2009 Legislative Session:Fifth 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)

Monday, March 23, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 40, Number 5

CONTENTS

Routine Proceedings

Page

Introductions by Members

Statements

Anniversary of Queen of the North sinking

G. Coons

Tributes

University of Northern B.C. men's basketball team

Hon. S. Bond

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Strata Property Amendment Act, 2009 (Bill 12)

Pension Benefits Standards Amendment Act, 2009 (Bill 11)

Hon. C. Hansen

Statements (Standing Order 25 b )

Canadian Red Cross

R. Lee

Bread of Life Centre

S. Fraser

Campaign for MRI equipment at Burnaby Hospital

H. Bloy

Queen Victoria School water project for Tanzanian village

S. Simpson

Steelhead protection

R. Sultan

Chinese heritage in New Westminster

J. Kwan

Oral Questions

B.C. Rail contract with Patrick Kinsella

C. James

Hon. W. Oppal

B. Ralston

J. Horgan

L. Krog

S. Simpson

M. Farnworth

Impact of Olympic security on air travel from rural B.C.

S. Fraser

Hon. C. Hansen

G. Coons

N. Macdonald

Petitions

R. Chouhan

Budget Debate (continued)

B. Simpson

D. MacKay

S. Fraser

Hon. M. Coell

N. Macdonald

Hon. L. Reid

R. Chouhan

J. Les

J. Horgan

[ Page 14531 ]

MONDAY, MARCH 23, 2009

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. M. Coell: I have five guests in the precinct today and had the privilege of having lunch with them: Anne Allen, Vivi Heppell, Bea Russell, Lynn Urquhart and my mother Norma Coell. Would the House please make them welcome.

G. Coons: On behalf of the member for Skeena, I'd like to introduce three constituents from Kitimat: Kathleen Cherry and her two daughters, Rosemary Reschke, age seven, and Jennifer, age 11. Also with Kathleen is her father Douglas Cherry, who was an official court reporter for 31 years under the Attorney General in Vancouver and who currently resides in Victoria.

Kathleen is a district counsellor with the Coast Mountain school district. Jennifer has studied the Legislature in school and is here today to see the buildings and politicians in action. Please make them all welcome.

[1335]

Hon. J. McIntyre: I would like to introduce a very special delegation from Mexico here up in the gallery today. They're here to discuss gang violence and other related justice issues between B.C. and Mexico. For all, I understand, it's the very first visit to beautiful B.C.

We have with us today Mr. Rommel Moreno Manjarrez, Attorney General of Baja California, Mexico; Mr. Eduardo Martinez Silva, deputy clerk and private secretary to the Attorney General; Mr. Aniver Pina Hernandez, executive secretary of the Attorney General; Mr. Hugo Salinas, general coordinator of advisers; Mr. Jose Manuel Yepis, director of communications; and Mrs. Cecilia Navarro, the director of training.

Also, there are three gentlemen along from the media from Mexico: Said Betanzos, Rafael Morales and Juan Galvan. I'd like the House to make them please feel very welcome.

C. Trevena: In the gallery today are a group of grade 6 students from Ecole des Deux Mondes in Campbell River. As the name suggests, it's French immersion. They're with their teacher Georgina Wood, and parents Lyn Logan and Duncan Devlin.

Earlier I talked to them about the behaviour that they may see in the House and hoped they weren't going to learn anything from it, and I hope that we actually are going to show them that we can behave as we should be doing in this House. I hope the House will make them all feel very welcome.

Hon. M. Polak: Today in the House I am fortunate to have six guests to see us in action, four of whom are from British Columbia: Jake Letkemann and Linda Letkemann, David Rutsch and Rose Rutsch. We are also joined by Gary Thack and Girarda Thack, who are visiting us from Michigan. Would the House please make them very welcome.

C. Evans: Hon. Speaker, we have some guests here today. They're my friends, but they're your constituents. So with your permission, I'll introduce your constituents: Pete and Cindie Simonsen and their daughter Anna-Lisa. I can't quite see from here if their son Anders is here. Cindie is, I think, a third- or fourth-generation farmer from Naramata. Pete is an organic grower, growing fruit and carrots and stuff, proving that grapes aren't the only thing you can still grow in Naramata. They've come to watch their Legislature. Will the House please make them welcome.

Hon. W. Oppal: Today in the gallery are two new legislative council assistants who are here to get a better understanding of how their work preparing bills and amendments is put into action. They are Diane Tyler and Elizabeth Flather. Would you all make them welcome.

I'd also like to introduce two members who are integrally involved in Law Courts Education Society, an organization that does stellar work in conveying the meaning of legal education to the public. They are Rick Craig, the executive director, and Mason Loh, who is a board member. May the House please make them welcome.

Statements

Anniversary of

queen of the north sinking

G. Coons: I'd like to acknowledge a sad day in B.C. history. Yesterday, March 22, was the third anniversary of the sinking of the Queen of the North. Lives were lost that fateful night. The Foisy and Rosette families lost their loved ones. Passengers and crew are forever having nightmares, and the public still wonders what happened.

Those in Hartley Bay are still dealing with the upwelling of diesel and the impacts on their harvesting grounds. Eight times in the final report of the Transportation Safety Board it said that B.C. Ferry Services' actions placed the vessel, its passengers and its crew at risk. After three years it's time for closure and time to have a full and thorough inquiry into this marine disaster, as promised on the day that we lost the Queen.

[ Page 14532 ]

Tributes

university of northern b.c.

men's basketball team

Hon. S. Bond: Certainly, a different tone to my comments this afternoon. On behalf of my colleagues from Prince George–Omineca and Prince George North, we want to recognize the Canadian College Association's Men's National Basketball Championship, held in Prince George this past weekend.

I should say that our UNBC Timberwolves did us very proud. They were the lowest seed in the tournament. In fact, they were only there because they were the host team. But they did a phenomenal job, finishing fourth in the country.

[1340]

One of our players, Inderbir Gill, was actually named to the all-Canadian team, and I can tell you that there were over 2,000 fans cheering them on. Congratulations to our Timberwolves, Coach Mike Raimbault and also to Len McNamara and everyone. Fantastic job. We're very proud of you.

Introductions by Members

R. Hawes: Compared to our Whip, our Deputy Whip is a real tyrant. But even tyrants deserve to have a happy birthday. I'd like to ask all members of the House to please join me in wishing the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine a very happy birthday. By the way, it's his birthday number….

Hon. B. Bennett: In November 2008, grade 12 students across the province were invited to submit a short video, up to three minutes in length, representing "What B.C. Means to Me."

The following students have each won $2,500 for themselves and an additional $2,000 for their school: Dustin Brons, Lord Byng Secondary School, from Vancouver; Amy Wang, Lord Tweedsmuir Secondary in Surrey; Kelcie Hudson, Wellington Secondary in Nanaimo; Tchadas Leo, Carihi Secondary in Campbell River; and Josh Havelka, Reynolds Secondary in Victoria.

Those winning videos are available on the government website. Everyone should take a look at them. They're just fantastic.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Strata Property Amendment Act, 2009

Hon. C. Hansen presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Strata Property Amendment Act, 2009.

Hon. C. Hansen: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. C. Hansen: I am pleased to introduce amendments to the Strata Property Act that will improve dispute resolution processes available to strata corporations and strata owners to enhance consumer protection and to clarify the act.

The most significant amendments will improve dispute resolution by allowing small claims court to hear strata property disputes so that they can be resolved in a more timely and cost-effective manner, rather than proceeding through the Supreme Court as they do now.

In addition, the amendments will authorize regulations for new arbitration and mediation processes, including the ability to require mediation for certain types of disputes. Allowing for these frameworks will enable the development of more economic, expedient and accessible dispute resolution models.

These amendments respond to our commitment to review dispute resolution processes in light of the numerous concerns received from strata organizations and individuals. Other technical amendments will contribute to better strata relations by addressing requests for greater clarity, flexibility and accountability. For example, new requirements for strata corporations to obtain depreciation reports and audited financial statements will ensure that owners and purchasers are better informed and may help prevent disputes from arising in the first place.

These changes are the result of consultations with key stakeholders, including condominium associations, strata managers, developers and lawyers.

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

Bill 12, Strata Property Amendment Act, 2009, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Pension Benefits Standards

Amendment Act, 2009

Hon. C. Hansen presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Pension Benefits Standards Amendment Act, 2009.

Hon. C. Hansen: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

[ Page 14533 ]

Hon. C. Hansen: I am pleased to introduce amendments to the Pension Benefits Standards Act. Most of these amendments are intended to enable B.C.'s pension standards to apply to the new private sector pension plan announced by the Premier in last fall's economic statement.

While the new pension plan will be established in legislation next year, it will be operated at arm's length from government as a voluntary, defined contribution plan. The plan will allow all B.C. workers, including the self-employed, to enjoy the financial security of pension income after retirement.

[1345]

These technical amendments will permit the new plan to be registered under the Pension Benefits Standards Act. The act's minimum standards for the registered pension plans would apply to the new plan for the protection of plan members.

The bill will allow greater scope for the unlocking of pension funds in the case of shortened life expectancy. This is in addition to the initial measures that I outlined. As in Alberta, a person with any disability or with a terminal illness can qualify for unlocking in certain circumstances, if the pension plan contains that provision.

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

Bill 11, Pension Benefits Standards Amendment Act, 2009, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25

b) Canadian red cross

R. Lee: I stand in the House today to recognize an invaluable organization to every community in B.C. March is Red Cross Month, but this year it is also the 100th anniversary of the Canadian Red Cross. The symbol of a red cross on a white background is recognized worldwide as one of neutrality, peace and aid. For anyone who has ever had the misfortune to be affected by a disaster, be it a natural or personal tragedy, they probably have had the benefit of the Red Cross and its volunteers.

There are countless services offered by the Red Cross, such as first aid and water safety training, disaster management and RespectED, a program for violence and abuse prevention.

I had the opportunity to attend a fundraising gala for the Telus Red Cross Call Centre on Friday night at the Michael J. Fox Theatre in Burnaby organized by the Cantonese Opera Association of Canada, which was founded by Anita Lee, Glynnis Chan, Helen Chu, Shiu Ling Leung, Christina Ho, Eric Szeto, Margaret Koh, Betty Shiao, Bing Wu and Patsy Bo Sai Kwong.

This excellent performance deserved all of the applause the audience gave. The Telus Call Centre is one of the most critical components of the Red Cross's response during times of disaster. It can handle over 10,000 calls per day for disasters of any size, domestically, nationally or internationally. This event was also supported by Red Cross Regional Director Susan Borthwick; Acting Regional Manager Amtul Siddiqui; and Chinese advisory group member James Shieh.

The hard work of the Red Cross volunteers, including Rose He, Stanley Wong, Taz Noor, Debra Molesworth, Mona Cheng, Libo Kong and Doug Nesbitt, were very much appreciated. I congratulate all the many people who make the Red Cross a success. I wish them a happy 100th anniversary and wish them 100 more.

BREAD OF LIFE CENTRE

S. Fraser: On Saturday evening it was chilly and clear in Port Alberni. I put on shorts and a gaudy Hawaiian shirt and a lovely yellow lei and went to a fundraiser and auction at the Bread of Life in Port Alberni. The theme was tacky tourist, so I was in good company.

The Bread of Life has been around since 1988 and draws its support from the people of Port Alberni. According to its mission statement, the Bread of Life exists to serve the needs of the poor and the homeless, to treat all people with dignity and respect and to encourage and help facilitate their social, personal and spiritual growth.

I donate personally to the wonderful organization, and I support their work to bring food and shelter to those who need it most. That's a situation we're seeing much too much of in later years. With one in four children growing up in poverty in this province and the lacking identified by the Auditor General's report on homelessness, organizations like the Bread of Life are attempting to deal with increasing needs, and they do so against great odds.

The Port Alberni Bread of Life Centre gets no provincial or federal funding. The people of Port Alberni step up to the plate and ensure that those who need help in the community get it through the Bread of Life. The Bread of Life is about people — yes, people that need help but also the special people that make that organization tick.

[1350]

As the chair of the organization, Roy GunterSmith brings an infectious and positive energy to the Port Alberni Bread of Life Centre, and that has certainly been evident and was on Saturday at the event. The director, Cindy Sjoholm, is there every day to make sure that those who need hot meals, blankets, clothing get them. Port Alberni Bread of Life Centre provides about 60 to 80 meals per day, every day, and the cuisine is excellent. I applaud the Bread of Life for all that they do, and I applaud the people of Port Alberni for supporting them.

[ Page 14534 ]

CAMPAIGN FOR MRI equipment

AT BURNABY HOSPITAL

H. Bloy: Last Tuesday I had the pleasure of attending the open house and ribbon-cutting ceremony for Burnaby's new MRI at Burnaby Hospital. Thanks to the tireless efforts of the Burnaby Hospital Foundation's $4.8 million Because Life Can't Wait campaign, Burnaby Hospital is getting an MRI. From $2 million provided by the province through the Fraser Health Authority, the space will be renovated and will maintain operating funding for this new equipment.

Without a strong community like Burnaby and its generous citizens, advancements like this would not be possible. Each and every contribution made helped bring this MRI to Burnaby Hospital. By continuing to support the Burnaby Hospital Foundation, we're able to continue to support the hospital and its staff with top-quality equipment and technology.

I need to single out one family who spearheaded this. That was Keith and Betty Beedie, who provided $1.3 million of their own money in matching funds to help launch the campaign.

The people of Burnaby know the hospital is crucial to the welfare of our community, and MRI services are a much-needed element of care that can help support many physicians. Burnaby patients will now be able to get their services done in their home community instead of travelling to other areas.

There are many people to acknowledge who made this campaign successful: Robert Bosa, chair of the fundraising committee; Rahim Rajan, foundation chair; Cathie Heritage; Dr. Henry Huey; Savik Sidhu; Cheryl Bosley; and Cheryl Blondin; plus the whole Burnaby Hospital Foundation board of trustees. Together we are making a difference in the health of our community and our province.

Congratulations to the Burnaby Hospital Foundation for the completion of this very successful campaign, and I wish them all the best as they continue to work to make Burnaby Hospital the best hospital there is.

QUEEN VICTORIA SCHOOL WATER PROJECT

FOR TANZANIAN VILLAGE

S. Simpson: March 22 was World Water Day. Across the globe people were busy advancing public awareness and initiatives that further our understanding of our critical and complex relationship with water and the desperate situation many people face, particularly in developing countries, to simply have access to clean drinking water.

Among those initiatives is a remarkable project by the students of Queen Victoria, an inner-city elementary school in my constituency. The Queen Victoria School water project began as an interdisciplinary exploration of water, which led to an original musical that was presented in May 2007.

While this was originally intended to be the entire project, much more was ahead for Queen Victoria — the drilling of a well in the village of Cheku in Tanzania. Through a local family, contact was made with Moshi Changai, who had a vision of supplying clean water to the village where he grew up.

With his assistance, the school established a sister-community relationship with the village. Pen pal letters and pictures were exchanged. Research was done on the feasibility of digging a well. A business plan was developed, and the task of raising $25,000 began. Awareness and fundraising efforts moved forward, including the walk for water, where students carried buckets of water from Trout Lake to the school to learn about the realities facing people in Tanzania every day to get clean drinking water.

Other activities included students forgoing their birthday celebrations, choosing instead to donate to the effort; setting up lemonade stands; and strangers, hearing of the project on the CBC, choosing to donate. After two years of learning, planning and fundraising, the drilling of the well in Cheku will commence this week.

This is a remarkable achievement by a group of elementary students, their parents, teachers and supporters. I'm very proud of the students of Queen Victoria School and their efforts to build this well and, equally important, to teach us all a lesson that when you put your mind to a worthwhile project and have the determination to stick with it, you can achieve wonderful results, regardless of your age or circumstances. Congratulations and thank you to Queen Victoria School.

[1355]

STEELHEAD PROTECTION

R. Sultan: I stand to recognize the efforts of the government steelhead caucus as they work to preserve and protect our steelhead population and all of the waterways they call home.

Recently I helped organize a steelhead summit involving participation by one-third of the government caucus, biologists, environmentalists, anglers, industry experts and leaders, such as John Fraser, Al Lill and Rod Clapton, at an all-day conference involving 65 people in total at BCIT. We analyzed in-depth — or heard analysis from the experts — the situation of our steelhead population in five critically important regions of the province, and the complexity of the situation has been brought home to us.

Some of the challenges steelhead face include climate change, ocean predators of unknown magnitude, unsound commercial fishing practices in some parts of B.C., competition for our freshwater resources ashore, the quality of the water and habitat degradation.

Vital to the survival of these fish and the health of our waterways is the $21 million government living rivers trust, which is dedicated to ensuring the sustainability of

[ Page 14535 ]

our fish populations and the rivers in which they reside. The steelhead caucus is dedicated to making sure that this magnificent icon of British Columbia is around a long time for our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren to enjoy.

CHINESE HERITAGE

IN NEW WESTMINSTER

J. Kwan: I want to tell all members about the attempts being made to preserve what's been called the last piece of Chinese heritage in New Westminster. It is not commonly known that New West once had a bustling Chinatown area, that there were 1,600 Chinese residents by the late 1800s. Those who died were often buried in a number of cemeteries near an old public cemetery. This is currently the site of New Westminster Secondary School, which was built in 1948, largely on top of the various burial grounds.

There is now very little trace of New West's Chinatown after demolitions over the years that were ordered by the city, which saw the buildings as fire hazards. The new plan to demolish the high school and build a new one could disturb the Chinese cemetery and destroy one of the last links to the New Westminster Chinatown.

Bill Chu, the founder of Canadians for Reconciliation, is active in seeking to preserve the history of the Chinese communities in British Columbia along with the Chinese Benevolent Association. Bill has made some concrete suggestions to deal with the issues, including that Chinese communities should be consulted on the planning, construction, methodology and demolition of any part of the entire site.

With the exception of a memorial park, the use of the area of the cemeteries should be restricted to service parking and landscaping only.

Apart from adding both Chinese cemeteries to the database under the Heritage Conservation Act, a restrictive covenant that no building or structure is to be built, to be added to the title of the parcels containing both Chinese cemeteries.

A portion of the area should be developed for a properly designated memorial park. As a minimum, such should contain a monument or plaque to commemorate the contributions of the Chinese in New Westminster from the 1800s until now.

A permanent display of the detailed history of the Chinese in New Westminster, including all racist laws and measures passed to limit the rights of Chinese in voting, migration, work, etc.

A permanent map and photos showing details of former Chinatown before and after the great fire of 1898, with locations of significant Chinese community groups and businesses.

A religious shrine that pays tribute can also be made so that we can acknowledge our forefathers.

Bill also proposed the history of the Chinese community be incorporated into the school curriculum so that the children in New West will grow up learning this history.

I ask all members of this House to support this proposal so that we, too, can learn about this history of racism.

Oral Questions

B.C. RAIL CONTRACT WITH

PATRICK KINSELLA

C. James: On March 12, 2009, B.C. Rail issued a letter stating that Mr. Kinsella had been retained between August 2001 and September 2005 to provide strategic advice "specific to the core review process which government was undertaking during that period." We know the core review finished in 2003. We know the decision to privatize and sell B.C. Rail was made in 2003, but the cheques to Mr. Kinsella didn't stop in 2003. Mr. Kinsella continued to get $6,000 a month for two more years from B.C. Rail.

[1400]

My question is to the Finance Minister. Why didn't Mr. Kinsella's payments stop in 2003 when the core review had finished and B.C. Rail was sold?

Hon. W. Oppal: This matter is obviously before the courts. We're not going to comment on anything before the courts.

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

C. James: It's extraordinary. B.C. Rail, a Crown corporation, can certainly comment on Mr. Kinsella's contract. In fact, they did comment on Mr. Kinsella's contract. And the government says that they can't?

We know that the B.C. Liberal Party campaign co-chair and one of the Premier's closest friends was paid $300,000, not of Liberal money but of taxpayer dollars, including $6,000 a month for two years without any job description.

Again my question is to the Finance Minister. Was he aware that B.C. Rail paid the Premier's friend tens of thousands of dollars for two years for doing absolutely nothing?

Hon. W. Oppal: You know, I don't know if the members opposite realize this or not, but if enough comments are made in this chamber about what's happening in the Supreme Court of British Columbia…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: …there's a very distinct possibility that a defence lawyer can raise the argument that his clients

[ Page 14536 ]

could no longer get a fair trial in view of the comments that have been made here, because they'll be unable to get a jury that can hear the case in an unbiased manner.

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

C. James: The Attorney General and everyone on that side of the House seem to forget that these are public dollars. The public has a right to know where that money was spent and for what. We see it over and over again. This government will do anything to avoid accountability. These are public dollars.

My question to the Finance Minister, who is in charge of the public purse: will he admit that the Premier's closest friend got $6,000 a month for two years for doing nothing, and if he knew it, why didn't he stop it?

Hon. W. Oppal: The Leader of the Opposition has once again shown that she has no understanding of the rule of law and no understanding of the independence of the courts.

B. Ralston: For a contract of $6,000 a month, ordinary accounting rules would require that the contract be authorized, recorded and reported properly.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. Will he agree to produce the bills Mr. Kinsella sent to B.C. Rail and let the public judge for themselves what he did?

Hon. W. Oppal: You know, we can do this for the whole 30 minutes, because I'm going to give the same answers. If they're going to raise issues that are now before the court, I'm not going to answer them.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: My question to the Minister of Finance is the same. Will he agree to release the bills that Mr. Kinsella submitted to B.C. Rail so the public can judge for themselves what he did for $6,000 a month?

Hon. W. Oppal: My answer is the same.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1405]

J. Horgan: I think that the member will find out that the people in Delta South are keen on accountability, just like everyone on this side of the House.

On March 12 Mr. Kinsella said the following: "He was engaged by B.C. Rail to assist in understanding and interpreting the core review process as to its potential impacts on the corporation."

That's interesting, because the last time we heard about accountability from the Premier, it was on May 20, 2003, when he was addressing the handpicked board members at B.C. Rail, and he said the following. This is the Premier speaking. "The establishment of the shareholders letter is one mechanism that we feel helps to clarify your relationship with government." "The core services review was designed to redefine the mandate of the company." "The shareholders letter is intended to clearly articulate your mandate to ensure that your role and the government's role is very clear."

Again my question is to the Minister of Transportation, who would have been responsible for B.C. Rail at some point in his life. What do you do when you've got a clear letter that tells you what your role and responsibility is? Why would you hire the Premier's friend for $6,000 a month?

Hon. W. Oppal: You know, there are three people charged in the Supreme Court of British Columbia in matters relating to B.C. Rail.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm not going to comment on it, because it's not proper for me to comment on it.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

Again to the prime shareholder, the Minister of Finance: what did we get for 6,000 bucks a month?

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm not going to answer the question.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

L. Krog: Well, I acknowledge that the minister might be getting a little tired of hearing the questions, but it's not nearly as tiresome as hearing his complete lack of answers to legitimate questions the people of British Columbia….

Interjections.

L. Krog: Yesterday the Attorney General was asked if he'd hold an independent investigation into Mr. Kinsella's

[ Page 14537 ]

activities. His response: "We don't just hold public inquiries just for the sake of having them. If there is something to be learned from an inquiry or probe, then we hold it."

My question to the Attorney General — very simple: will he today take the opportunity to reconsider those comments, and will he now agree to hold an independent investigation into the activities of Mr. Kinsella?

Hon. W. Oppal: Commissions of inquiry are held under the Public Inquiry Act. They are not held where there are matters before the courts. So if there's a trial going on, we don't hold commissions of inquiry, for reasons that are obvious. Evidence that's admissible on a commission of inquiry is not admissible in a courtroom often, so those are the reasons we don't hold anything of a concurrent nature.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Take your seat for a second, Member.

The member has a supplemental.

L. Krog: B.C. Rail has no trouble commenting on this matter — a Crown corporation. And yet the Attorney General can't open his mouth to give one small scintilla of an answer to this.

[1410]

This has nothing to do with the integrity of the courts. That's very clear. It is entirely about protecting this Premier's political hide just prior to an election.

The Attorney General refuses to say why the Premier's close friend was paid $300,000 by a Crown corporation, and he believes there is no need for any independent investigation.

So my question to him, simply, today is: when is he going to stop protecting the Premier and his friends and finally tell this Legislature the truth?

Hon. W. Oppal: We do have an independent hearing going on. It's called a trial.

S. Simpson: What the Attorney General clearly does not understand is that he has a responsibility to the people of British Columbia and that responsibility starts with being accountable and transparent about the public interest, not about secrecy and arrogance on his part and his government's part. Unless we have full disclosure here as to what Mr. Kinsella, the first among Liberal insiders, received this money for, the people of British Columbia will continue to have those questions.

Will the Attorney General stand up, do his job and tell British Columbians what that money was for?

Hon. W. Oppal: My job as the chief law officer of the province is to adhere to the rule of law, and….

An Hon. Member: You're failing your job.

Hon. W. Oppal: That was clever.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: Our courts are independent. People here ought not to be commenting on matters that are before the courts. It's called "the right to have a fair trial," and it's about time that member learned something about democracy.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: And what this minister should learn is…. He should learn what this place is about. He should learn about the Legislature. He should learn about accountability to the people of British Columbia. He should learn that he and his friends on that front bench have a bigger obligation than covering up for the Premier.

The Premier's friend, the chair of your campaigns, $300,000 — no explanation here. The performance is shameful. Tell the British Columbians what that money was for, and produce the documents.

Hon. W. Oppal: I'm not going to answer the question.

M. Farnworth: Well, that's a new one. Every answer to date has been: "It's before the courts." In fact, that's going to be the epitaph of this government: "It's before the courts."

[1415]

What would be really clever of the Attorney General, if he's so concerned about being clever, is if he'd stop acting as a human shield for the Premier and start answering the questions the public of British Columbia deserves answers to.

Mr. Kinsella has commented on the contract. B.C. Rail has commented on the contract. We know that the Premier's letter to the railway was for a core review which lasted only two years, yet the payments continued year after year after that core review ended. So the public has a right to know: what was that money for, why was that money given to Mr. Kinsella, and what did he do for it? Three simple questions.

If the Attorney General won't answer those questions, will the Minister of Finance at least stand up and show that he was doing his job and tell the people where that money went for and what it was for?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[ Page 14538 ]

Hon. W. Oppal: Well, the melodramatic bluster keeps getting larger and larger in volume.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Attorney, just take your seat for a second.

Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: The public will have every opportunity and every right to know what happened in the B.C. Rail dispute in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: Actually, I think maybe the answers might be forthcoming after May 12.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Member.

M. Farnworth: What has been clear right from the beginning is that these documents from the library are in the public domain. Mr. Kinsella has commented on them. B.C. Rail has commented on them. People directly involved have commented on them — except this government, which issued the cheques, gave the money to Mr. Kinsella. It won't comment on it, and that is a disgrace.

The Attorney General has a dual role under our system. One is the independent officer, and the other is a political one, and it's time that he recognized his duty to the people of this province. The public wants to know: what did Mr. Kinsella do for $300,000, and why did those payments continue long after the core review was over?

Hon. W. Oppal: I might add that both roles of the Attorney General involve the respecting of the courts.

IMPACT OF OLYMPIC SECURITY ON

AIR TRAVEL FROM RURAL B.C.

S. Fraser: Many people in rural B.C. are rightfully skeptical about claims by this government that the Olympics will benefit all.

Air carriers, in particular, in rural communities and the communities that they service have a big problem right now with this government. K.D. Air in Qualicum Beach, my constituency, is being told, with no consultation, that for security reasons their flights from Qualicum Beach to Vancouver — their direct flights — will have to divert to Nanaimo Airport, deplane the passengers and the baggage, go through security, reboard, reload and await clearance before continuing on to Vancouver.

The 20-minute flight, the convenient flight that makes their business viable, turns into hours. This will do anything but benefit the region and the people, and it will take away tourism opportunities and take away the vital services that are needed locally.

[1420]

Will the Tourism Minister explain how he plans to protect carriers like K.D. Air and the regions that they service?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Okay, let's try this again. Minister of Finance.

Hon. C. Hansen: As someone who was born in Port Alberni and keeps in touch with family and friends in that member's riding, I know how excited people are in that member's constituency about the fact that…. In fact, as I've travelled around British Columbia, I know how excited British Columbians are generally about the torch coming to their communities and the fact that the world spotlight is going to be on these communities.

When it comes to the security plan for the Olympics, it is the RCMP and the federal government that are in charge of that security plan. They have responsibility for making sure that not only the 250,000 visitors from around the world who come to British Columbia at that time are safe, but that British Columbians, as well, are safe and secure.

I know that the RCMP are working with various affected organizations around the province. It is my hope that they will find measures that will ensure that everybody can be appropriately accommodated.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

S. Fraser: I was knocking on doors in Port Alberni this weekend. What they're excited about is May 12. You guys biting the dust is what they're excited about.

Last week I spoke with Lars and Diana Banke. They own and operate K.D. Air out of Qualicum Beach. They estimate that they're going to lose a quarter of a million dollars. That could put them out of business. They have 15 employees. What are they — collateral damage with this government?

Again to the minister: how many air carriers and communities are being hung out to dry, and will he commit today to this House to ensuring that all small, vital air carriers like K.D. Air out of Qualicum Beach will not be forced out of business because of the Olympics?

Hon. C. Hansen: I think that we see a growing excitement about the Olympics. I know that in October, when the torch lands in Canada, it's going to land right here on Vancouver Island, and it's going to carry on up. I

[ Page 14539 ]

think we're going to see that excitement start to ignite in community after community after community, including in that member's constituency.

I can tell the member, or at least I would suggest to the member, that everybody in this House on both sides wants to make sure that the games are held in a safe and secure way. When it comes to air travel in and out of Vancouver International Airport, those are decisions and calls that are made by the RCMP, working with Transport Canada.

I'm sure that the member wants to ensure that all the measures are taken to ensure that everybody is safe and secure and that we can all celebrate one of the best Winter Olympic Games that this planet has ever seen.

G. Coons: The minister doesn't get it. Thousands of people and tourists from small B.C. communities will likely not be able to fly into YVR or downtown Vancouver.

I have one question for the minister, or whatever minister wants to stand up. I'm surprised that they aren't saying that this is before the courts. They aren't saying: "This is up in the air" or "We don't know what's happening." Can the minister confirm that the Boundary Bay, Langley, Pemberton and Squamish airports will be provided with passenger screening security equipment for the duration of the heightened Olympic security period?

[1425]

Hon. C. Hansen: Actually, I was in Prince Rupert just yesterday, enjoying the sunshine. I had a chance to chat to….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: I had a chance to talk to many of this member's constituents. I know how excited they are about the Olympics and how excited they are about the torch coming through their communities in the months and weeks leading up to the opening ceremonies of the Olympic and Paralympic Games.

I can reiterate that the RCMP and Transport Canada are working with the communities, working with affected organizations, to make sure that, first of all, we have safe and secure games, and we do it in the way that is the most accommodating to all concerned.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

G. Coons: The minister talks about working with communities. They're being told: "You're on your own." How can the minister justify the double standard of providing security for some airports and neglecting our small regional airports, who are being told: "You're on your own"? Who is looking after the interest of residents, of businesses, especially the tourism dollars that these rural regions rely on?

Hon. C. Hansen: There are a small number of airports in British Columbia that do not have security measures for passengers that are boarding air flights flying into YVR currently.

I know that the Department of Transport federally and the RCMP are putting in place a security plan that will ensure that visitors to British Columbia, athletes, officials and our fellow Canadians are kept safe and secure during those games and that they're doing that in a way to develop measures that will ensure that affected organizations have opportunities that can be mitigated. There are opportunities for dialogue to make sure that all of those measures are met and done so in a way that we can have the best Winter Olympics that we have ever seen.

N. Macdonald: A question on the same theme but this time to the Minister of Tourism. He loves to talk about airports. We'll give him a very clear question. Why do Langley and Boundary Bay airports get a solution, but Powell River and dozens of other rural airports are abandoned with no solution? Why is it that, consistently, rural British Columbia issues are ignored by this government?

Hon. C. Hansen: Actually, as I've gone around British Columbia, I've found that rural communities are excited as anybody about the fact the Olympics are coming. We've actually seen the excitement in communities when we rolled out $20 million worth of projects in rural communities, including in that member's riding.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat. Minister, just take your seat for a second.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: I know how excited constituents in that member's riding were when we not only announced the expansion of the Cranbrook Airport, but we delivered on the expansion of the Cranbrook Airport. That's true in airports around British Columbia that have opened up British Columbia to international tourism.

When you look at what this government has done for rural British Columbia over the last eight years, it is hands above what had happened during the ten years of NDP government when we saw rural communities decline. We saw jobs leave this province.

Once again, we're actually seeing, under this government, rural British Columbia being supported.

[ Page 14540 ]

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

N. Macdonald: There is no government that has so consistently failed rural British Columbia than the one that sits over there — and on this issue as well.

Let's look at the airlines that are affected: Pacific Coastal, Northern Hawk, Oscar Airways, Tofino Air. There are solutions to the screening issue. You have temporary screening sites.

[1430]

I'll just read where the situation's been taken care of: Vancouver Harbour, Vancouver Harbour floatplane, Vancouver Harbour helicopter, Vancouver south side, Vancouver south side river. Vancouver, Vancouver, Vancouver.

The communities that are not helped — and these will be familiar, as the minister travelled around: Bella Bella, Bella Coola, Fort Nelson, Grand Forks, Mackenzie, Powell River, Qualicum Beach. Rural issues consistently ignored.

Why does this minister not give a specific commitment to fix this issue and do something for once for rural British Columbia?

Hon. C. Hansen: As I have said, I know that the RCMP and the federal Department of Transport are working on issues around airport security for the small number of airports that are affected.

But I can remind the member that it is this government that put $185 million into the Northern Development Initiative Trust. It is this government that put $50 million each into the Island Coastal Economic Trust and in the southern Interior economic trust for rural economic development.

It is this government that has rolled out literally billions of dollars of highway and other infrastructure construction projects in every single corner of British Columbia. It is this government that in the latest budget, on top of everything else we've done, has put another $30 million into the rural economic development secretariat.

[End of question period.]

R. Chouhan: Seeking leave to table a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

R. Chouhan: I have 4,663 residents of Burnaby who have signed this petition asking the government to cancel its decision to build a prison at the corner of Willingdon Avenue and Canada Way. This is not a complete list. We will be collecting 4,000 signatures in the next couple of weeks.

C. Trevena: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

C. Trevena: At the beginning of question period, I introduced a group of students from Ecole des Deux Mondes in Campbell River. Well, there were two groups that came through. One came to see question period, and one is going to be here for part of the budget speech.

I'd like the House to welcome the second group, who are joined by Nancy Hwong and Francois Charron. They're here to observe how a debate goes. I hope the House will make them very welcome.

Orders of the Day

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

Budget Debate

(continued)

B. Simpson: It's my pleasure and privilege to stand in the House and give my response to the budget. Before I do that, I would like to give some thanks to some folks who have really been a major contribution to the last four years that I've had an opportunity to serve Cariboo North.

First and foremost, my thanks to my family for putting up with this crazy life of politics and a life of service to the people in the Cariboo. I know that my family have learned much along the way, as I have, as we've had discussions about what politics is all about and as I've learned so much about the Cariboo. I lived there for 25 years. It was not until the last four years that I've really begun to appreciate what that part of the world is all about.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

I'd also like to thank my staff, my two CAs back in my community office, Angie Sandve and Adam Schaan, who make sure that while I'm down here, I still have a presence up there.

[1435]

They serve the constituents on a daily basis, and it always amazes me how much they are able to assist people by walking them through the system, helping them to get past barriers, helping them to get their needs met. I think all of our CAs deserve gratitude. I know that many members of this House have made a point of that in their responses to the throne and to the budget.

The staff that we have here as well…. The person who helps me make sure that at least most of my facts are straight is Tracey Janes down in research. Tim Renneberg assists me with communications, and that's

[ Page 14541 ]

a thankless task sometimes, because I've asked him to redraft his communications so many times. I thank both of them for all of their hard work.

Of course, Heidi Reid, my legislative assistant, has learned over the last couple of years how to be as flexible as she possibly can, as my

schedule continues to change and as she continues to adjust that based on demand throughout the province and the demand for travel back and forth here in Victoria.

Before I talk about the budget in general, though, I'd also like to thank the people of the Cariboo. It has been a real learning experience over the last four years, understanding the significance of the Cariboo in the province of British Columbia. We were the area that actually contributed to the development of this province.

We have some of the oldest towns in British Columbia in the Cariboo region. Quesnel Forks is a phenomenal place to visit. It is really quite remarkable, as long as you can stomach the drive down into it, because you basically have to drive down what feels like a riverbed to get down into where Quesnel Forks is.

The folks of Likely — Jim Gibson, Robin Hood, the chamber of commerce, the volunteer firefighters — have kept Quesnel Forks alive despite the fact that it doesn't have any recognition either in British Columbia or by the federal government as a heritage site. Those folks have kept Quesnel Forks alive over the years, and it is truly an amazing place to visit and read about.

Of course, we have Barkerville, Cottonwood House, Wells and all of those historic sites that have built this province through the gold rush and through the various mineral activities that occurred before logging and forestry became the mainstay of the economy in that region.

I've learned much from a particular group of people who have spent a lot of time educating me over the years, and that's the placer miners. They go back in those historic roots of when we first went after the gold in the Cariboo. Again, they're quite an interesting group of people.

Most of them live off the grid. They mostly choose to live back in the bush in small cabins and cottages and continue to have a relationship with the land that few of us could even begin to understand. They have spent a lot of time with me over the last number of years, educating me about their issues and trying to get me to understand the continual role they play in the economy of the Cariboo and the economy of the province.

The first nations in our area are a very diverse group. They have a range of needs, and they have a range of interests in the Cariboo. I've had a really interesting time learning from them about where they are at in the continuum of the treaty negotiations, where they are at with land claims, where they're at in trying to make sure they secure a future for the generations of first nations that are going to be coming into that region of the province over the next few years, because that is a population that is growing.

The current leadership is really trying to capture some of the earth's resources that are available to them to make sure that those future generations have a robust and viable economy that they can participate in.

The arts and culture sector in my riding is very robust. It's a phenomenal sector. Every community I go to — Likely, Horsefly, Big Lake, Nazko…. The artisans that choose to live there — the painters, the sculptors, the photographers — do an incredible job of representing the Cariboo through various media. I've had a great opportunity to work with those folks to make sure they do get the representation that they need, both in the Cariboo and here in this House.

Then, of course, the heart and soul of the Cariboo right now is the forest industry, in particular the small-scale side of that industry. I think we're learning over time how much of a contribution small-scale forestry plays in the broader economy of the province — the small-scale salvage operators, the logging contractors and harvesters, the truckers.

[1440]

Over the last few months in particular, I've been spending a lot of time with those folks, trying to understand what their needs are, because they are being missed in this global economic meltdown.

We have some resources for employees. We have some resources for communities, but these logging contractors and independent businesses do not have resources available to them to help them through this time period. I've raised their issues in this House and will continue to do so.

Then the agriculture sector. I've had the pleasure to visit many farms in the Cariboo and really get to know what agriculture is all about. I'm a city boy. I was born and raised in Glasgow, Scotland, and have lived in cities all my life.

Quesnel really is the city in the Cariboo. To get out onto the land base to visit these farms, to see what the potential is for agriculture in the Cariboo, has been a real pleasure as well. I thank all of those folks for the time and energy they've taken to make sure that I represent their interests, because that's what they believe they elected me to do.

I'm standing today to speak to the budget, and I think it's interesting for folks at home to understand the context for that. In the spring session of the Legislature, the government comes forward with a throne speech that normally gives that forward look. It's normally the way that the government sees the province just now and projects into the future what the province could be and presents a vision.

As many of my colleagues on this side of the House have pointed out, in successive throne speeches under this government and this Premier, we have had these sweeping visions of what British Columbia might be. But we have never seen the delivery or the execution of

[ Page 14542 ]

those visions. This throne speech and budget are very interesting, because I think that for the most part, that vision seems to be absent.

The second thing that the government does is present a budget, and the budget speaks to what the government believes is the way it will realize the vision in the throne speech.

As I sat and thought about what I wanted to say about the budget, I thought it would be interesting to try and put some filters on it. How do people make sense out of a budget that has document after document full of numbers and tables of numbers? How do you make sense out of it? So I tried to apply three filters to this budget to see if it's one that's reasonable.

The first filter is: does the budget clearly articulate a vision and strategy for the province of British Columbia? Does it have a forward-looking vision that's appealing to people, which gets people to roll up their sleeves and participate in something that we're all going to work towards to try and make sure that British Columbia moves forward? And does it have a strategy to achieve that?

Second, what does the budget say about the future? In particular in this case, does it have numbers that people can have some surety in and have confidence in — that the numbers actually do make sense and that the government does seem to have an understanding of what the future holds for British Columbia?

I think in particular these days: does it speak to young people? Does it speak to the youth? Does it engage them in a meaningful way with respect to both the government and what the government is going to do to make sure they can participate in our economy and in the culture of British Columbia?

Third, how does it distribute tax dollars? That's really what the heart of a budget is. As was spoken to in question period today, in particular, does it distribute the provincial tax dollars in a way that's equitable for the geography of the province of British Columbia?

I stand with the member from the Kootenays, Columbia River–Revelstoke, when he says that we have a government in power that has really lost sight of rural British Columbia. I think that is a very true statement. I hear it every day as I travel this province in my role as the Forests critic.

One of the things we need to look at in this budget is: does it redress that issue? Are there significant resources going to be put into the rural part of British Columbia? The answer, quite frankly, is no.

[1445]

How does the budget distribute dollars among the capital, programs, services? Does it achieve the vision? Does it maximize the return to all British Columbians, and where are the investments going to be put? Do they represent the geography?

So vision and strategy, defensible numbers, and whether or not we have an equitable distribution and maximizing the investment of British Columbia's tax dollars. Let me speak to those three briefly. Then I want to concentrate a little bit on forestry while I still have time.

First off, vision and strategy. As I said before, this throne speech in particular, if you look back at all the other throne speeches under this Premier, seems to be absolutely absent of any vision or strategy. The throne speech and the budget together do not give a clear indication of where this Premier would take this province in the next three years.

While the whole world is looking at a global meltdown of our economy and while, as other members on this side have pointed out, we have a unique opportunity to redefine ourselves with respect to the earth, with respect to each other, with respect to how our economy works, with respect to the growing disparity between the rich and the poor that we see all over the world — the loss of the middle class and their loss of buying power and earning power — in this budget there's nothing that speaks to that. There's nothing that speaks about grabbing that opportunity to redefine British Columbia.

Mr. Obama in the United States is struggling with that very question, and we see day after day his struggles to try and address that. We see the same with Prime Minister Brown in Britain. We even see Mr. Harper sort of talking about this, although sometimes it's hard to make sense of what it is he actually thinks is going on. But in this particular budget, there is no indication that we're going to grab this opportunity.

Yet it is a unique opportunity. As the member for Nelson-Creston so eloquently pointed out in his speech, we have an opportunity to redefine our economic system. We have an opportunity to redefine where we're going to invest for a viable future. One aspect of that which I find interesting, as I listen to the dialogue all around this issue of the economic situation, is the discussion of prosperity — that we have to somehow re-ignite the engine of prosperity. I guess I would say: "Not the old way of doing that."

What we don't have is a dialogue. Unfortunately, this House does not allow us to get into meaningful debates and dialogues around these things, but I think it's an opportunity for us to define a new prosperity.

What is it that we need to do to change our economic system so that we do not depend on extinguishing the Earth's natural resources in order to enjoy our daily lives, so that we do not have to undermine employment standards, so that we do not have to bring wages down in order to have a competitive environment in the world, so that we don't have to undermine safety, so that we don't have to undermine the environment in order to achieve prosperity?

I don't hear that dialogue out there, and it's unfortunate because what it means is that we're still trapped in the old thinking. We're still trapped in that world that says in order for us to be able to sustain our economic

[ Page 14543 ]

system, we have to extinguish the Earth's resources, we have to do it on the backs of people and we have to continue this move towards a growing disparity between the rich and the poor. In this budget speech, there is no inkling whatsoever that there's an understanding that we have an opportunity to do that redefinition.

We live in a strange situation where all of a sudden the taxpayers, who for decades since the Reagan and Thatcher eras of the 1970s, have been told that the best place for taxes is in their back pocket. "We need to get corporate taxes down in order to be competitive. We have to get all of our environmental employment standards down in order to be competitive. Government has to be small, and somehow CEOs are the ones who ought to decide what's good for all of society."

All of that now has proved to be bankrupt — both morally and economically bankrupt — and what we need to do is to find the replacement.

The other side talks about us being socialists. Well, the reality is that that side and the ideologues that they listen to are corporate socialists. That's the difference. They believe that corporations are the ones that should get all the handouts, that CEOs should be able to suck companies dry, that we should actually not charge them anything to operate on our land base and not charge them anything to use our infrastructure, and that somehow that will create competitiveness. Yet all you have to do is look at the statistics.

We have lost good, family-paying jobs decade over decade since we've been putting this kind of corporate socialism in place.

[1450]

Now that has been brought into question. As we heard on the radio today, there are people taking to the streets over what's happening with AIG down in the United States, where an effectively bankrupt corporation that is living off of taxpayer handouts gives all of its senior employees exorbitant stipends. Finally people are waking up to that, and they are taking to the streets today. I hope that more people actually pay attention to what's going on and take to the streets as well.

Next, the stimulus package that's in this budget, which is all part of the vision and strategy, is one of the weakest, I think, in any jurisdiction that I've seen. Again, it gives us no sense of direction. Where is it that the Premier wants to take us? If you look at where the major points of the stimulus package are put to, as we understand it, they're put to roads, bridges and the normative infrastructure. There's nothing new and interesting in that stimulus package as well.

In terms of vision and strategy, all that this budget is, really, is an attempt by the Premier to make the deficit as small as he possibly can on paper going into an election. It isn't about a vision for British Columbia. It isn't about a strategy for British Columbia. It isn't about addressing the real issues of British Columbia or repositioning it for the future. It's simply an attempt, on paper, to make the deficit as small as possible before we go into the May 12 election.

That brings me to the second filter, and that is: can you trust the numbers? Well, as the member for Surrey-Whalley and our Finance critic has pointed out many, many times, the answer to that is flat-out no. Since this budget has been put forward, we have had more information about the falldown in the economy and particularly information that calls into question whether or not Canada is truly better positioned than the rest of the world, which is what the Prime Minister tries to claim and what the Premier tries to claim about British Columbia.

Two weeks ago the International Monetary Fund came out and talked about the Canadian economy and stated that the downside risks to the Canadian economy predominate, mostly because we're still so dependent on natural resource extraction and trade that "we're in for a shock in the next few months."

At the same time that the IMF came out and said that we're in for a shock, Kevin Page, the parliamentary budget officer for the federal government, came out and said that Canada is actually performing significantly worse than even the United States and that if you look at gross domestic product, GDP, which is what most people use, we look as if we're on par.

But he argues that what we need to look at is a thing called the gross domestic income, which is a better indicator of what's happening with wage-earning jobs, a better indicator of what's happening in the economy in general. Canada, over the second half of last year, plunged 15.3 percent in real GDI versus a 1.5 percent decline in the U.S.

So we are already in significant decline relative to the U.S., which is in a full meltdown. My point in raising this is that this budget is predicated on the fact that B.C. is going to be okay, that we'll somehow ride this out and that we'll be untouched.

Whereas the reality is that we are going to be worse hit than many other jurisdictions because we're a small, open economy based on resource extraction and selling those resources to the world. Our trade deficit is going to grow. We're already seeing the job losses, and it's only going to get worse.

I'd like to talk about forestry in particular, because it's interesting how dramatically this is all changing. One of the briefings that the credit union put out in January talks about the forest sector declining significantly over the next little while. It actually has a statement in it, and I'll read it for the record.

This is January 30 of this year — the Central 1 Credit Union document. It says: "The Central 1 Credit Union forecasts lumber production in B.C. will drop a further 5 percent this year, following year-over-year declines of 23 percent in 2008 and 11 percent in 2007. Sawmills in the central Interior forest region — Williams Lake, Quesnel — will continue to avoid most of the production cuts."

[1455]

[ Page 14544 ]

Now, to illustrate how little economists have predictive capacity…. The member for Cariboo South and I were at a meeting on Saturday night. Williams Lake has one small remanufacturing facility that's still running today, and they are mostly family members who are working in that mill. The plywood plant is down. The remanufacturing facility is down and bankrupt. The sawmill is down. Everything is down.

Quesnel. We've got all of the sawmills effectively down or in curtailment. The plywood plant is down. One of our pulp mills is now on half-time, our medium-density fibreboard plant is on a day-to-day, and it is a bloodbath with respect to the workers and their families.

Yet on January 30, less than a month and a half ago, the credit union said we would be relatively untouched. That's how bad the situation is getting.

We have a weakness in our legislative process, and that is that the government can't keep coming back and changing the budget. I get that. They can't keep coming back and saying: "Okay, revisit it and revisit it and revisit it."

However, when they did put this budget together, we still believe and maintain — and I stand with the Finance critic on this side — that there was a rosy picture chosen for British Columbia that does not reflect or give any real sense of what's going to happen to B.C. in the future. So we can't have confidence in these numbers.

The third filter that I put on is the distribution of tax dollars. Is the distribution fair and equitable? Is it generational? Does it address the needs of the young as well as the needs of the old, and does it address the geography of the province?

With respect to the demographic equity, I believe that this budget really fails us, because there's nothing here for our young people who are struggling with significant debt loads as they go on to college and university. We should have a major program to allow those young people to get in while this market is so poor.

I haven't seen the latest figures on our youth unemployment rate, but I know they're 20 percent plus and in some regions even much higher than that. We should have those young people able to get into our post-secondary institutions in droves and not be saddling them with enormous debt burdens.

I sat on the Finance Committee for two years. I know what the message was from the post-secondary institutions about addressing that issue, and this budget doesn't address that. We don't have a comprehensive strategy in this budget to address that need and make sure that those young people are in getting the skills we need for our future economy.

Does it address the seniors? Again, my answer is no. We really have retracted services to seniors over the last eight years. In my community we desperately need a major infusion into home care for seniors. It's a significant investment that will actually save the government millions of dollars from avoidance costs as these seniors have to go from home to institutional care.

If we can keep them in their homes by an investment in home care for seniors, then I think it's a good investment for the seniors. It meets their needs, and we get all kinds of opportunities to avoid costs as the seniors are forced to go more quickly into institutional care.

So does the budget address the issue of distribution of dollars on a demographic basis? The answer to that is no. Secondly, does it address geographically? All one has to do is take a good hard look at the numbers for all the land-based ministries. All the land-based ministries over the next three years get significant cuts.

What seems to be missing in all of this — I think we miss it sometimes on this side, and I've had these discussions in our caucus as well — is that the land is our infrastructure — not the roads, not the bridges, not the buildings. British Columbians are the shareholders in 94 percent of the land base in British Columbia. That's our true infrastructure. That's our true resource. That's where real wealth comes from.

Real wealth doesn't come from Wall Street. Real wealth doesn't come from people who manipulate paper. Real wealth comes from clean air, clean water, good soil and the ability of people to use our natural resources to generate economic activity in a sustainable fashion.

[1500]

Yet under this government, over the next three years we will cut significantly the budgets for all the ministries that actually are involved in our land base and involved in that true source of wealth.

As a consequence, I think, we're losing sight of the fact that we will have to keep shoring up our health care system, our social system and our education system, with less and less economic activity and the taxes that we derive from that activity to generate the kind of revenue we need to shore those social services up.

We cannot sustain health care, education, the infrastructure — the roads and bridges — and all the things that make this a progressive society if we de-invest in the land base. In this budget we do that. The cuts to all the line agencies….

There's no incremental funding for the mountain pine beetle. I ask all members of the House and people at home to grab the most recent version of British Columbia Magazine and turn to the centre page. You will see a picture of devastation that will give you a sense of what the mountain pine beetle is all about. It's a picture of a person standing at an outlook on the Llgitiyuz Mountains looking over the Chilcotin plain to the Coast Mountains, and all you see to the horizon and to the north and south is a dead forest.

Yet there's no additional money in here for the mountain pine beetle, and this government also lost the federal mountain pine beetle money. We've canvassed that in question period. They lost it because they did not put

[ Page 14545 ]

a concerted plan forward, year over year, of what they were going to do with that money. So we lost $100 million this year and next — and, most likely, the rest of that promised $1 billion as well.

There is also no additional money for the community development trust, for worker transition. There's no support for our contracting community throughout the province who work on that land base. None of that is there that shows that this government really understands the true nature of the economy in British Columbia.

On the infrastructure issue, I find it quite interesting that the Premier indicates in the throne speech that he is going to cap the ability of municipalities to raise taxes, yet both the federal and provincial governments are forcing these municipalities to come to the table with one-third of the costs for infrastructure. I think that they have put such uncertainty into the local governments that they will not be able to participate in any stimulus packages federally or provincially. That's a shame, because we have lots of people we need to put back to work. We need to regrow these communities.

With that, I would say that the three filters that I would use to look at this budget…. Does it have a vision and strategy? No, not one that I can discern. Does it have numbers that can be trusted, that really are a reflection of reality? That is a definite no. Finally, does it disburse the taxpayers' dollars in an equitable fashion both demographically, in age classification, and geographically? The answer to that is no.

That's why today I stand and say that this is a budget that ought not to be supported. I believe that the government should go back to the drawing board and do something that is based more on the reality of our fiscal situation and the reality of how the B.C. economy really works and where true wealth comes from.

D. MacKay: First of all, before I get into my budget response, I would like to thank the members from both sides of this House for the warm birthday greetings that they have extended to me today. I have to tell you that getting old sure beats the alternative.

The budget speech, as most of us will recall, was delivered on Tuesday, the 17th of February, 2009. Since I'm not seeking re-election, this will be the last opportunity I have as a member of this chamber to stand up and respond to a budget or throne speech.

It's been an honour for the past eight years to have represented the large riding of Bulkley Valley–Stikine. That is a huge riding with a fair number of people, but the land mass is absolutely phenomenal. It takes in about one-quarter of the province of British Columbia, and it's been an honour for the past eight years to have represented those people.

I sometimes wonder if any of us sitting in this chamber actually look back at the length of time that it has taken us to get up to a thousand members in this chamber — and I don't think we've got there yet — since B.C. became a province. So those of us who sit in this chamber sit here with a great deal of pride representing the many constituents throughout our province, and we are a select few that have had the opportunity and the privilege of sitting in this chamber representing people throughout our province.

[1505]

I was first elected in 2001, and I just want to go back to the member for Nelson-Creston, when he talked about the fact that what we need in this chamber is debate. We need some different views.

Actually, in 2001 — if everybody recalls, puts on their thinking cap — we were elected with a majority of 77 members to two. Now, we didn't get there by ourselves. The people of this province elected 77 B.C. Liberal legislators to this chamber and two opposition members.

He forgot to mention that when he talked about how important it was that we need debate and different views. Well, we actually did have a meaningful debate back in 2001 to 2005, because we as B.C. Liberals were allowed to have opposing views, and we debated in our caucus meetings and in this chamber. We had free votes in this chamber, unlike the members from the opposition, who at times were chastised for voting against party lines. Sometimes they wouldn't even show up to vote on issues.

I remember all too well what happened when a member actually voted against a piece of legislation from the opposition side and some of them didn't show up. I recall that all too well. But we were allowed in our party to stand up and vote our conscience and vote on behalf of the constituents that we represent. I remember that well.

Well, we were re-elected in 2005 with a smaller majority, and here we are on the eve of another provincial election. I have to ask myself: do you think for a moment that the population of British Columbia has forgotten the dark days of the 1990s? They're going to tell us on May 12, and I have a very strong feeling that on May 12 they're going to tell this Legislature once again. They're going to send a very strong message. They're going to say that the opposition members belong where they are today, and that is in opposition.

As I said, this is my last budget speech. In order to recognize many people around our province and throughout the riding, I'm going to take a few minutes now and wander from the budget speech to say a few thank-yous. The riding, as I said, is absolutely huge. I'm going to have to read this because there are so many communities in the riding of Bulkley Valley–Stikine that I'm sure I'll forget some of them if I don't read them.

I'd like to thank the people from Burns Lake; Southside; Decker Lake; Granisle; Topley; Houston; Quick; Telkwa; Smithers; old town, new town and Hazelton — the three Hazeltons; the many Indian reserves throughout the riding; Kispiox; as well as those who live along the Highway 37 corridor; the Bell II people; Iskut; Dease

[ Page 14546 ]

Lake; Telegraph Creek; Glenora; Good Hope Lake; Lower Post; Pleasant Camp; and my favourite spot of all, Atlin. As I said, there are lots of communities and lots of miles to travel.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to publicly thank my two constituency assistants, Sharon Eastabrook and Judy van der Mulen. I'd like to thank them for all that they have done over the past two terms to help me deal with the many issues that were brought to my office. Lest I forget, I should also thank Bev Davidson. A special thank-you to Bev Davidson.

I'd also like at this time to thank the legislative assistants that work in this building for government as well as opposition members; the staff in the Legislature; the Clerks; the young students that are in here — I believe they're called pages, and I see one wandering around as I'm speaking; the security staff; the cleaning staff that keep our offices clean and keep this chamber clean; the kitchen staff, who do a great job of providing us with a great variety of food; and those who take our food orders.

Of course, we shouldn't forget the Hansard staff, who record our words with clarity so that what is said in the moments of heated debate comes back and bites us. I should also like to thank the members of the staff who work in our great library, which is contained in this building.

As I get ready to leave this chamber and speak for my last time, I have a lot of mixed emotions as I leave. There were some good times. There were some exciting times. The first time I was in this chamber was after I was elected in 2001. I'd never been in here before, and it was an honour and a privilege to come into this chamber as an elected representative, representing the riding of Bulkley Valley–Stikine.

[1510]

But you know, there were some not good times that I recall as well. I have to tell you that I'm embarrassed at times to sit in this chamber when members get worked up and start yelling, to the stage where I can't hear any answers. Of course, I'm talking about question period. I'm embarrassed as I watch people get up from the gallery, who are sitting upstairs watching this chamber in action. They get up and leave because of the noise level, shaking their heads.

I actually know of a constituent in Bulkley Valley–Stikine, and I won't mention the community, who will not allow her children to watch the legislative channel during question period, but she will allow her children to watch horror movies. Now, what does that say about the behaviour of grown men and women in this chamber as we are tasked with the job of legislating the best we can be in our province?

If you recall, Mr. Speaker, some time ago I read a two-minute statement in this chamber, and I talked about bark collars. I thought that might be a way of controlling the behaviour of members in this chamber. Actually, I wasn't kidding.

As I sat in here today, I saw several people get up and leave during question period. Once again, I'm embarrassed for them. As I sit in this corner of the building down here, I can't hear the answers that are being given by the members. It may not be an answer that they're satisfied with, but at least I would like to know what the answer is without having to go back to Hansard to read what the answer was to the question that was put to them.

So as I was sitting here in question period today, because I find it so embarrassing, I was actually reading the public affairs bureau's Today's News . While I was reading it, I ran across an editorial from the Times Colonist . This is dated today, March 23. It talks about the fact that the Speaker in the provincial Legislature has plenty of experience dealing with juvenile behaviour. It talked about him coaching a basketball team at Southern Okanagan Secondary School in Oliver.

Then it goes on to compare those young people that the Speaker coached while they were in school…. It would be an embarrassment, or it would be an insult for them to be compared with the MLAs who govern this province. You know, Mr. Speaker, there are times when I agree with that comment.

It also goes on to say: "It's disappointing to see this kind of behaviour from the people we have elected to run this province, and it's sad that they see the need for it. But the Speaker is ultimately facing a losing battle. These childish ways have been going on for years in our Legislature, and in every single chamber across Canada."

It talks about the advantage of being an incumbent or somebody new running for the provincial Legislature who wants to become an MLA and represent a constituency. It goes on to say: "For one thing, being an incumbent would no longer be an advantage. British Columbians might start to think that anyone would be better than the crew in this chamber right now." I echo those words. As I get ready to leave this chamber, I have to say that I agree wholeheartedly with that.

It is so discouraging to sit in this chamber and watch grown men and women behave as we do during question period. When I see school children sitting up in the gallery watching the behaviour of the people in this chamber, I am embarrassed.

When I talk about the behaviour of the members in this chamber, I have to think back to the member for Yale-Lillooet. One day in this chamber I was speaking, and he was heckling me. I thought: "Well, I'm going to get back at him because he was heckling me." He was yelling so loud that I could hardly hear myself speak.

I took it upon myself to heckle him, because I knew he was going to be speaking, and I made a point of being in this chamber when he stood up to speak. I tried heckling him, but you know, Mr. Speaker, I could not bring myself down to his level. I cannot bring myself down to the level to heckle somebody when they're speaking.

[ Page 14547 ]

I find it offensive. My grandparents would be embarrassed, as would my parents, if they saw me behave the way some of our members in this Legislature behave.

[1515]

Another not so good thing, as I get ready to leave this chamber for the last time, is the accountability issue with the aboriginal file. This issue has been going on for so long. Moneys are given to the aboriginal communities, and a lot of it doesn't get to those that are in need of it. It seems to disappear before it gets down to the level of those people that need it.

When we deal with aboriginal files, I have to wonder. I went back to the Nisga'a treaty — January 13, 1999, was when the second reading debate took place — and I found out that the second reading of the Nisga'a treaty had 38 yeas and 33 nays. So the NDP of the day who were in power supported the Nisga'a treaty, and the 33 B.C. Liberal members who were sitting in this chamber voted against the Nisga'a treaty.

Now, when I think about the aboriginal file, it's remarkable how it's turned around. Our party supports, with a few exceptions, the treaty process. I'm not one to say that we shouldn't be moving ahead and trying to make life better for our aboriginal people. We need to do that. But it's funny how the balance shifts when you're either sitting in opposition or whether you're in government.

I'd like to thank the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast for making an issue out of a comment I made during the child and youth representative's meeting, where I made the comment that some aboriginal people have actually told me that the residential school system was the best thing that happened to them.

That thing got blown up into a bit of a media event for a short time, but I can tell you that comment resonated across Canada. I had phone calls and e-mails from every province in this country, and I had it from a lot of older people who had actually taught in residential schools. They thanked me for bringing that issue up. They said they felt like they had been ostracized by the Canadian people for having dared teach in a residential school. They said they felt they were all vultures sitting in trees waiting for aboriginal children to come into the residential school system. That wasn't the case.

It just broke my heart in some cases, listening to some of these older people who told me they had given their lives to educate young aboriginal children. So I'd like to thank the member from Sunshine Coast for his comments that generated so much positive comment for me from people across Canada.

The friendships that have been developed over the past years on both sides of this House will be missed, and I say, "missed" and "at times" — not all the time. But they will be missed. It's okay to disagree in spite of our differences. The type of government that we have…. You know, it's interesting, given the type of government we have, we have accomplished a lot for the people of British Columbia, the very people that elect us on their behalf to serve in this great building. It has been an honour.

Now, there's one person that I haven't mentioned yet and that I owe so much to, and of course, I saved her for the last. There are many others who deserve a special thanks but none more than my wife, who has made sure that I got on the plane on Sunday mornings to get to Victoria on time and who met me when I came home Friday mornings. After 43 years of married life — I was only four years old when I got married — to the same woman, I owe a very special thank-you to my wife Edith.

You're popular down here, Edith, and you're popular at home.

I also want to thank my children and grandchildren, who had to

schedule appointments to see me when I came home on Fridays, when I was home.

Now I want to get into just a couple of things on the budget before my time runs out. In 2001 when we formed government, we saw our province go from a have province to a have-not province. We went from first place to tenth. When we were first elected in 2001 we were actually on the receiving end of the balance of payments that the federal government makes out, because our economy had dropped so dramatically. This is in spite of dramatic growth through the rest of Canada. We inherited a structural deficit of $4 billion.

[1520]

We saw mineral exploration at the lowest ever — $29 million a year. We saw moving trucks. The only people that were making money, of course, were people involved in the moving industry who were moving people from B.C. and coming back empty.

We had an unemployment rate of 9.7 percent. We saw the youth unemployment rate at 17.4 percent in 1998 and drop to 13.7 percent in 2000, all under the previous government.

Budgets were presented under the previous government, promises made, but no money was budgeted to pay for some of the programs. I think of the mental health issue that was around for a long time, where they budgeted $125 million but didn't put any money aside.

I think back to the forestry promise under the jobs and timber accord, where forest companies were ordered…. Not: "Can you do it?" They were ordered to create 32,000 jobs. Not one job was created, but new regulations were added, and they added a billion dollars to the cost of production of the forest industry.

We saw training spaces for our nurses cut, in spite of an aging population. I'm a great example for that, as are others in this chamber. If you looked forward, you could see the demand that was going to be placed on our health care system as we grew older. We did not see one new training space for doctors or other health care professionals, in spite of an aging population.

Let's spend just the next couple of minutes and go over the last eight years under the leadership of Premier

[ Page 14548 ]

Gordon Campbell and the B.C. Liberal government. In eight short years we took our province from tenth place up to first place. People look to our province for leadership. They wanted to know what we were doing here that worked so well. In spite of the $4 billion structural deficit left by the NDP, the challenges of SARS, forest fires, flooding, BSE and 9/11, our government moved the province to be a leader in Canada.

We saw mineral exploration at a phenomenal rate. We saw an increase of 1,300 percent in mineral exploration. We saw $416 million spent on mineral exploration in our province in 2007. There were 98 projects with budgets in excess of $1 million. Only the NDP would say a 1,300 percent increase in mineral exploration is a cut.

We actually saw people moving back to our province. In seven and a half years, we saw 400,000 jobs created in our province. We saw the unemployment rate drop to 4.5 percent. We saw the youth unemployment rate drop to 8.4 percent. That's almost half of what it was under the previous government. We saw increases in training spaces for nurses and double the number of training spaces to train and replace our doctors. We eliminated red tape to reduce costs to private sector investors, to create jobs in our province.

We introduced over 100 tax cuts for the people of our province, and the members of the opposition voted against every one of them. Does that mean we're going to see some tax increases if they ever, God forbid, form government again? Do tax cuts work? Yes, they do. There were lots of naysayers years ago, but I think we can stand here with pride today and say that tax cuts did work in our province with the number of jobs that we created. That's what happens when you have a strong economy.

Our health care. When we came to power in 2001, health care was spending around $9 billion a year. In a few short years we'll be spending over $14 billion, and the opposition members call that a cut. I don't know how they figure out their math, but I'm glad I'm past my stage where I have to learn math anymore, especially from the opposition members.

In spite of a declining student population through the K-to-12…. We've lost over 50,000 students provincewide, and yet we've seen an increase in education funding every year. Every year, there's been an increase in education funding, and the NDP call that a cut.

A little closer to home in the Bulkley Valley–Stikine where I was elected, we have seen a decline of 3,100 students, yet block funding to the four school districts has increased by over $10½ million, and the NDP call that a cut. Let's not forget the $12 million for replacement of the Lakes District Secondary School in Burns Lake. We've opened up three StrongStart centres in Smithers, Burns Lake and Houston.

Infrastructure and grants are kind of interesting, because in 2001 direct access grants amounted to $76,000 for non-profit organizations. That didn't seem like an awful lot of money, because I heard members from the large urban ridings talking about the large sums of money that were available through these direct access grants.

[1525]

We held four grant seminars throughout the large riding, and in 2007-2008 the non-profits received $710,000. That's a tenfold increase. Over the past eight years those non-profits have seen $3 million directed their way.

The Northern Health Connections bus was a commitment we made in 2001 to help provide some much-needed transportation for people who need to travel for health care. In the first two years 16,000 people have used that bus, which runs through from Prince Rupert to Prince George to Vancouver — 16,000 people. It's been well received.

We also saw $2.7 million for our airport runway extension, which is now completed. That was a big bonus for the community of Smithers and the residents of Bulkley Valley–Stikine. Burns Lake also received a quarter of a million dollars for their airport upgrades.

I think Houston has received in excess of $5 million for different projects. The last, of course, was $2.8 million to renovate health care centres and relocate the ambulance.

We've spent millions of dollars on flood control for Houston, Smithers and Telkwa.

Now, Highway 37 electrification is an issue that is very dear and close to my heart, because I want to see that happen. I want to see it happen for the people that live up in that area, and I want to see it happen for the mining industry, who spend almost half of their dollars that are spent in the province of British Columbia along the Highway 37 corridor.

The fact that we've moved into the environmental assessment process for Highway 37 has got to be great news. That's something that has to be done. Why not do it now, while we're going through this downturn in our economy?

I just want to wander here for a moment. We keep talking about the economy and how bad it is right now. I wonder how many people remember the decision that was made by that three-person panel on the Kemess North project. That had been approved, and the aboriginal community were upset about it. So we went through a second hearing stage on the Kemess North project — 450 jobs.

The decision of that three-person panel was that the aboriginal cultural and spiritual benefits outweighed the benefits of economic activity in the Kemess North. It was just an extension of an existing mine. So in a few short years we're going to see 450 people without work because of this decision made by the three-person panel. I wonder what the decision would have been in today's economic situation that we find ourselves in. Do you think they might have said that we should retain

[ Page 14549 ]

those jobs, that we should keep those jobs for the 450 families that depend on the mining industry for their livelihood?

As I close my comments, I don't think it will come as a surprise that I will be supporting the budget. I'd like to thank all of you in this chamber for making the last eight years, at this time in my life, such an honour to have served as an MLA for the residents of Bulkley Valley–Stikine. When I arrived in British Columbia in 1962 as a young, 19-year-old policeman from the province of Alberta, I never thought I'd be retiring for the third time as a member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

S. Fraser: As I rise today to speak to Budget 2009, and just as I start, I'd like to acknowledge my constituents in Alberni-Qualicum and the Pacific Rim. It is a varied group of people and communities throughout my constituency, and it has been a pleasure and an honour to represent them for the last four years. I have learned much from those members and my constituents, have made many friends, have got lots of advice and have learned to be humble.

You know, when we get elected to this place, as I did almost four years ago now, there seems to be an expectation, initially, that you will be bestowed some great wisdom on all the issues. We all know that is not true. There are so many issues, and they come at us fast and furious.

I have relied on my staff. I have a great constituency staff. Brenda McLean is an excellent CA. I am honoured to be working with her.

[1530]

Patty Edwards is also excellent, and they're a great tag team. Colm Harty is also a wonderful constituent and constituency assistant who helps people, and that's what we're all about in the constituency. I know we all try to strive for that.

Returning to the budget. I will not be supporting this budget, and I do so on behalf of my constituents. My constituents are skeptical of this budget. I spent quite a bit of time this weekend on the doorstep, and I've heard concerns about priorities from this government and certainly concerns about what this budget might mean.

I will comment somewhat ad lib, but I will comment on the previous speaker's couple of statements. I find it hard to listen to statements that refute the good Office of the Auditor General, and I know it's a matter of course for this government. It's part of their messaging, but this government inherited a surplus of almost $1.5 billion. That was in 2001, and in a blink it was turned into a deficit. It went from a record surplus to record deficit overnight largely to accommodate tax breaks. Then the gutting and looting of this province began.

I know they did some creative bookkeeping to try to change what the Auditor General had concluded. We've already seen how this government handles the Auditor General's reports whether it's dealing with skills and trades, where this government has made a great failure to so many people, or the ghastly removal of land from public control of tree farm licences and the failure to protect the public interest, which I submit would be the mandate of any government regardless of political stripes. This government does not take it as such.

Correcting for the record the fact that the Auditor General will affirm that, indeed, this government took a record surplus and turned it into a record deficit. They brought in legislation and stuff to say that you couldn't have a deficit again, but then this government proceeded to run three or four back-to-back deficits. I've lost track now. We're back to deficit financing, which is the mainstream of this government's plans, regardless of legislation which was just overturned to accommodate a deficit. Quite a symbolic thing and, I think, quite misleading.

It's with that in mind that my constituents and, I think, most people of British Columbia are greatly skeptical about this budget. We know that if this government is re-elected, a real budget will probably come out, I would guess, in September, which will have some hard realities.

[K. Whittred in the chair.]

The scary truth is that this government has squandered the times when there was a surplus. Of course this government — maybe all governments — likes to take credit for surpluses, but this was a world phenomenon and national phenomenon. Record-high commodity prices along with a housing boom in the States along with very low interest rates, all of those things — sort of the perfect storm for a surplus.

Even though this government had driven us into record deficits, the province came out….

Interjections.

S. Fraser: I hear the laughs.

At the Auditor General's results, 2003, it was over a $3 billion deficit just in the one year.

An Hon. Member: Three billion.

S. Fraser: Yeah, $3 billion.

Again, for those in the audience who don't know — and that seems to get laughter out of the government members — the Auditor General is basically the watchdog of the public purse. This government — I know if they could do away with one office, it would be that one. So I don't think more needs to be said.

Because of the derisiveness of this government toward things like the Auditor General and the Auditor General's accounting in the public interest, that is what has bred

[ Page 14550 ]

the skepticism of my constituents in Alberni-Qualicum and certainly those across the province when they see this budget.

[1535]

During the surplus years — which this government likes to take credit for but, as I pointed out, had nothing to do with them — there was a great deal of damage done in this province. The policies that were brought in place with the surplus did not prioritize children, even though we had a children's budget.

When this government brought up children as a priority, it was a slogan in a previous budget speech and a previous throne speech. The harsh reality for one in four children in this province — it's the fourth or fifth or sixth year in a row, and again I lose track, and it's something I shouldn't lose track of; none of us should — is that one in four children grows up in poverty. That happened under this government during record surpluses due to commodity prices around the world.

I believe that all governments must put children first. We had a speech earlier today talking about Jordan's principle, and that is a principle to put children first — first nations children first — and to not let them suffer because of government indecision.

When British Columbia became the worst place in Canada for child poverty during the good years, it showed a clear lack of interest by this government in protecting the most vulnerable. We saw cuts to children and families, and cuts during a time when new policies were being implemented. The results were disastrous to children in care — again, the most vulnerable in our society — abandoned for different priorities that trickle down — the sort of Reaganomics that we see or the George W. Bush stuff down in the States.

The deregulation that has caused so much damage in the world today is the policy of this government. It is the legacy of this government. I know that in my constituency of Alberni-Qualicum, we saw the direct results of such deregulation. It was with the forest industry.

The 2003 forest devitalization. I cannot say revitalization. I'll be accurate here for the interests of Hansard . It was devitalization. It was a deregulation of the industry. It was everything that the corporate sector wanted in forestry. It abandoned forest communities and jobs in favour of short-term gain for corporate interests which happened to donate to the government, and that seems to be the main criterion for the policy decision-making of the B.C. Liberals — who will pay, and whoever it is will get what they want.

When those lands were removed from the tree farm licence, TFL 44, in my constituency, it was devastating, and the legacy has carried on.

I must note that we're looking at about a half-billion-dollar deficit in this budget. I've already referred to the skepticism of everybody I've talked to about that budget, based on the past history of this government and their failure to even honour and recognize the reports from the Auditors General.

The forest industry deregulation, when the lands were removed from TFL 44…. This government, against their own staff's advice, waived all requirements to pay back to the Crown, to the taxpayers, to the community, to the workers in Port Alberni hundreds of millions of dollars. They waived that and gave land out of public control — 80,000 hectares from TFL 44 — and completely ringed the Alberni Valley with private forest land that led to the Private Managed Forest Land Act by this government, which has led to a massive increase in raw log exports — all at the expense of jobs in my constituency.

That policy of deregulation is a policy and a legacy of this government. I note that south of the border, the public has cottoned on to that. Certainly, the George W. Bush model of deregulation is seen for what it is. This government is stuck in that model.

We had a young man at a forest policy committee meeting last week, and he quoted Einstein. He said that you can't fix the problems — I'm paraphrasing — with the same mindset that created the problems. That's a big problem for the people of British Columbia, with this government and this budget.

[1540]

I've touched on what happened when this government prioritized children and the devastating effect that has had on children in British Columbia. The same thing happened in 2007 with a housing budget, I believe it was, and it was nothing more than a tax break.

Again, I'll refer to the Auditor General's recent report on poverty and homelessness, which plants the responsibility of that directly at the feet of this government and this Premier. It's a 385 percent increase in homelessness under this government following their 2007 budget speech that talked about housing and homelessness.

So it seems there is a pattern. Whatever this government and this Premier prioritize in a throne speech and a budget — watch out. It's the opposite that happens.

Seniors care — remember that? Well, under this government — and I hear this on the doorstep time and again — seniors have been cut loose. Under this government we've seen seniors on fixed incomes having to face the spectre of higher fees for everything and no recognition of the problems that causes for our seniors in this province.

I fought long and hard along with the community of Port Alberni to try to bring about proper quality end-of-life care through a hospice, a palliative care facility known as Ty Watson House. The community had been fighting for that with VIHA and this government for years.

The building was built; the furniture was in place. The community had rallied to deliver a building, a legacy of the late Ty Watson. The community built fountains and provided the proper facilities such as elevators in this

[ Page 14551 ]

beautiful character heritage home, which could provide quality end-of-life care that VIHA and this government were not providing. All we got were stalls, and people died in the Alberni Valley not receiving the quality end-of-life care that they should have because this government refused to listen to the community.

I believe it would be at every government's peril to not listen to communities. That is where the true wisdom is. That is what we must learn and represent here in this House — what the people of our communities say. That is where true wisdom rests.

There's a good-news story here. We did get the doors of Ty Watson House open. But the battle continues, and this government and the health authority refuse to provide even the basic core funding for quality end-of-life care in this province and certainly on Vancouver Island.

There are nine stand-alone hospices outside of the Victoria region. They provided a budget for this government — a very lean and mean budget — to provide all the administrative needs for nine stand-alone hospices on Vancouver Island for $450,000 — $50,000 per facility, an incredible deal. We have nothing in this budget that even addresses that.

It's the best value you can find. It's the communities coming together. They can get no better value than that, and this government fails to recognize it. The health authority fails to recognize it. We see no leadership at all from the Liberal government, the minister responsible or the Premier.

I was at a fundraiser — I spoke about that earlier today in a two-minute statement — on Saturday for the Bread of Life in Port Alberni. It's a facility that's been around since the '80s, and it helps try to address the needs for those who can't take care of themselves. No matter what we think or how great we're doing in our own personal lives, nobody in this province is very far from needing help, and this government has been anything but the help-giver that they should be.

So the Bread of Life does fundraising, and they ask community members to come forward and help. Sometimes community members that can't afford to help still donate. I donate. I don't want to see people going without meals or children without clothes, without warmth, without blankets, without housing.

[1545]

That should not be a political thing. That should be something for all of us in this House to address. Instead, this government has exacerbated homelessness, poverty, child poverty. It's shameful, and this budget does nothing to address that.

The West Coast General Hospital in Port Alberni. Well, when there was a surplus, they stripped that facility, the hospital in Port Alberni, of its psych ward — an incredibly important facility in the West Coast General Hospital to deal with psychiatric needs and those people who need help. This was done without any consultation with the community. This was done without any consultation with emergency services, the police, the RCMP or the ambulance services, which would then be required to transport people that need appropriate psychiatric care out of the valley.

Remember the other slogan from this government? "Health care when you need it, where you need it" — another slogan, an empty slogan, a vacuum.

The Tofino Hospital on the west coast of Vancouver Island services the entire Pacific Rim region — Ucluelet, Tofino, five Nuu-chah-nulth communities and up to 20,000 tourists and travelling public on any day during the summer. The hospital has not been getting more services. It's being stripped of services.

When there was a surplus, this government stripped away obstetrics at the Tofino Hospital. A pregnant woman now living in Tofino — a better example, living in Hesquiat, a Nuu-chah-nulth community in the north part of the region serviced by that hospital, at least an hour's boat ride to Tofino, often a perilous boat ride…. A pregnant woman from Hesquiat now has to travel by boat for at least an hour to get to Tofino, and the hospital has been stripped of its ability to deal with obstetrics.

She now has to move on to Port Alberni, to West Coast General. It's another two hours of twisty road after an hour of open ocean, in some places, to get to Tofino. Now there's the trip to West Coast General. Again, health care when you need it, where you need it.

That woman may have to spend the last month of her pregnancy away from her family, far distant from her community, to give birth to a child. That should not be. That happened when there was a surplus. This government did that when there was a surplus.

The fear in my constituency from my constituents is palpable. What will this government do with the real budget next September if they get re-elected? When they stripped these valuable and vital services from our communities when there's a surplus, my god, what will they do with a deficit? And this deficit, the half-billion, is based on smoke-and-mirrors accounting, just as the accounting that they claimed when they came in, which is refuted by the Auditor General of British Columbia, was smoke and mirrors.

That's why the public knows this budget is false. The half-billion-dollar deficit, I would suggest, is not even in the ballpark. We have that based on an increase in sales tax revenues, an increase in income tax revenues.

Well, the last I looked, travelling around the coast and the province, there were 30,000 forestry jobs lost — just that long ago. Over 60,000 jobs lost in the province just that long ago.

I don't know anyone who buys the fact that we're going to have any significant increase in income tax revenue. It just doesn't wash. People know that. They see this for what it is. This is a pre-election budget that will

[ Page 14552 ]

be altered if this government gets re-elected, and the truth will come out.

Promises made by this government and this Premier are certainly suspect anyway. We've all heard and remember: "We won't tear up legally negotiated contracts." On that one, when the HEU took this Premier to court, the court not only found in favour of the HEU; they found that the Premier had defiled the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of this country.

[1550]

Whatever political stripe, any Premier who actually brings in policies to take away rights and freedoms that have been fought for and people have died for in this country doesn't deserve to be a Premier.

Fir Park/Echo Village is a very big part of the community in Port Alberni, a seniors complex care facility. When there was a surplus, this government, this health authority stripped that facility of its secure wing designed for people who wandered — seniors with dementia, Alzheimer's — and took that away. It's been in place for years.

I've spoken with the residents there, their families, the staff and the administration. There was no consultation with them. There was no consultation with the community. They stripped our community of that vital service when there was a surplus. What will they do with the real budget if they get re-elected? What will they strip under those conditions, Madam Speaker?

When times were good, this government stripped students of student grants. They have increased the debt load of post-secondary students. They've doubled. This government is charging usury fees, interest rates for student loans. When times were good, they did that.

This is a time to retrain. There are challenges in the world now. There are challenges in B.C. now, with the economic problems we're seeing around the world. This is a time, which we know from history, to retrain and reinvest in our future, our students, and we've seen a cut instead. The five-year plans came forward for the last fiscal weeks before the budgets had to be finalized by the post-secondary institutions. This government pulled out 2 or almost 3 percent of that budget. Courses were reduced; staff were fired.

In a time when we should be investing in education — when there was still a surplus, at least on the books — this government took away, and this budget does nothing to address that.

The Auditor General's report again. I know this Liberal government hates the Auditor General, but I respect Mr. Doyle. Look at what he just said, Madam Speaker, about skills training, trades training — that this government failed. They brought in changes to help their business buddies, those that sponsor this government, this party that has driven the trades and skills training into the ground in this province. Disgrace.

Take away the ability and don't even consult with those people that would be mentors in any industry. No, instead of making a carpenter that can have a living wage, let's bring it down to somebody who nails up drywall, who may live below the poverty level, based on this government's failure to address minimum-wage issues. Well, they did address minimum-wage issues. They dropped it to six bucks an hour. Disgraceful.

I'm the critic for aboriginal affairs. Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation is the minister that I shadow. There's an 18 percent reduction in the budget. This government and this Premier were just negotiating legislation on recognition and reconciliation — all the right words. We heard those words before. It's called the new relationship.

It was this government and this Premier's failure to deliver on the new relationship that forced the Premier into a negotiation kicking and screaming, with the spectre of action on the ground by first nations who would take no more platitudes and slogans about a new relationship that was never even meant to be.

[1555]

This government, the Premier, was never going to sign it and never did sign it — never implemented it, never provided a budget to implement it. And he was going to do it again, because this legislation, which has just been put on hold, has not been accounted for in any budget. There's a reduction in the budget — 18 percent reduction in the budget.

That legislation was supposed to apply to the dirt ministries, if you will, specifically — not exclusively, but specifically — Mines and Forests and, I would submit, Environment. There are a number of ministries that would be involved with this. By my estimation, those ministries have also had cuts. There was no ability to implement any new legislation. Worse, there was no intent to do so. This was another attempt by this Premier and this government to mislead first nations in this province, and that's a disgrace.

First nations will not stand for it any longer. I've brought in motions in this House demanding the empowerment of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs — for all the right reasons, because the first nations communities, first nations leaders and first nations people in this province do not want to be sold a slogan again. We need to address first nations issues. Yes. We need to do it openly, because we've learned that we cannot trust this Premier and this government to do it behind closed doors.

As I wind down here, I want to affirm to this House, in case they haven't got my message yet, that I will not be supporting this budget. This government and this Premier have let down the people of British Columbia. The people of British Columbia have watched their piece of the pie in this great province we call British Columbia being whittled away. It gets smaller and smaller — a looting of the province to benefit a few at the expense of the whole, of the public interest.

In closing, I'll reiterate the words of the Auditor General when he was referring to the disastrous removal

[ Page 14553 ]

of more land from tree farm licences in public control — that the government failed to take into account the public interest.

Hon. M. Coell: I'm pleased today, as Minister of Advanced Education and Labour Market Development, to rise to speak in support of the budget.

We are living in a world radically different than just seven months ago. It's a time of uncertainty. Our province has been impacted by economic events beyond our control, and we've seen unprecedented drops in provincial revenues. Never has our knowledge economy and the value it places on specialized skills been more essential, and never has a vibrant post-secondary system been more crucial to the economic well-being of our province.

We know that in times of economic hardship, post-secondary enrolment goes up as students enter and stay in school, waiting for a more favourable time to enter the workforce. Workers return to school for new skills training or upgrading. Colleges and universities around the province are already reporting large increases in enrolment. Never has it been more important to support post-secondary education, and as we approach 2010 with the optimism of the current economic crisis waning, we must also plan ahead to look at addressing B.C.'s potential labour market shortages caused by a retiring workforce.

That's why our government is welcoming immigrants to B.C. communities with a view to working with educators, industry and partners to help them settle into their new lives with the support they need. That's also why we'll welcome workers from other provinces by reducing barriers that interfere with the recognition of their credentials in our province.

[1600]

There are no easy solutions to the challenges we are facing as a province, but there are some carefully measured approaches we can take to help us through these tough times. In order to ensure that British Columbians continue to have access to quality education and health care, the government is running a temporary deficit. Recently this government also took steps to amend legislation that will allow the implementation of a series of economic measures to help support families and businesses across British Columbia.

What we're doing as government is helping individuals, families and businesses get through the tough times so that when they end, B.C. will continue to be well positioned for success. We will be one of the first jurisdictions out of the gates as new opportunities return.

Despite facing economic challenges, we are honouring our commitment to protect and enhance access to post-secondary institutions, expand health education programs and fulfil the commitment to increase the number of trained physicians in British Columbia. In fact, we're investing more in post-secondary education than ever before.

Budget 2009 will provide a $228 million increase in funding for public post-secondary institutions over the next three years. The budget for post-secondary education will be 56 percent higher in 2012 than it was in 2001. Operational funding to institutions