplaces? Why won't you let us do it?" We are. This is what they asked for. They're going to get credits for training the young people of British Columbia so that they can all have good paying jobs to stay here in British Columbia.

We put in $39 million more for the Industry Training Authority, $50 million for natural resources and applied sciences endowment, $17 million for computer training to create computer access centres in the first nation communities and $2 million for mineral exploration.

I find it hard, because I have people saying: "I can't find a job. I'm a welder. I can't do this." Well, there are so many jobs in British Columbia, and if you're looking at the mining industry, they are looking for people in northern British Columbia. If anyone from Ontario is listening, come on out, because there are lots of jobs here for you.

Post-secondary education budget increases. There's a $460 million total increase for budget increases. We've got the world centre for digital media, and we have supporting research and innovation. Just in my riding alone, Simon Fraser University receives many grants for research and is expanding all the time.

[1600]

In our Balanced Budget 2006, we have tax reduction for homeowners. For the first time since 1993, we've increased the threshold for the grant amount of your house taxes, keeping taxes fair and competitive. We've

[ Page 2598 ]

eliminated PST on labour charges for maintaining and modifying computer systems.

Let me say that just this morning, I was back in my riding at a company called Swiss Water Decaffeinated Coffee Co. They take the caffeine out of coffee. They have been working for a couple of years, and they wanted to add a second line. Well, I pushed the button to open the second line this morning. It was a $20 million investment in British Columbia for that line, and over $13 million of it was spent with three companies in Burnaby.

The jobs that go with that line and the $20 million were going to New Orleans in the United States, and the reason they didn't go to New Orleans, they tell us, is because of our tax structure, because of taking the 6 percent tax off the manufacturing equipment. That's what saved the jobs for British Columbia.

The Minister of Finance has come up with a negotiating framework. It's $6 billion for the public servant contracts. One billion is available to sign before your contract expires. That's about $3,300 per worker in the province. There's $4.7 billion over the next three years to settle their contracts, and then there's a $300,000 bonus for going into a fourth year, where the workers of British Columbia, the public sector, will be able to share in the growth and wealth of this province. That's laid out, and this is so unique.

I hear from people in my riding, from teachers, from nurses — well, bus drivers aren't part of that contract — but teachers and nurses, in particular, and from the maintenance people at Burnaby Hospital. They're encouraging their union to settle early. They say: "Harry, it seems like teachers…. We've always been in this position. We've never negotiated with any government for 12 or 13 years." They have always had to be legislated back to work because of the mentality of the leadership. The mentality of the leadership, and some of it is present in this House, but….

Interjection.

H. Bloy: It's worth repeating.

What they're telling me is: "We're encouraging our rep at the school to tell them to settle the contract, to take advantage of the bonus, to listen to what the people of the province want. Yes, we care about class size and composition." That's what I hear as the number one issue, but they want the contract settled. They want that, so I applaud the Minister of Finance for coming up with this framework to settle these contracts in British Columbia.

Balanced Budget 2006 strengthens communities. It helps community living in B.C., natural resources and sustainable development. We've put in even more money again for the pine beetle infestation. It's just something we have to be able to take under control and eliminate from our lands here. Tourism and international opportunities — well, there's money going to be spent in British Columbia.

I think most members in this House can remember that when we had Expo 86, there were naysayers. It wasn't going to work. You know, it's too much, and it's only for the people of the lower mainland. It will never help me. I live all the way out in Falkland, British Columbia. I can tell you that the people in Falkland, British Columbia, said that. They're so happy that Expo 86 worked, because they had friends from around the world who came. Tourists came there. They took the tourist routes, and they visited all of British Columbia.

That's what's going to happen with the Olympics. If you're from Texas, you're probably not going to be sitting up here in February 2010 to watch the downhill skiing, but you'll go to Whistler in the summer, one of the summers before the Olympics, so that when you're sitting at home when the Olympics are on, you'll say: "I've been there. I've been to Whistler, British Columbia — beautiful Whistler, British Columbia. I've been to Vancouver. What a beautiful province. I've been there in the summer in all its glory. I've been up there, and I've gone up on the lift. What a great place."

[1605]

That's public relations. That's what we got from Turin, Italy when people talked about us, when we put up our house there. We have the most beautiful province, and there's no reason why we are not going to have so many tourists before the Olympics. This is what has happened at many of them. Even Lillehammer, Norway, will say that they planned for tourists for the Olympics and after the Olympics, but they didn't plan for them before the Olympics. They were really taken aback.

Investing in infrastructure, Balanced Budget 2006. You know, we often hear W.A.C. Bennett mentioned by both sides of the House as the person who created this province because he had the foresight to build the dam. He built this great dam. Do you think we would have the lower mainland we have today if it weren't for Mr. Bennett?

What we have to get through, or the opposition has to understand, is that if we don't continue to invest in infrastructure, if we don't continue to look at new ways, we will continue to go backward. This is why we're investing in the infrastructure of British Columbia. We have to build health facilities, and we are building them.

Just in my riding alone, the light rapid transit system is going to go from Lougheed town centre up North Road and Clarke Road, through Port Moody to Coquitlam town centre. I'm encouraging TransLink now to add one last stop to that, and that's at Douglas College, which is just above, because it's known….

On the Expo Line the largest ridership or largest stations for destination shopping are Metrotown, first, and Pacific Centre, second. We have the Expo Line that carries about 186,000 passengers a day, and we have the B-Line bus that runs from Richmond to downtown Vancouver and carries about 114,000 passengers a day. I'm hoping the Millennium Line is going to continue to grow. It's nowhere near capacity yet. It's heavily subsidized, but I'm hoping that when we add the light rapid transit onto it, we'll get more ridership on that.

[ Page 2599 ]

When I listened…. I just can't remember which member it was, but he was talking about health care in British Columbia and how there's a report that said we were the best in British Columbia, and he was whining about something. We were the best in Canada, but I don't accept "the best in Canada" until we can serve every person in this province. I agree with everybody in the House on that, but why can't we be the best in Canada? Why can't we be the best in the world? Why are we looking so negatively and so small at what we do here from the opposition? I say we can be the best in the world, and that's what we have to strive for.

On education. We're putting more money in K-to-12. In the last ten years we've seen a loss of about 80,000 children in British Columbia. In the last ten years we've lost 80,000 children in the public school system, yet for the remaining children, we've added $1,200 for every child in British Columbia. Each child is now funded at the rate of $7,338.

Sound fiscal management. That's what we have under the leadership of our Minister of Finance. I'm proud to say I'm part of the Liberal team that is striving for a better British Columbia, working toward being the best in the world, working toward hosting the 2010 Winter Olympics and all the jobs it will bring to British Columbia and all the relatives of all the members of the House in this province that — they may not know it yet — will be out to visit, I'm sure, at some point before the Olympics.

I'm not sure how to do this. I've said how proud I am, but I do get concerned about the negative comments that keep coming out of this House. We have these negative comments. Some we hear inside the House and some outside the House. We just went through a federal election. The opposition…. You know, an NDPer is a city councillor, a provincial member and a federal member. They have no bounds. They're just one big party.

[1610]

They want to tax us and tax us. The last member from Nelson-Creston: "Double the spending on this; double the spending on this. Double this, and we'll dance, and we'll do this." That was the last member for Nelson-Creston. Boy, they could sure spin a tale, but he did it.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order.

H. Bloy: He did it in the 1990s, and he worked us. You know, he taxed us and taxed us to death, and at death they want to tax us all over again. Can you imagine? These people here in this House want to tax us after we die. With all the work we do as contributing members to society, they want to take that money from our family members or where we want to give it to a charity. They want to take it from us. I find that so disgusting. They tax us while we're working, and then they are going to tax us after death and tax us and tax us.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, members.

H. Bloy: I guess this comment…. They're wondering what we talk about, but when you're an NDPer, when the party boss in Ottawa says that that's it, because…. When the party boss here says it, who the hell knows what she's going to do?

Deputy Speaker: Member, I would ask you to keep your language parliamentary.

H. Bloy: Thank you.

But who knows what the Leader of this Opposition will say? I don't know. One thing here, and another thing outside. It can be point after point where she's had three or four opinions, depending who she has talked to or, as I understand, who has talked to her last. But then we have their leader in Ottawa who gives them direction.

I'm proud, so proud, to be part of this strong leadership of the Premier of this great province and of the Finance Minister in the cabinet of the B.C. Liberals.

D. Cubberley: It's a pleasure to have the opportunity to present in the chamber again and to see you in the chair, Madam Speaker, and to feel your judicious hand on the interactions in this chamber guiding them toward reason and away from emotion.

Perhaps the member for Burquitlam was a bit caught up in his own passion. Perhaps he was stirred into that by the passion of the member for Nelson-Creston. I won't be partisan and assert that I felt that the passion from the member for Nelson-Creston had a closer association with reason and balance than the passion of the member for Burquitlam.

It is a pleasure to have an opportunity to respond to the provincial budget, both the substance of the budget, which I think was sorely lacking, and the bumf, which was of course superabundant and continues to play in the chamber today.

I just want to take as an example the opening pitch of the budget, which was that every budget is an opportunity for our province to take another step forward. I have to say that I did very much agree with the member for Burquitlam when he made the point that we should definitely not continue to go backward. I agree strongly with that point, but what we see in this budget isn't anything near a step forward. At best, I think you'd have to say it's a step sideways, if not outright backwards.

Perhaps it might be more apt to describe it as an opportunity missed, an opportunity to acknowledge the clear message delivered last May about agendas lacking in conscience; cuts foisted on the vulnerable; initiatives taken in secret; leadership veering off a promised course of openness, accountability and transparency into unilateral action; privatization by stealth; and a general climate of disrespect for working people and signed agreements.

[ Page 2600 ]

It might have been an opportunity not to gloss over but rather to acknowledge the need for a more balanced approach, one that respects the public's desire to see public health care stewarded and sustained, renewed through innovation and imagination, with shortened wait times for access to surgery, better access to primary care and a system of seniors care that gives hope and allows individuals to plan their futures with a degree of certainty that care will indeed be there when and where they need it — patient-centred care, when and where you need it.

[1615]

To me, that actually sounds like a very good slogan. I think it's one we should keep right in front of us, but it does ring hollow in the context of a lack of caring and mismanagement of the hospital emergency sector and seniors care.

I recall it was a new-era promise — care when and where you needed it, patient-centred care — one made but clearly not kept through the actions that followed the promise. This time it was not kept in the throne speech, either, and it was not reflected in the budget.

I'm not talking about the amounts of money that are being spent. The members opposite used to say over and over again when they were in opposition: "There's enough money in the system.

It's how you're proposing to spend it that's the problem." Well, there's a kind of time lapse involved there, and now there's an irony in being on this side of the House, listening to members opposite resort to endlessly citing how much money is being spent on health care, how much additional money they are putting into the system and how difficult it is to sustain it, but forgetting their former focus on how the money is being spent. Today, in the budget context, the issue is: how you are and aren't proposing to spend it.

Now, my critic responsibility is health care, so for me, the budget itself has to be considered in that context. I have to say, frankly, that it was a damp squib. There was nothing new. There were no new initiatives. There's no sign of innovation. There's no sign of change, which you would have to acknowledge is rather baffling in light of the fact that the throne speech was all health care. The throne speech's dynamic intent about transformative change to build on all the wonderful things that have been done and take them further…. There we have it.

The budget comes along, and the transmission for intent turning into action is, of course, the budget. The budget comes along, and there was nothing in it at all about health care — not much more than an allowance for inflation. If you use the inflation factor the budget gave, deduct that from what was announced and eliminate money announced previously, which is not new money now, the budget is right where it was.

That's okay. I said it wasn't simply about how much money but how the money's being spent. In that regard, I have a concern, because there was nothing in the budget that showed any commitment to addressing the issue of wait times on a systemic or a systematic basis and nothing to address the chronic and increasing waits for joint replacement in British Columbia, which, of course, is a topic of high interest in my constituency.

There's no dawning awareness in that budget of the need to establish better patient flow to eliminate bottlenecks, to expand capacity in new directions or to borrow good ideas that are being tested in other jurisdictions, some of them immediately adjacent to us.

You know, joint replacement is a topic of great interest to seniors — a rising portion of our population, a portion we are all approaching joining, if not already in. It's one of the two groups that this budget purports to be about. Yet there's $560 million in government's hands, roughly, in federal money. It's in the bank for British Columbia to spend specifically to bring wait times down for joint replacement and other surgeries. That $560 million could make a lot of change if we were interested in transformative change in British Columbia.

Now, members opposite, I'm sure, would be eager to remind me about the UBC surgery announcement. It's something that I've publicly acknowledged as a step in the right direction but, nonetheless, it's a baby step in the face of a pressing problem involving huge and utterly unnecessary suffering of seniors.

Members opposite might also wish to remind me about the money for health authorities to reduce their backlog surgeries — a small amount of welcome money, I'm sure. But let's just point out that the first thing we saw with that money is the health authority announcing that it would use the fund to purchase some surgeries as a stopgap in the private sector, not to build capacity in the public health care system. I also want to hasten to point out that the $25 million for the dedicated UBC surgery is less than 5 percent of the money sitting in the bank to bring wait times down.

[1620]

Real change, if we care about the suffering of seniors — and the suffering is real and widespread — will require an action plan on a much broader scale. To put it in human terms, I am hearing on an ongoing basis — and within my own sphere, not just from people who approached me from outside — from seniors who are suffering near-complete immobility, often for a period of years, while waiting for joint replacement surgery. Joint replacement surgery is not rocket science — it's well understood how you do it — but joint replacement surgery in British Columbia is a scarce commodity, and people are waiting entirely too long.

What we hear from government is that the median wait time for quality-of-life surgery is X number of weeks. Of course, the median wait time is a bit of a shell game, because no one waits the median wait time. The median wait is the midpoint between the longest wait and the shortest wait. We don't know how many people fall on either side of it. We don't know how long people are actually waiting.

What we don't get is a frank acknowledgment that median wait is not it for anybody, that most people wait far longer for a surgery than government is acknowledging — six months to a year is common from the time the surgery is booked — nor, especially, that

[ Page 2601 ]

the wait for surgery once the specialist actually books the surgery, once you get to that point, is the shortest part of the cumulative waiting that patients do. People have been suffering for years by the time they get to see the surgeon and the surgery is booked.

The waiting begins when the hip or knee reaches the end stage of arthritis. As members will know, if you have a member of your family or, heaven forbid, if you're reaching that stage yourself, arthritis locks into end stage very quickly, and mobility is lost. It happens very suddenly. That's when a senior typically sees the doctor — who then either tests, diagnoses and refers that person to a specialist or may immediately refer the person to a specialist, who then does the diagnosis.

The problem is that the specialist-wait is a killer. A year is quite fast in British Columbia. Up-Island, it is two years. Upcountry, I understand, it's two years. That's two years in which a person is confined to using a walker, barely able to get from bed to bathroom, utterly dependent upon a caregiver, if there is one, and unable to work or stay mobile enough for good health — and that's just to get to see the specialist. From there, there's another wait or waits. This situation is increasingly typical among seniors.

It was this situation, in fact, this very situation, that led to the Chaoulli case at the Supreme Court. This situation led to the determination that wait times were too long. It's this situation that's driving change and moving governments to bring wait times down from Quebec to Alberta, by way of Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan — the invisible border is there — but apparently not in British Columbia, where we have the money but do not have the political resolve to face the problem.

That's right. We have the money — courtesy of the federal government transfer sitting in the bank, earmarked for wait-time reduction — and what is government doing? Government is sitting on its hands, sitting while seniors suffer. The budget clearly indicates a lack of resolve. We've been commending the specialized surgical clinic model in the public health care system to government for some time — not with a great deal of traction, I might add. Maybe it's the quality of the message or the messenger, but it's not being heard.

However, the use of dedicated surgical centres is one way to move high numbers of patients through a repetitive procedure in a cost-effective manner. That is being demonstrated across the country. It gets patients out of the crowded, oversubscribed general hospital operating room, which has to handle every class of surgery, and it allows them to be dealt with quickly and cost-effectively.

I know the members opposite believe that there's nothing to learn from Manitoba, but Manitoba has demonstrated how you can do a much higher volume of joint replacements or cataract surgeries much more quickly at much lower cost. In public health care, on the clinical side, I think we need to be interested in how we can do things better, more safely and more economically. Ultimately, that's one of the pillars that sustainability rests on. One of the others, of course, is improved population health, but that's a topic I'll have to explore another time.

[1625]

You know, if you're resistant to learning from Manitoba — and I get the sense there's resistance to the idea that you would learn from one of those social democratic provinces or, heaven forbid, from the initiative of a social democratic provinces or, heaven forbid, from the initiative of a social democratic government — deeply into "subsidiarity," I might add, but that's another question. You're resistant to learning from Manitoba. Why not try learning from Alberta? That's right. I said Alberta. Alberta — imagine it. Learn from Alberta, a place where they actually elect some of the people who sit on health authority boards.

An Hon. Member: No.

D. Cubberley: No, Alberta, a place where innovation isn't the exclusive property of the private sector. Imagine it. You know, a dose of Alberta medicine on wait times for joint replacement would do B.C. a lot of good. Indeed, it's just what the doctor would order, if we actually took the time to demonstrate to doctors and to government how well it can work. It works very well.

The Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute has demonstrated clearly that by creating central assessment clinics where patients who may require orthopedic surgery — that would be a joint replacement — are examined by a team of professionals in one visit. You collapse all of the sequential waits into a single visit. It takes a day, and you get to the specialist.

Remarkable reductions can be achieved through those centres. Most remarkable, to my mind, was