H0415pm 09

H0415pm 09

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

y Fourth Session, 38th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) Tuesday, April 15, 2008 Afternoon Sitting Volume 30, Number 9 THE HONOURABLE BILL BARISOFF, SPEAKER ISSN 0709-1281

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR His Honour the Honourable Steven L. Point, OBC FOURTH SESSION, 38TH PARLIAMENT SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................Hon. Gordon Campbell Deputy Premier and Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...................... Hon.

Shirley Bond Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ........................................................................................................ Hon. Michael de Jong Minister of Advanced Education and Minister Responsible for Research and Technology ........................................... Hon. Murray Coell Minister of Agriculture and Lands.......................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Pat Bell Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism............................................................................... Hon. Wally Oppal, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ................................................................................................................Hon. Tom Christensen Minister of State for Childcare ........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors’ and Women’s Issues........................................... Hon. Ida Chong Minister of Economic Development and Minister Responsible for the Asia-Pacific Initiative and the Olympics.................Hon. Colin Hansen Minister of Employment and Income Assistance ...........................................................................................................Hon.

Claude Richmond Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources .......................................................................................................Hon. Richard Neufeld Minister of State for Mining......................................................................................................................................................Hon. Kevin Krueger Minister of Environment and Minister Responsible for Water Stewardship and Sustainable Communities ...............Hon.

Barry Penner Minister of Finance.......................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Carole Taylor Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for Housing ............................................................................. Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Health ......................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

George Abbott Minister of Labour and Citizens’ Services ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General and Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations............... Hon. John van Dongen Minister of Small Business and Revenue and Minister Responsible for Regulatory Reform............................................ Hon.

Rick Thorpe Minister of Tourism, Sport and the Arts ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Stan Hagen Minister of State for ActNow B.C. ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Gordon Hogg Minister of Transportation...........................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Kevin Falcon LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition .........................................................................................................................................................Carole James Deputy Speaker ....................................................................................................................................................................................Sindi Hawkins Deputy Speaker ...........................................................................................................................................................................

Katherine Whittred Assistant Deputy Speaker.....................................................................................................................................................................Sue Hammell Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole................................................................................................................................................. Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly .........................................................................................................................E.

George MacMinn, OBC, QC Clerk Assistant.........................................................................................................................................................................................Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk .......................................................................................................................................................Ian D. Izard, QC Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees ....................................................................................................................................... Craig H.

James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk ..........................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms............................................................................................................................................................................. A.A.

Humphreys Director, Hansard Services ...................................................................................................................................................................Jo-Anne Kern Legislative Librarian ..................................................................................................................................................................................Jane Taylor Legislative Comptroller...............................................................................................................................................................................Dan Arbic

Party Standings: Liberal 46; New Democratic 33 ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Abbott, Hon. George (L) .................................................................... Shuswap Austin, Robin (NDP)............................................................................. Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP).................................................................. Surrey-Newton Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)..........................................Penticton–Okanagan Valley Bell, Hon.

Pat (L) .............................................................Prince George North Bennett, Bill (L) ........................................................................ East Kootenay Black, Iain (L) ............................................................ Port Moody–Westwood Bloy, Harry (L)................................................................................Burquitlam Bond, Hon. Shirley (L).....................................Prince George–Mount Robson Brar, Jagrup (NDP).....................................................Surrey–Panorama Ridge Campbell, Hon.

Gordon (L) .........................................Vancouver–Point Grey Cantelon, Ron (L)..............................................................Nanaimo-Parksville Chong, Hon. Ida (L) .................................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Christensen, Hon. Tom (L) ................................................. Okanagan-Vernon Chudnovsky, David (NDP) ......................................... Vancouver-Kensington Coell, Hon.

Murray (L) .....................................Saanich North and the Islands Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)...........................................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .......................................... West Kootenay–Boundary Coons, Gary (NDP) ....................................................................... North Coast Cubberley, David (NDP)............................................................Saanich South de Jong, Hon.

Michael (L) ...................................Abbotsford–Mount Lehman Dix, Adrian (NDP) .........................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Evans, Corky (NDP).................................................................Nelson-Creston Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L) .......................................................

Surrey-Cloverdale Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ...............................Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Fleming, Rob (NDP) ..............................................................Victoria-Hillside Fraser, Scott (NDP) ..............................................................Alberni-Qualicum Gentner, Guy (NDP).......................................................................Delta North Hagen, Hon. Stan (L) ................................................................ Comox Valley Hammell, Sue (NDP) ................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Hansen, Hon.

Colin (L) ..................................................Vancouver-Quilchena Hawes, Randy (L).......................................................... Maple Ridge–Mission Hawkins, Sindi (L) ............................................................... Kelowna-Mission Hayer, Dave S. (L) ................................................................ Surrey-Tynehead Hogg, Hon.

Gordon (L).....................................................Surrey–White Rock Horgan, John (NDP)......................................................Malahat–Juan de Fuca Horning, Al (L)........................................................... Kelowna–Lake Country Ilich, Hon. Olga (L)...............................................................Richmond Centre James, Carole (NDP).......................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Jarvis, Daniel (L)..................................................

North Vancouver–Seymour Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................... Esquimalt-Metchosin Krog, Leonard (NDP)......................................................................... Nanaimo Krueger, Hon. Kevin (L) .....................................Kamloops–North Thompson Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Lali, Harry (NDP)........................................................................

Yale-Lillooet Lee, Richard T. (L)....................................................................Burnaby North Lekstrom, Blair (L).............................................................. Peace River South Les, John (L)........................................................................ Chilliwack-Sumas Macdonald, Norm (NDP).................................... Columbia River–Revelstoke MacKay, Dennis (L)....................................................

Bulkley Valley–Stikine Mayencourt, Lorne (L).......................................................Vancouver-Burrard McIntyre, Joan (L).................................................West Vancouver–Garibaldi Neufeld, Hon. Richard (L) .................................................. Peace River North Nuraney, John (L).............................................................Burnaby-Willingdon Oppal, Hon. Wally, QC (L).......................................... Vancouver-Fraserview Penner, Hon. Barry (L)...........................................................

Chilliwack-Kent Polak, Mary (L) ....................................................................................Langley Puchmayr, Chuck (NDP)...................................................... New Westminster Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ............................................................. Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (L) ................................................................ Richmond East Richmond, Hon. Claude (L).............................................................

Kamloops Robertson, Gregor (NDP) ................................................Vancouver-Fairview Roddick, Valerie (L).......................................................................Delta South Routley, Doug (NDP)..................................................... Cowichan-Ladysmith Rustad, John (L) ........................................................

Prince George–Omineca Sather, Michael (NDP).........................................Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...................................Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Bob (NDP)..................................................................Cariboo North Simpson, Shane (NDP) ....................................................Vancouver-Hastings Sultan, Ralph (L) ....................................................West Vancouver–Capilano Taylor, Hon.

Carole (L).....................................................Vancouver-Langara Thorne, Diane (NDP) .................................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Thorpe, Hon. Rick (L).......................................................Okanagan-Westside Trevena, Claire (NDP) ..................................................................North Island van Dongen, Hon. John (L)............................................ Abbotsford-Clayburn Whittred, Katherine (L)........................................

North Vancouver–Lonsdale Wyse, Charlie (NDP) .................................................................Cariboo South Yap, John (L)...................................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Clayburn....................................................Hon. John van Dongen Abbotsford–Mount Lehman .......................................... Hon. Michael de Jong Alberni-Qualicum..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Bulkley Valley–Stikine ...........................................................Dennis MacKay Burnaby North ...........................................................................Richard T. Lee Burnaby-Edmonds........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Willingdon................................................................... John Nuraney Burquitlam.......................................................................................Harry Bloy Cariboo North..............................................................................

Bob Simpson Cariboo South..............................................................................Charlie Wyse Chilliwack-Kent ..................................................................Hon. Barry Penner Chilliwack-Sumas............................................................................... John Les Columbia River–Revelstoke................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley........................................................................ Hon.

Stan Hagen Coquitlam-Maillardville..............................................................Diane Thorne Cowichan-Ladysmith ................................................................. Doug Routley Delta North ...................................................................................Guy Gentner Delta South ............................................................................. Valerie Roddick East Kootenay................................................................................

Bill Bennett Esquimalt-Metchosin.........................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ..................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Kamloops.....................................................................Hon. Claude Richmond Kamloops–North Thompson ............................................Hon. Kevin Krueger Kelowna–Lake Country.................................................................. Al Horning Kelowna-Mission ......................................................................

Sindi Hawkins Langley ...........................................................................................Mary Polak Malahat–Juan de Fuca .................................................................. John Horgan Maple Ridge–Mission ................................................................ Randy Hawes Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ..................................................... Michael Sather Nanaimo......................................................................................

Leonard Krog Nanaimo-Parksville .....................................................................Ron Cantelon Nelson-Creston .............................................................................Corky Evans New Westminster .................................................................. Chuck Puchmayr North Coast....................................................................................

Gary Coons North Island ...............................................................................Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale................................................Katherine Whittred North Vancouver–Seymour..........................................................Daniel Jarvis Oak Bay–Gordon Head ........................................................... Hon. Ida Chong Okanagan-Vernon......................................................... Hon. Tom Christensen Okanagan-Westside..............................................................Hon.

Rick Thorpe Peace River North.......................................................... Hon. Richard Neufeld Peace River South..................................................................... Blair Lekstrom Penticton–Okanagan Valley .................................................Hon. Bill Barisoff Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain ............................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Westwood.................................................................... Iain Black Powell River–Sunshine Coast ...............................................

Nicholas Simons Prince George North.................................................................... Hon. Pat Bell Prince George–Mount Robson ............................................Hon. Shirley Bond Prince George–Omineca................................................................ John Rustad Richmond Centre......................................................................Hon. Olga Ilich Richmond East........................................................................Hon.

Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston...........................................................................John Yap Saanich North and the Islands ............................................ Hon. Murray Coell Saanich South ........................................................................ David Cubberley Shuswap............................................................................Hon. George Abbott Skeena.......................................................................................... Robin Austin Surrey-Cloverdale............................................................... Hon.

Kevin Falcon Surrey–Green Timbers ................................................................Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton............................................................................... Harry Bains Surrey–Panorama Ridge.................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey-Tynehead ....................................................................... Dave S. Hayer Surrey-Whalley...........................................................................Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ............................................................Hon.

Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Burrard..............................................................Lorne Mayencourt Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................Gregor Robertson Vancouver-Fraserview .................................................Hon.

Wally Oppal, QC Vancouver-Hastings .................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington.......................................................David Chudnovsky Vancouver-Kingsway ......................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara ........................................................... Hon. Carole Taylor Vancouver–Mount Pleasant........................................ Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey ................................................Hon.

Gordon Campbell Vancouver-Quilchena.........................................................Hon. Colin Hansen Victoria–Beacon Hill...................................................................

Carole James Victoria-Hillside ...........................................................................Rob Fleming West Kootenay–Boundary........................................................Katrine Conroy West Vancouver–Capilano...........................................................Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Garibaldi ........................................................Joan McIntyre Yale-Lillooet..................................................................................... Harry Lali

CONTENTS Tuesday, April 15, 2008 Afternoon Sitting Routine Proceedings Page Tributes ....................................................................................................................... ............................................................ 11369 Frank Carson Hon. G.

Campbell Introductions by Members ....................................................................................................... ............................................ 11369 Introduction and First Reading of Bills........................................................................................ ....................................... 11369 Wills, Estates and Succession Act (Bill 28) Hon. W.

Oppal Statements (Standing Order 25B) .............................................................................................................................. ........... 11369 Tynehead Hatchery volunteers D. Hayer Gladstone Secondary students in robotics competition A. Dix Lions Gate Hospital Foundation R. Sultan Ev Timms C. Wyse 100-mile diet R. Hawes Queen Elizabeth Secondary School fundraising event S.

Hammell Oral Questions................................................................................................................. ....................................................... 11372 Ferry fares G. Coons Hon. K. Falcon C. Trevena B.C. Ferries board appointment and remuneration L. Krog Hon. K. Falcon B. Ralston R. Fleming Independent power project proposals S. Simpson Hon. B. Penner J. Horgan Hon. R. Neufeld

Second Reading of Bills........................................................................................................ ................................................. 11376 Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Cap and Trade) Act (Bill 18) (continued) C. James C. Trevena N. Macdonald Hon. B. Penner Oil and Gas Activities Act (Bill 20) Hon. R. Neufeld J. Horgan G. Robertson A. Dix G. Gentner M. Farnworth Hon. R. Neufeld Public Safety and Solicitor General (Gift Card Certainty) Statutes Amendment Act, 2008 (Bill 17) Hon. J. van Dongen M. Farnworth A. Dix L.

Krog Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply............................................................................................................ ................................................. 11408 Estimates: Ministry of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy (continued) D. Cubberley Hon. S. Bond D. Routley H. Bains C. Trevena G. Coons

11369 TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 The House met at 1:33 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Tributes FRANK CARSON Hon. G. Campbell: I'm sad to report that one of Vic- toria's really distinguished citizens passed away yester- day. Frank Carson Sr. passed away. I'm sure members of the Legislature will be aware of the fact that Frank served this region as a city councillor from 1980 to 1990. He was always at the core, at the heart, of Victoria's vol- unteer community. He was a recognized businessman across the capital region and indeed across the province. I got to know him personally when he was sitting on the B.C.

Transit board back in the late '80s. He always served with honour and with dignity. He always lis- tened with an open mind. He always tried to bring a way of bringing people together in the community to accomplish our goals as a province. He was one of those people that I think everyone appreciated working with. Carson Hall in the Victoria Conference Centre bears his name as a reminder of his great contributions, cer- tainly, to this city. I know we'll all remember his con- tributions, and I think it's important for the House to recognize that those contributions were not just to a community but to a province.

I know the House would want to send our condo- lences to the family and our best wishes and our prayers to them as well. [1335] Introductions by Members H. Bains: There are 71 grade 5 students from Straw- berry Hill School joined by their teachers Rapinder Kaur Gill and Harmony Wilson. The kinds of questions that they asked me when I met them in the hallway…. I'm sure that one day they will be occupying some of these seats here. Please join me and extend our warm- est welcome to them all. Hon. C.

Richmond: I'm pleased to announce four people in the gallery today who assisted us in an- nouncing the second year of our tenant starter kits in the main rotunda at noon. These are the kits that we give to people moving into housing, who are trying to turn their lives around, or women fleeing an abusive relationship. The program was a great success, so we've renewed it for another year. I would like the House to welcome Marg Gordon, member services coordinator of the B.C.

Non-Profit Housing Association; Donna Sassaman, AHEAD co- ordinator; and two people from our shop, Barbara Stewart, manager, and Ben James, who helped us put today's program together. Would the House please make them welcome. R. Sultan: In the precinct today we have 50 students from Braemar School in my ri ding, ages eight and nine. They've asked such penetrating questions as: how many times has the Sergeant-at-Arms actually hit somebody over the head with the mace, and could we give an example of decisions we have pushed up to the federal government level? Would you please welcome these eight-year-olds. Hon.

J. van Dongen: Visiting us in the Legislature today are two dental hygienists, Paula McAleese from Abbotsford and Monica Maletts from Chilliwack. Also accompanying them are Cindy Fletcher, executive director of the B.C. Dental Hygienists Association, and Jennifer Burnett, registrar of the College of Dental Hygienists. I ask the House to please make them all very welcome. S. Simpson: I'm pleased to introduce Gwen Barlee from the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, who's here having discussio ns around private power projects. Please make her welcome.

Introduction and First Reading of Bills WILLS, ESTATES AND SUCCESSION ACT Hon. W. Oppal presented a message from His Hon- our the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Wills, Es- tates and Succession Act. Hon. W. Oppal: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now. Motion approved. Hon. W. Oppal: I'm pleased to introduce the Wills, Estates and Succession Act. This act was prepared with the considerable assistance from the British Columbia Law Institute. I'd like to acknowledge their help and the help of over 30 volunteer s from the legal, academic and notary communities.

This act will modernize the law of succession and replace four existing pieces of legislation. It contains a number of important changes that will simplify the administration of estates and make it more likely that the wishes of a deceased will be upheld. 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 28, Wills, Estates and Succession Act, intro- duced, 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) TYNEHEAD HATCHERY VOLUNTEERS D. Hayer: There's nothing like a success story, and one of those is happening in my constituency of

11370 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 Surrey-Tynehead with the efforts of the volunteers of the Serpentine Enhancement Society. Just recently, we provided the organization with a $9,000 grant to enhance the operations at Tynehead Hatchery. Those volunteers are dedicated to returning salmon runs to our local streams and rivers , especially in Tynehead Regional Park where they have successfully trans- formed the little creek that eventually becomes Surrey's major river — the Serpentine — into a salmon producer. This hatchery doesn't just raise fish.

Its volunteers operate an education program both at the hatchery and in classrooms, which supplies fertilized salmon eggs to some 40 school groups, and teach children about the value of protecting our en vironment and bringing it back to life. After raising the salmon, the children then go to the hatchery to release them into the Serpentine River. [1340] There are hundreds of volunteers who diligently contribute their time to k eep this valuable hatchery, wildlife habitat enhancem ent and education program going. Some volunteer hundreds of hours every year.

Directors include Glenn Wright, president; Ebb Budgell, vice-president; Julie Budgell, secretary-treasurer; and directors Alan Dobby; Bruce Easton; Chris Hamming; Lorene Meyer, who is in charge of fundraising; Dave Woods; and Carol Wright. Among many other volunteers are Orla Christensen, Frank and Willa McKnight, Brian Garard, Catherine Kyle, Al Nyberg, Eric Kaipainen, Greg Moro, Frank Marshalok and many longtime members, including Emil Quinn, Tom and Elaine Goodwin, and Barry Shiles. I ask everyone in the House to join me in saluting these dedicated volunteers and environmentalists.

I also ask the members to join with me for Tynehead Hatchery's 20th anniversary celebrations on Sunday, May 4. GLADSTONE SECONDARY STUDENTS IN ROBOTICS COMPETITION A. Dix: Tomorrow morning, two teams of engineer- ing and electronics students from Gladstone Secondary in Vancouver-Kingsway will travel to the Georgia Dome in Atlanta to compete in the World Robotics Champi- onships. Earlier this year the teams won the right to go by winning the B.C. event and then the western regional event held in Seattle, Washington, involving western states and provinces.

The 11 students are Alexander Jew, Alex Mui, Angus Lei, Kelvin Tam, Natasha Palmer, Jason Khuu, Tony Lee, Henson Truong, Victor Yang, Henry Lee and Eli Hollett-Feuchtwanger. I invite the Minister of Education, the Premier and all MLAs to visit the classroom with teacher Todd Ablett at Gladstone. It is a remarkable place of learn- ing, and the success of the program is a tribute to the students and Mr. Ablett. Todd tells the story of how one of the teams in the middle of the competition in Seattle decided — they were winning the competition, by the way — to take their robot entirely apart and rebuild it overnight.

Hon. Speaker, I know what you're thinking. The Vancouver Canucks should take note. The students qualified for the world championships in February and only had a short time to raise the $20,000 needed to go. I'm happy to report that we as a community succeeded in raising the money. I want to acknowledge the contribution of Global television, whose coverage of the students' success led to a wave of contributions. The media, a force for good — who'd have thunk it?

I want to highlight, as we ll, one of the contributors, Rudy Chiang from the Universal Buddhist Temple, who saw the story in my householder and matched my contribution of $1,200 to allow the students to finally meet their goal. Thank you, Rudy. Imaginative students, a great teacher and involved community — it is a great story of public education in British Columbia. On behalf of the Legislature, I want to wish the Gladstone students all the best in Atlanta and congratulate them for representing our province and our community so very well. LIONS GATE HOSPITAL FOUNDATION R.

Sultan: In these days of huge health authorities and complicated 3P funding, it is encouraging to dis- cover old-fashioned philanthropy alive and well — private citizens digging deep into their own pockets to build the health facilities they desire. The Lions Gate Hospital Foundation has served the North Shore for 20 years, during which time it has raised $40 million to build a new emergency department, state-of-the-art imaging facilities and new minimally inva- sive operating suites, including a neurological-surgical OR second to none.

Under the guidance of pr esident Judy Savage and a board chaired by Carmen Thériault, the foundation has taken on such challenges as raising $15 million from approximately 8,000 of our citizens, topped up by $7 million from Vancouver Coastal to build the Jimmy Pattison ER facility. Jimmy's contribution was important, as was Michael Smith's, bu t the bulk of the funding came from the little guys. Their most recent campaign has raised almost $10 million for a hospice, the North Shore being the only B.C. community of this size without a facility staffed with end-of-life specialists.

Vancouver Coastal is sup- plying the land, and the foundation has partnered with the hospice society and Family Services of the North Shore under founding chair Joanne Houssian to raise the balance. [1345] This is all hard, grinding work, but last week to top up the hospice fund, Teck Co minco and the Vanderspeck family backstopped an evening of fun and entertainment at the Meek with Jann Arden and Vicki Gabereau. This is no fat-cat thing. Most of the foundation's money arrives in $25 and $50 chunks. Contributors are motivated by the wish to see excellent facilities

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11371 in which to house the excellent staff of our excellent health care system. Others can learn from their example. EV TIMMS C. Wyse: Members on both sides of the House frequently acknowledge the volunteers in their con- stituencies. We understand how important volunteers are to the well-being of our communities. Volunteers are the soul of any city, town or village in this province. Today I would like to recognize one of the very special volunteers in the village of Clinton in Cariboo South.

Ev Timms has been a dedicated volunteer fire- fighter in Clinton for the past 50 years. When he began his work, Clinton had almost no firefighting equipment and definitely had no fire trucks. During his many years of service Ev has seen many changes, as the community now has three fire trucks and a brand-new fire hall which opened last year. During the 1970s and '80s Ev was the fire chief. When he resigned this position, he remained with the hall as a firefighter, sharing his wealth of experience and offering sound advice to the many volunteers on the crew.

Ev also offered his expert ise to the new fire chief Robin Fennell, thereby providing smooth transition in leadership and ensuring the community continued to be well protected. Ev Timms continues to work for his community and has been the dispatcher at the Clinton fire hall for the past four years. This week Ev and his wife Joan are celebrating their 56th wedding anniversary. Ev's 50-year involvement in the Clinton fire department has been for almost their entire married life, and undoubtedly she has supported him in his work and deserves recognition as well.

I ask the House to join me today in thanking Ev Timms for his dedication, his work and his commit- ment to the safety and well-being of his friends and neighbours in the village of Clinton and the surround- ing area. 100-MILE DIET R. Hawes: Ever since James Mackinnon and Alisa Smith spent a year eating only local foods and published their book The 100-Mile Diet , the whole concept has taken off. The notion of eating only locally produced fresh foods and calculating food miles has captured families throughout North America. The hundred-mile diet has now come to Mission.

Starting June 1, Paperny Films of Vancouver will be filming a dozen Mission families, including mine, who have committed to a total hundred-mile diet for 100 days. They'll follow these families as they struggle to find sources of local foods to meet the challenge.

Just think — a hundred days with no coffee, no tea, no caffeine products, no sugar, no beer or distilled p r o d u c t s , n o s o d a p o p , n o c h o c o l a t e , n o f r u i t s u n l e s s grown within a hundred miles, no prepared foods with additives manufactured outside of the hundred-mile limit and no McDonald's, Burger King or A&W — just fresh locally produced and locally grown produce, dairy, meats and fish. Already the Mission community is scouring the valley seeking farm-gate sources. Restaurants and food stores are getting ready to offer hundred-mile products and meals.

James Mackinnon and Alisa Smith will be on hand through much of the hundred days to provide guidance, support and commentary. Mentoring com- mittees are being formed and recipes exchanged. A hundred more families are committing to 50 percent of the hundred-mile diet. This is an exciting project that's uniting the community and making everyone more aware of the environmental and health consequences of food choices. The production will be aired on the Food Net- work in February and March of next year. Provided we in Mission can all avoid caffeine rage and sugar withdrawal, I think we're up to the challenge.

We are all learning the wisdom of the often-spoken words of the member for Delta South, who frequently says: "We all have to eat to live." QUEEN ELIZABETH SECONDARY SCHOOL FUNDRAISING EVENT S. Hammell: In light of national volunteer month, I'd like to recognize the time and effort the students of Queen Elizabeth Secondary in Surrey have given to executing the annual Roots and Rhythms Extravaganza.

This evening of dance and fashion, now in its eighth year, is considered to be the highlight of their school term. [1350] The student-run multicultural event took place last Thursday, and for the second year the students decided to give the proceeds to Surrey Memorial Hospital. The students have indicated th ey are concerned about the future of the health care system. Surrey Memorial is located across the street from the high school, and these students have said they have been directly affected by long wait lines and the emergency ward situation.

Providing an opportunity for students to get in- volved in their community gives youth a sense of own- ership and opportunity. The Queen Elizabeth student body has a significant number of South Asian students. It has been noted in the local South Asian media that today's youth are experiencing a struggle between two different cultures — the western culture they are ex- posed to every day and are immersed in while at school, and the South Asian culture that their parents expect them to be part of. Sometimes these two worlds collide and create is- sues for our youth.

The Roots and Rhythms event is an excellent way to celebrate the difference and temper those collisions. Youth who are involved in volunteer work benefit in the long run as they learn the skills of teamwork, communication and how to interact in a real-world setting. Through projects like Roots and Rhythms, they develop self-esteem and leadership skills. So congratulations once again to the students of Queen Elizabeth Secondary. Over eight years, more than $13,000 has been raised. Their goal this year was

11372 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 to raise $5,000, and the students are confident they've exceeded that. So would everyone say: "Well done." Oral Questions FERRY FARES G. Coons: On the same day that ferry fares were increased up and down the coast of British Columbia, the hand-picked B.C. Ferry board of directors were rewarded with a 60 percent, gravy-train boost to their paycheque. Coastal communiti es are outraged by the dramatic fare increases, and now they learn there seems to be plenty of money for handouts to this gov- ernment's friends.

The Transportation Minister said, "Boo hoo," to ferry users, and now he's saying, "Here's the cash," to his friends. Will the minister finally stand up for ferry users and ferry-dependent communities and put a morato- rium on any new ferry fares? Hon. K. Falcon: Mr. Speaker, $130 million — that is the amount that this gove rnment provides each and every year to subsidize ferry services in the province of British Columbia, with $55 million just for the Gulf Islands alone. That's $55 million a year for 25,000 people.

You can look in any part of the province, and you will not find an area that receives more government money to underwrite and support important transpor- tation services than we do with the B.C. Ferries system. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. G. Coons: This minister just doesn't get it. Cash- cow payouts to the minister's friends, while ferry users are crippled with outrageous fare increases. He isn't listening to the people in communities who depend on ferries.

In the Gulf Islands, Powell River, the Sunshine Coast, the central coast, the north coast and Vancouver Island, residents are all struggling and in a crisis due to this minister's lack of concern. The B.C. Liberal government has abandoned ferry- dependent communities, but they're happy to hand out big bucks to their hand-picked board. The Minister of Transportation is ultima tely responsible. Why won't he support a moratorium on ferry fares? Is it because he wants to keep doling out the cash to his hand- picked board? Hon. K. Falcon: Well now, Mr. Speaker, once again the member opposite hasn 't done his homework.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, because the member should know that these are not hand-picked board members. Actually, the communities put forward names. If you have problems with some of the names they're putting forward, Member, you ought to say so. [1355] The other thing I'll tell you, Mr. Speaker, that we won't do…. We won't do what the NDP did when they were there for ten years and ran up the debt 1,800 percent, bankrupted B.C. Ferries and left us with a fleet with an average age of 42 years old. That's what we won't be doing under the new structure.

We've seen almost $1 billion invested in new ferries and new terminals, including a new vessel in that mem- ber's own riding, the Northern Adventure; the Northern Expedition, a new vessel coming on next year; and a third new vessel that will be in place by 2012. That's delivering results. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Member, just wait. Member has a further supplemental. G.

Coons: A real disconnect with reality from the minister over there — 13 board members costing tax- payers over $730,000 a year, directors getting a collective $233,000 pay raise while people up and down the coast are struggling to even come up with their fare increases. It's time for the minister to own up to his accountabil- ity on this file. His government gives B.C. Ferries $130 million every single year. Again to the Minister of Trans- portation: why are taxpayers subsidizing fat increases to the board while ferry users are struggling to make ends meet with these unaccountable fare increases? Hon. K.

Falcon: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'll tell you one thing we are doing differently. We are making sure that people who are appointed to the board actually have some knowledge and experience. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat for a second. Continue, Minister. Hon. K. Falcon: Oh, I know it's a shock for the mem- bers opposite to think about things like ability and skill set when you appoint people to the board. After all, when they appointed people, they would appoint MLAs from their own government. They would appoint labour leaders. One of the more famous moments in B.C.

Fer- ries history is the labour leader they appointed who, after the fast ferries fiasco , commented and said: "Well, what the hell do I know about building boats?" Well, I'll tell you. We actually want to have people on a board that know a th ing or two about building boats, that know a thing or two about overseeing a complex large organization and that deliver a capital program of almost $1 billion in four years and continue to improve service. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. I remind the minister to be careful in his choice of words. C.

Trevena: What the minister clearly doesn't understand is that the latest round of fare increases is

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11373 putting a whole new level of hardship on people who live in ferry-dependent communities, people who live on those islands and work on those islands. But the minister thinks 60 percent for the board members — a 60 percent raise for them — i s j u s t f i n e . F o r g e t a b o u t the people who live in the communities. Maybe you should take time to listen to people who are there. Families are leaving. People feel trapped. The economy is suffering in a ll those communities because fares have become unaffordable under his watch, un- der this government.

So to the minister: will he stop ignoring the very real concerns of North Island families and put an end to his unfair fare increases? Hon. K. Falcon: You know, I wish we lived in a world where we haven't seen oil prices in the last five years go from $35 a barrel to $110. I wish that wasn't the world we lived in, but I will tell you this, Mr. Speaker. When we added $7 million in additional dollars to reduce fee increases on the northern minor routes, we got no support from those members oppo- site. When we said we did not want B.C.

Ferries to have to pay $13.9 million in GST as a result of doing the right thing and going out and finding a replace- ment vessel for the Queen of the North , we didn't get any support. [1400] Every penny of that $13.9 million that the federal government, who we worked with to bring those dol- lars back to British Columbia so that we could use them, as we are, to keep fares down on the northern and minor routes — and without any support from the NDP opposition…. Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental. C. Trevena: I think the minister is missing a beat here.

We're talking about $730,000 that is going to board members coming out of taxpayers' pockets and coming out of ferry fares, which is completely unjustifi- able. We have communities that are suffering. We have families that are suffering. We have a simple situation where parents can't take their kids to swimming lessons because they can't afford the ferry fares. People say they feel like prisoners in their own homes. No one at B.C. Ferries will tell people in my com- munity when to expect the next fare increase or the next fuel surcharge. The minister cannot blame every- thing on the increase in oil prices.

This is getting unaf- fordable. It is getting worse. I would like the Minister of Transportation to first come and visit my constitu ents, and then when he does, tell them when those huge raises of the board became more important for him than affordable fares for people in British Columbia and people in northern communities. Hon. K. Falcon: I'll tell you what I will tell her constituents and what I will tell all ferry-dependent communities. There is a big difference between what took place in the decade of the 1990s. Interjections. Hon. K. Falcon: Just a minute. You're going to like this part.

You will like this part. I promise. The big difference is that although the NDP man- aged to increase fares by over 70 percent, unfortunately, it was done at the same time that there was virtually no investment in the fleet, no investment in terminals. They ran up the debt 1,800 percent. They bankrupted the cor- poration. They had the worst labour relations record that anyone could remember. So what have we got today? I'll tell you what we've got today. We've got a new independent ferry system with $837 million of capital in the last five years. We've got renovated terminals.

We've got a stable labour cli- mate, and we've got better service being delivered to the folks in those ferry-dependent communities. B.C. FERRIES BOARD APPOINTMENT AND REMUNERATION L. Krog: I represent the third- poorest constituency in the province of British Columbia. The average family income in Nanaimo is $49,000 a year. A director now will get $48,000 a year for part-time work. So I've got a suggestion for the minister. I've got families in Nanaimo who will happily take up a part-time position for $48,000 a year.

I am asking this mi nister today to tell this House that he will direct that board to roll back that outrageous 60 percent increase now. Hon. K. Falcon: Well, first what I will say to the member is that I agree with the member to the extent that I think that is a lot of money. I actually phoned the chair of the board, and I made it clear that the position of this government was that I thought that was far too generous an increase. Interjections. Hon. K. Falcon: Just a minute. I'm glad we can all agree on that.

Where we disagree with the members opposite is that the predilection of th e members opposite, through a decade of government, was to interfere in every as- pect of the ferry corporation. The ferry corporation has been structured so that it's independent of direct political interference. The decision they made was based on an independent report they had by a resourcing firm called Hewitt Associates. I happened to disagree with the conclusion of that. I let the chair of the board know we disagree with that and that we didn't think that was a particularly wise decision, but they are independent.

They have the ability to make those decisions independent of political interference. [1405] Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. L. Krog: You know, hon. Speaker, I don't know what the minister thinks ab out the intelligence of the

11374 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 average British Columbian. But when they know that the only shareholder of the corporation is the govern- ment of British Columbia, they know it's their money. They also know that this minister can tell that board to roll it back. Again, I'm asking this minister to show some lead- ership. He can get on the phone and complain. Let him get on the phone today and tell them to roll it back. Hon. K. Falcon: This is a classic example. The NDP can't pick and choose. I heard the same members tell- ing me that I needed to interfere with the B.C.

Ferries decision to build some ferries over in Europe. You know what? When they were delivered ahead of

schedule and $20 million under budget, where were the NDP? When they were in government — let's remember this — they made the decision to interfere. They said they had to bu ild fast ferries, and $463 million later three of them are still parked in Howe Sound doing absolutely nothing with no benefit to British Co- lumbians. I'll tell you, Mr. Speaker, that is the difference between this government and that opposition. We will not be interfering, as the Auditor General said we should not be. We will not be micromanaging the decisions of the B.C. ferr y corporation.

They are to make their decisions in the best interests not of politi- cians, not of your friends in the shipyard unions, but of the 20 million people a year that use B.C. Ferry Services. B. Ralston: I want to deal with another example of non-interference by the Minister of Transportation. Chris Gardner is an old pal of the Minister of Transpor- tation. The two of them were right-wing student radicals at Simon Fraser back in the 1980s. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Just take your seat for a second. Member for Surrey-Whalley, do you want to start again. B.

Ralston: The Minister of Transportation's pal Mr. Gardner managed the by-election campaign in 2004 in Surrey–Panorama Ridge for the now member for Lang- ley. Mr. Gardner is, in certai n quarters, rumoured to be a candidate for the B.C. Liberals in the 2009 election in the riding of Surrey–Panorama Ridge. Did the minister appoint hi s pal to the B.C. Ferries board of directors to encourage him to run as a candi- date, or did he appoint him as a consolation prize for not running as a candidate? Hon. K. Falcon: Now, I would have hoped…. This is a great example of how the NDP….

When people of excellent qualifications put themselves forward for a position, that opposition immediately starts attacking them. So let me ask the members opposite: what part of his qualifications do they have a problem with? Is it the fact that he has a law degree? Is it the fact that he was a senior corporate finance specialist for one of the largest investment banks in the world? Is it the fact that he lived in Asia, working with one of the largest law firms in Asia, and speaks Korean? Is it the fact that he's the vice-president of one of B.C.'s fastest-growing private sector companies?

What part of that resumé package offends the members opposite? Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat. We're not going to continue until it's quiet. Continue, Minister. Hon. K. Falcon: So you see, Mr. Speaker, there is an important difference. The difference is that we will put people of excellent calibre and excellent qualifica- tions onto a board without any apologies. The fact that they may be supporters…. They joined 50 percent of the population in the latest poll that supports this government, unlike the plummeting support for the NDP opposition. Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member has a supplemental. [1410] B. Ralston: The minister modestly forgot to men- tion Mr. Gardner's most important credential. He's a pal of the minister. He was appointed on April 4 to the board of B.C. Ferries. The order was retroactive to April 1. On April 1, the pay for directors jumped 60 percent. Did Mr. Gardner make his acceptance conditional upon receiv- ing a 60 percent pay increase? Hon. K. Falcon: These questions are actually em- barrassing, Member. You should be embarrassed to ask those kinds of questions. I'll tell you, Mr. Speaker.

You know, just for once it would be nice if the Leader of the Opposition actually said to her people that rather than trying to constantly attack people who do public service and are serving the public of this province…. I will point out again for the member opposite the stark contrast between the calibre of appointments that our government has a record of making, with the calibre of appointments that they made. A union leader they appointed to the Ferries board, whose most famous comment after the fast ferries fiasco was — Mr.

Speaker, I think you admonished me not to use the word, "What the heck do I know about building boats…?" I'll tell you. It is important that people of calibre and quality with law degrees, with senior executive experience and with corporate finance experience actu- ally know what they're doin g when they're overseeing a complex major organization like B.C. Ferries. I'm proud of that appointment, and I'm proud of our re- cord. I'll put it up against their record of absolutely atrocious appointments any day of the week.

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11375 R. Fleming: We've learned a few details here this afternoon, and one was that the minister phoned the board chair and requested that the outrageous increase to director pay be rolled back. He was very disap- pointed that the board chair didn't listen to him. Now we've learned that his friend is on the board and that his appointment is retroactive to April 1.

I wonder if the minister will consider asking his new friend who's on the board to ask the chair at his very first meeting to roll back those increases and tell them: "No pay increases for directors until ferry fares are rolled back and frozen for B.C. customers." Hon. K. Falcon: I have to say I'm rather amazed. This is a week-old story. I'm glad the NDP have finally clued i n t o i t . I j u s t c a m e o u t o f 1 9 h o u r s o f b u d g e t e s t i m a t e s , and not once did I hear the member talk about this issue. Just yesterday I was in budget estimates talking about Ferries.

Not once did the members talk about this. This may be new to members opposite. It's certainly not new on this side. Why doesn't the member opposite go to the B.C. Ferry Authority website and look at the criteria they lay out that they're looking for in people to be appointed to the board? I'll touch on some of them. Accounting and finance experience — that would be important for the members opposite to note, because they had none on the board when they drove the ferry corporation into bankruptcy. Legal experience — that's something they call for, just like this individual Mr. Gardner with his law degree.

Marketing.… I realize that the members opposite…. Interjections. Hon. K. Falcon: Do you have a concern with the law degree? Is that the issue? Is it the corporate finance experience with one of the largest investment banking firms in the world that offends the members opposite? Is it the fact that he speaks an Asian language that of- fends the member opposite? I'm really having difficulty trying to figure out what part of the qualifications they have a problem with. INDEPENDENT POWER PROJECT PROPOSALS S.

Simpson: The firm Kerr Wood Leidal has pre- pared an analysis for the government, identifying over 8,200 potential rivers and streams for private power projects covering more than 1.2 million hectares of Brit- ish Columbia. If this doesn't perpetuate a gold rush mentality, then I don't know what does.

Now that we've learned we're not talking about 500 or 600 sites but that more than 8,200 private power sites are on the table, will the Minister of Environment agree to support our call for a morato- rium on these projects at least until a comprehensive economic, environmental and social analysis is done and a provincial plan is developed with real consul- tation? [1415] Hon. B. Penner: It's April 15. We're into our third month of the session. The member of the opposition just asked a question. That's his 13th question in ques- tion period, and it's the very first one that he's directed to me.

So I'm pleased to finally…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat. Members. Hon. B. Penner: I'm pleased that the Environment critic for the opposition has finally seen enough interest in the environment that he's asking me a question dur- ing this session. In terms of the opposition's approach to energy planning, we've heard it from their Energy critic and from their other members that they would prefer that B.C. continue to import electricity from fossil fuel sources outside of our borders. That's not our government's agenda. We have a commitment to the environment.

We've got a commit- ment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We've got a commitment to stimulate economic activity in British Columbia. We're going to follow through on that commitment, even if the opposition can't see their way forward to supporting green projects in the province of British Columbia. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. S. Simpson: What would be good is if this minister had enough respect for British Columbians to have gone and talked to those 1,200 people who showed up in Pitt Meadows and the thou sands of people around this province who are conc erned about this giveaway.

If he would get out of his of fice and quit hiding in his office and talk to British Columbians, we'd be better off. Hon. Speaker, I find it hard to believe…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat for a second. Members. Continue, Member. S. Simpson: I f i n d i t h a r d t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e g o v - ernment commissioned this wo rk if they don't plan to use it — more than a thousand sites in the Lower Mainland, 700 on the Island and 3,000 on the north coast among others. Be clear. It's not only thes e projects that are intrusive on their own.

They all require transmission line systems that are equally or more intrusive. So if the minister won't support…. Interjections.

11376 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 Mr. Speaker: Members. Continue, Member. S. Simpson: If the minister won't support our call for a moratorium, will he commit today to no intrusion into our class A parks or conservancy areas by these projects or their transmission systems? Hon. B. Penner: By now, members should know — at least the member opposite should know; everybody else seems to — that I've already made a decision with respect to the park boundary application for the Upper Pitt. Here are some other facts that the member may not be aware of.

When we came to office, there were 26 operating independent power projects in British Co- lumbia. Today there are 19 ad ditional. Under the NDP, the largest single IPP in B.C.'s history was approved, and you're right. It wasn't a run-of-river project. It was a fossil fuel–burning project. As a result, B.C.'s greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector went up 300 percent between 1996 and 2001. That's the record of the NDP. They would prefer to burn fossil fuels to generate electricity. We're looking at clean, green, renewable hydroelectricity. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. J.

Horgan: I'm certain that my participation in the debate will lower the volume a little bit as we move forward through question period. I was pleased to hear th e Minister of Environment say one down and, as my critic for the environment said, only 8,200 more to go. I'm going to move over to the member beside the Minister of Environment and ask the Minister of Energy if he can confirm: of these projects that are being proposed, will the B.C. Transmis- sion Corporation be on the hook for building those transmission lines through class A parks as the minister wants to do? [1420] Hon. R.

Neufeld: I'm glad they dream in 8,200 numbers, but what they should get to is reality. British Columbia needs 30,000 gigawatt hours of electricity within the next 20 to 25 years, with the anticipated growth. That's not my number. That's the B.C. Utilities Commission's number and B.C. Hydro's number. We need 30,000 gigawatt hours of electricity. We need to acquire that. As the Minister of Environment said, we want to acquire as much of that as we possi- bly can from green sources, which they are totally opposed to. On top of that, we've actually asked B.C.

Hydro to account for 15,000 of those gigawatt hours through energy conservation — something that group across the way never talked about and haven't talked about. That's the highest target of any jurisdiction in North America for conservation, and we're proud of it. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Member has a supplemental. J. Horgan: I guess I'll take that as a no with respect to going through parks.

They're going to go wherever they want to go, and I guess we'll take that as the rate- payers are going to be paying for transmission lines to hook up expensive power, low-grade power, for their friends to bring to the load centre in the Lower Mainland. A simple question for the Minister of Energy — a very, very simple question for the Minister of Energy. Will we be on the hook for increased costs as a result of this misguided policy? Hon. R. Neufeld: Always interesting to hear the NDP try to blow everything out of proportion. I guess 8,200 is the new number today. Maybe tomorrow it'll be 10,000. I don't know.

Maybe the next day it'll be a hun- dred. They don't speak reality at any given point in time. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members. Hon. R. Neufeld: Prior to 2001 there were 26 IPPs. Of those 26, 19 were storage. Those were run-of-the- river projects. Since we came into office, 13 projects — 13, not 8,200. Absolutely ridiculous. That's garbage — what they talk about. It's not even worth listening to, but it's the fear factor that they try to perpetrate. I wish for once they'd speak the truth. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon.

M. de Jong: In this chamber, I call continued second reading debate on Bill 18. In

Section A, I call Committee of Supply — for the information of mem- bers, continued debate on the estimates of the Ministry of Education. Second Reading of Bills GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION (CAP AND TRADE) ACT (continued) C. James: I rise today to speak in the debate on Bill 18, intituled the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act, a bill that in fact says absolutely nothing about how the gov- ernment intends to achieve that goal.

It's a bill that's already found itself mired in controversy related to the heavy-handed secrecy provisions that this bill contains. [1425] It's a bill that empowers the government to do what it pleases when it comes to implementing a cap-and- trade regime without any legislative oversight or, in fact, any public input. It's a bill that in many ways

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11377 embodies the deeply flawed process which the Premier and this government are taking in the fight against global warming. [K. Whittred in the chair.] Like never before, the political constituency to fight global warming has formed. The time for action has come. It's our generation's greatest challenge. British Columbians from all walks of life, from all parts of the province, are ready to do their part to save the planet. No more debates about whether global warming is real.

No more arguments about whether human beings are to blame or can actually impact change. The envi- ronmental community, business, labour and everyday families are coming together to do their part. They know that the transition isn't going to be easy. They know that it's not going to happen overnight, and they certainly understand that everyone is going to have to make sacrifices. They also know that the stakes are too high to turn away and pretend that global warming isn't the biggest threat to our collective future.

Indeed, most British Colu mbians came to that un- derstanding long before the Premier or anyone else on that side of the House did. When the Premier was still fighting the Kyoto accord and arguing that B.C. could do very little to impact global warming, British Columbians were in fact doing their part. They were looking at how they could reduce their im pact on the environment. When British Columbians were leading the way, doing what they could to develop a green future for this prov- ince, the Premier was in fact on the wrong side. He was fighting progressive environmental progress.

As we debate this bill, I think it's important for us to take a look at the past, to take a look at the record of this government. In 2001 when the Premier came in, he embarked on an anti-envir onmental agenda. In fact, many of those cuts continue to this day. We saw conser- vation officers cut. We saw environmental protection laws rolled back. We saw the agricultural land reserve weakened. For a time, we actually saw this Premier eliminate completely the Minister of Environment, giv- ing him and his ministers fr ee rein to run roughshod over environmental progress.

The debate we've been having in this House of late, around the liquidation of our forests and gifts of land to the big forest companies over the opposition of commu- nities, is a powerful symbol of the disconnect between the illusion of the government's newly acquired green rhetoric and the reality of their anti-green agenda. So are the skyrocketing transit fees that we see imple- mented by this government in cities like Surrey, where it now costs $10 to take a return trip to Vancouver. So is the government's continued promotion of offshore oil and gas.

So, agai n, are the record subsidies that this Premier and this go vernment are giving to the oil and gas industry — dollars that could actually be spent on green initiatives or on relieving gridlock in our emergency rooms, on im proving education in the classroom, on providing child care or fighting child poverty. So is this government's gas tax, a measure that actually hits average families hard while letting the big polluters off scot-free. So is the Premier's obsession with secrecy on any- thing to do with climate ch ange.

What's so disturbing about this — and it's clear in this bill as well — is that it's a secrecy that's harming the broad-based constitu- ency we have in British Columbia to actually act on climate change. It's so critic al that people buy in, and they can't buy in if they're being shut out. We can't expect British Columbians to just take this Premier's word for it, to take as an

article of faith that the Premier and his seques tered team know exactly what's right. British Columbians are deeply engaged in the political life of this pr ovince. They are deeply con- cerned about the future of our planet. They believe passionately in their rights as citizens to be heard and to have input on laws that affect their lives. [1430] Only when that happens will we all feel the collective sense of ownership over the decisions and the sacrifices we must all make to achieve great things for our province. Is that what we have in this bill that's in front of us? No.

In fact, Bill 18, just like every other climate change proposal that has co me forward from this Pre- mier, has been conceived in secret and imposed on high. In doing so, it's contributing to the growing anger and frustration that's undermining people's beliefs that we can all take collective action to meet the challenge of global warming. Unlike the Premier, I've taken time to go out and talk to British Columbians.

I've taken time to travel to every corner of this province, to hear people speak passionately about the work that needs to be done, to hear people speak passionately about the need for all of us to take responsibility.

I can also tell you, Madam Speaker, that I've heard very clearly from people that they're angry that the government says: "You can just make a choice and change your behaviour." On my recent trip to the north, I had someone say to me: "When I have to travel two hours to get an ultra- sound that I'm required to get, how can I make a real choice when there is no other alternative there for me?" I heard it from school trustees who are concerned about how they're going to pay the extra costs without making cuts to classrooms, on budgets that are already stretched by this government, on things that are already downloaded on to them by this government.

I hear it in the concerns of local governments already coping, again, with downloading from this government, when they don't have a choice of imposing that cost somewhere else. They're just forced to make cuts or pass the cost on to homeowners, which is the last thing most local governments want to do. I hear concerns from commuters who are expected to pay the ridiculously high transit fees. I hear it from forest workers already hit by the worst downturn in living memory. Now, just as in this bill, those British Columbians haven't been included in the discussion. Those voices

11378 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 haven't been heard by this government. This govern- ment thinks it has all the answers, and they expect Brit- ish Columbians to sit quietly and take it. Well, British Columbians aren't going to sit quietly and take it. They're speaking out. They want to do their part for climate change, and they expe c t t o b e i n c l u d e d i n t h e discussion. If there's one underlying message in Bill 18 and certainly in all the information that has come forward from the Premier around climate change…. He's saying to British Columbians: "Just trust us.

We know what's right for you. Just let us introduce whatever kind of cap-and-trade we think will work, whatever we please, whatever makes sense to us. We — the Premier, the executive council — we're the best ones to do what's right. And don't worry. When we decide the time is right, we'll inform the public. But we'll decide. As Pre- mier, as government, we'll decide when the public should know. When the deal's done, we'll make sure that we give you the broad outline, but we may keep the details a secret." Well, there's nothing abou t fighting climate change that requires this kind of secrecy from this Premier.

Let's take a look at other jurisdictions. Other jurisdic- tions, in fact, are engaging citizens in the solution. Only in British Columbia are people being kept in the dark. If we take a look at cap-and-tr ade, what this bill is all about, other partners in the western climate initiative are actually providing citizens with the information they need to be informed and participate in this debate. Other partners aren't keeping the public in the dark.

Other partners are engaging people in this debate because they understand — unlike this Premier — how critical it is that everyone be engaged in this process. [1435] In a recent letter to the Environment Minister, the Information and Privacy Commi ssioner wrote that Bill 18 overrides the freedom of information laws. I quote from that letter: "It's a matter of significant concern, considering the importance of environmental protection measures related to climate change and the need for openness and accountability in monitoring and en- forcement of such measures." Well said.

Well said because it once again points out the secretive nature of this government and that they're heading in the wrong direction. The Information and Privacy Commissioner hit the nail on the head. In a democracy, openness, accountabil- ity and public oversight are fundamental to managing change of this magnitude. Bill 18 does not do that. This bill goes in the opposite direction. This bill, in fact, shuts people out. This bill is the opposite of openness and transparency. New Democrats strongly support the implementa- tion of cap-and-trade. It's a critical piece to our climate change agenda.

It's critical for us, as a province, to move in that direction. But the devil is in the details. If you take a look at other countries and other regions, the potential for failure — for market distortions and for massive wealth accumulation with no impact on greenhouse gas emissions — is actually enormous. Other jurisdictions have shown that, if you don't do it properly and if cap-and-tr ade is done in the wrong direction. I f w e t a k e a l o o k a t E urope, the allocation system proved to be a failure.

Far more credits were allocated than were necessary, which created a huge credit mar- ket and an actual increase in emissions. But will we know, on this bill, whether that's going to occur under this government? We have no idea, and we won't be told unless the government decides it wants to share information. We won't actually know. Again, if we take a look at those experiences, it has led many to conclude, including those of us on this side of the House, that a system of credit auctions is a fairer and much more effective form of cap-and-trade and that we need to be looking in that direction.

But do we have any idea what the government's doing in this direction? No, because this bill in front of us doesn't let us know what the government's going to do. It doesn't let the public know what the government's going to do. This bill is silent. Bill 18 is silent on what kind of cap-and-trade model is going to be applied. That's up to the government. No discussion. No public input. No debate.

By simply handing the government the author- ity to implement by regula tion whatever it deems — without public involvemen t, without any oversight and, certainly, without any public buy-in — we greatly increase the chance of failure. Now, on every important policy decision related to cap-and-trade, this legislation gives the government full discretion to make the decisions behind closed doors on offsets, on reporting and monitoring, on pen- alties. It's a one-sided mo nologue, with the Premier calling the shots.

In fact, that 's like every decision that the Premier's climate change conversion has brought forward. The public has been shut out. Well, on this side of th e House, we profoundly be- lieve that the government is making a very serious mistake by taking this secretive approach to the most important challenge of our time. If we are going to be successful on climate change, we need buy-in from all British Columbians. We need everyone to feel that sense of duty and ownershi p over solutions.

Every British Columbian must know that their individual sacrifice is broadly shared by their fellow citizens and by everyone in our province. Bill 18, in fact, fails to provide that assurance. It empowers the government to override public will. It empowers the Premier to continue acting in secret. In doing so, Bill 18 undermines the very goal that it's supposed to achieve, which is a lasting reduction in greenhouse gases. The Iroquois talk about the principle of the seventh generation.

They say we must always consider the impact of our actions on the seventh generation. [1440] Well, to get there we must also consider the genera- tions in between. We must ask ourselves: have we set a path that our children can follow? By not including this generation of British Columbians in this discussion, I'm very afraid that the path this government is choosing

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11379 will affect the generations to come in a very negative way. This is a critical debate. This is a critical issue for this generation and future generations. We need to do this right. We need to ensure that everyone is engaged in this most important discussion. We need to ensure that the actions we take are implemented in a way that will have lasting impact on support for our province, for our country and for the globe. The bill in front of us does not do that. It does not move in a direction that includes the public in dialogue.

It is, once again, a secretive act by this government. I stand here to say no to that secrecy, no to the direction the government is taking. Let's do it properly. Let's ensure that climate change action really occurs. C. Trevena: I rise to speak on Bill 18, the cap-and- trade bill. As I speak about th is, one of the items in the news today that I think we should all be aware of is that sea levels could rise by 1½ metres by the end of the century, which is a great de al more than the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, forecast in its assessment last year.

This is really significant, and it's going to cause huge damage, particularly to low- lying countries. I preface my remarks with that because I think that both sides of the House are very aware of the huge impact that climate change is having, the rapid- ity of it, and the need to find solutions quickly and find effective solutions. I think that both sides of the House are aware that cap-and-trade for greenhouse gases works. It was first introduced in the 1990s, when all we had to worry about was acid rain.

We were very con- cerned about that — the fact that we were seeing huge amounts of pollution brough t in through the rain. A system of cap-and-trade was brought in, in the United States, and it worked. It was effective. It was also a comparatively cheap way of working. Since that time, many jurisdictions have looked at cap-and-trade as a very effective way of moving for- ward on issues that need to be dealt with. Now we're looking at it for dealing with climate change. I think, as I say, that both sides of the House are aware that this is a good way forward.

But what is of real concern about the govern- ment's views on cap-and-trade is that we don't know what they are and that we are being asked to vote on a piece of legislation that gives us no details. While we agree that we need to be moving forward in this way of using the market, through cap-and-trade, as a carrot-and-stick approach to encourage polluters to reduce their emissions and to make sure that we are dealing with something as fundamental as climate change — so we are trying to bring back our emis- sions and restrict our emissions — we don't know what is being suggested. This is enabling legislation.

The government can say, "Well, it's okay. We ju st need this framework to take us on. Once we've got the framework in place, we can go ahead and have our discussions with the west- ern climate initiative and bring back the details," but those details won't come before this Legislature. [1445] This Legislature is in place so that we can examine such important things as details that are going to be go- ing into a cap-and-trade bill so that we can actually say if it's going to be effective. We can ask the questions. We are not going to be allowed to ask the questions because of the structure of this bill.

I picked up Bill 18, when it was tabled, with great excitement. Here we are. We have cap-and-trade. We have a pioneering move through what this government is doing in North America. Let's move on cap-and- trade — very exciting. I flick through it. Where are the figures? What are the levels that the government wants to put on levels of emissions? What are the bench- marks? What are the details? Like many people, I was very disappointed, because we need to have those fundamentals. We need to have those details and the baselines because we have to go into this with our eyes open.

We all need to know what is going to be involved. We all need to know what the targets are going to be and how we're going to achieve them. Whether we're talking about 33 percent below 2007 levels by 2020, whether we're talking more or whether we're talking less, this is something that we all have to know.

The way this legislation is set up — and this is the concern and why yesterday we were asking to have it referred to a committee and today are debating the substance of the bill — is that it is asking us as a Legis- lature to put a huge amount of trust, as the Leader of the Opposition said, into th e cabinet, into the climate change secretariat, into the people who have been taken away from the ability to ask questions. So the government, through th is bill, is asking us to agree to something that we just don't have any details on, which is really somewhat irresponsible I think.

It would be irresponsible for us to say, "Yes, this is it. This is the correct way forward. This is the way that we want to take B.C. forward on climate change," without any details. It would be completely irresponsible. Voting on something without any information is not the way forward. It's saying: "Okay, that's it. We abrogate our responsibility. You guys go and decide it, and we'll trust you." Unfortunately, I really don't trust the government on a number of these issues.

W e a l s o n e e d t o e n s u r e t h a t w e k n o w w h a t t h e government is saying and planning, because this is going to have a huge impact on the way that we as a province move forward. We can't kid ourselves. This is going to have an impact on our economy. We're talking about major industry being involved in a program which is going to reduce their emissions and how they deal with the trade in the emissions and with the cred- its — how the whole system is going to work.

It's going to have a major impact, and this major impact is coming at the same time that we have other bills introduced to deal with climate change. We have the carbon tax, the fuel tax. We have the bill on biofuels and ethanol. These are different ways that the govern-

11380 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 ment is looking at trying to reduce greenhouse gases, and there are going to be others. I'm sure there are go- ing to be others at the same time that communities are also looking at how they can reduce their footprint and make sure that they are sustainable and have the resil- ience to go forward into the coming years, into the coming century. It is going to have a huge impact.

So it would be irresponsible for us as legislators to approve of some- thing without knowing what that impact is going to be, and we're not going to know what that impact is going to be if the government does n't put these details in the piece of legislation that is in front of us. I really don't understand what the concern is — why that information isn't there, what the worry is and why the government is being so secretive. If those fig- ures were there, we would be much more likely to support it. If we could look at it critically and say, "We like those targets.

We think that maybe we would sug- gest this way…." But there's nothing. It's a skeleton. We can't do that blindly. As I say, it would be completely irresponsible. [1450] I've mentioned in the past, and other colleagues on this side of the House have mentioned, that the NDP, the New Democratic Party, has a standing committee on environment and economy linked. This committee has been talking about a sustainable B.C. It has a document which looks at th at and has a concept of a sustainable B.C. act, which would make sure that there was a commitment to social, environmental and eco- nomic sustainability.

It's the big picture. We have to be looking at the big picture when we're talking about this. We have to be looking at greater concepts, not just frameworks, not just a one-off piece of legislation. We've got to be look- ing at the big picture, because this is the way that we are moving forward. All sides of the House, I would hope, agree that we are in a period of transition. We are in a period where we are shifting from this society we've known for the last hu ndred years and the indus- trialization we've known for the last 150 years, and we're moving on to a different level.

I would hope that there was some vision, some way of bringing together that societal, environmental and economic view in one package. I would hope that by giving us a fuller bill on how to reduce greenhouse gases and on the cap-and-trade, this would be part of it. But we don't see that. We don't see what the gov- ernment's real vision is. Instead, we see the sense of: "Trust us. We're part of the western climate initiative. It's all going to be okay. Just go ahead, and we'll fill in the details later.

We'll fill in the details when the western climate initiative comes back in August and says that we've come to an agree- ment." The western climate initiative is largely the western United States, ourselves in British Columbia, and Manitoba. It's not just rhetoric. People do want to know how it's going to work. It's not just the concepts. We're talk- ing here about industry. We're talking here about our economic engine. I would've thought that they would want to know how it's going to work. I'd have thought that they'd be putting a lot of pressure on this govern- ment to say: "This needs more detail.

We can't expect to go forward. We can't expect to support you. We can't expect to plan unless we have more details, unless we know what's going to be expected of us." But in this bill, we don't even know what industries are going to be included. For instance, aviation and other major industries bring about 40 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions. I mentioned the other day that on the top-ten list of polluters is the cogen plant in Campbell River. What impact are these plants going to have on that? What is the government thinking for other indus- tries? I mean, are we looking at oil and gas?

Are we looking at the producers of fossil fuels — the miners, the coalminers and other extractors? Are we looking at the big industrial complexes? Are we looking at — as I suggested yesterday when I was discussing the referral — just aviation? These ques tions aren't answered. I'd have thought that there would be a lot of pressure from industry on the members opposite, on the government side, to say: "We need to know." I've also got to say about the importance of the for- estry industry. There's no description here about how that is going to play into cap-and-trade. There is abso- lutely nothing.

One of our biggest economic drivers, the forest industry — communities dependent on it, and there is no reference to how it's going to play in. So as I say, I would have thought that there would be a huge concern by industry. I know that Jock Finlayson, the Business Council of B.C. executive vice-president, is uncertain. He is quoted in The Vancouver Sun last week as saying: "This negotiatio n about pursuing environ- mental goals…. A number of us have yet to see how B.C. strategy reflects that.

The whole thing seems to be run by the climate action secretariat, but it doesn't have a mandate to worry about industry. Its only mandate is to deliver on the greenhouse gas reduction goals that the government has set. But you have to do that in a cost-effective way." There is some questioning there, but there aren't any answers. So from all sides — whether it is business, in- dustry or this side of the House — there should be some answers. We would hope that there are so me answers. It's interesting that Mr.

Finlayson mentions the climate action secretariat, which is, again, not public. [1455] These issues are too important to be kept behind closed doors. These issues cannot be kept in some- body's pocket. They cannot be kept secret. We have to be able to be discussing them openly. If we can't dis- cuss them openly, I don't th ink we as a province can really move on. The other issues that have huge business impacts and impacts for everybody are how the permits under the cap-and-trade are going to be allocated. This is done using a business model, using the market.

It harnesses the market to encourage a reduction of emissions.

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11381 As I said at the beginning of my statements, it is proven that this is a very effective way, using the market to encourage a reduction of emissions. It has been found to be much more effective than the old command-and-control style, where the government imposes an across-the-board cut in emission standards. This way, one company can be reducing and trading its excess capacity to another. We don't know how the permits, which allow the trades, are going to be issued in the first place. The cap- and-trade has been used in other jurisdictions.

It has been successful in some places and not successful in other places. In the European Union in 2005 the gov- ernment distributed a number of carbon credits. There were problems. So we should be looking at lessons learned from other places. We should be seeing what has worked for them, what their ideas are, what can and can't work and see more of that substance. That substance isn't here. We don't know whether those permits are going to be auctioned or allocated, and this is a huge distinction.

This side of the House would advocate auctioning the permits, because that generates revenue, which the government can then use. It's nice to actually earn some revenue. The government can use it and put it back into climate change initiatives, put it back into the cap- and-trade initiative for other complementary policies, help build up the climate change vision and just move forward a little bit. So we would hope that that is the way forward. As I say, the European Union in 2005 started off on a very, very ambitious cap-and-trade system and dis- tributed these carbon credit s.

I'd like to quote Michael Dorsey from "Carbon Trading Won't Work," where he says: "The credits were based in large part on what the firms estimated their annual carbon dioxide emissions would be. Because these credits were given out, not auctioned off, the firms did not pay for their pollution. Yet they stood to make money by selling them." So the European Union had a problem where firms were making a lot of money on this, and the system didn't work. That's why we need to see how these permits are going to be allocated, and we need to see it right now.

We don't want to wait until we've approved this legislation, this skeleton, this enabling act — passed it on to say, "Well, it's okay. The cabinet will deal with it, and they'll tell us how it's all going to work," and then find that we've got a massive failure. We can't afford a failure. Whether it's sea levels rising, whether it's pine beetle, whether it's huge windstorms, we are seeing the impact of climate change. We cannot afford t o g e t i t w r o n g . I t w o u l d b e i r r e s p o n s i b l e f o r u s t o a p - prove something that might allow us to get it wrong.

In the secrecy, we don't know what the penalties are going to be. We don't know what the government is suggesting if firms don't meet the cap or break the cap. We don't know how it's going to be enforced. Enforce- ment, again, is part of the way that you make sure that things work. Is it going to be self-policing? Is industry going to be the ones who are sayi ng: "It's okay. We met our limits. We're fine"? Or is there going to be another authority, another body that is going to come in and say: "We will make sure that the limit is met"? We don't know that.

This is very tr oubling when we're dealing with something that is so fundamental. [1500] B.C. is, as I say, part of the western climate initia- tive. The western climate initiative plans, by August, to have more details. It's one of these ones where I think that the government, in its sense of urgency of dealing with climate change, wants to push everything through. It would be better maybe to wait and see what comes out in August and then, in the fall session of the Legis- lature, bring us back something that has more detail and has some figures and that has been discussed and agreed much more broadly.

It's very interesting that the other jurisdictions in the western climate initiative, as I say — western states in the United States and Manitoba — are being much more open about what's going on. We just don't see what the government is doing. When we don't see what the government is doing, it is very concerning. It's very concerning that the Privacy Commissioner has raised red flags about this, has written to the minister and said: "You could be violating freedom-of-information acts here." We really have to have a much broader idea.

We have to have more details before we can support it, because we agree that climate change is a fundamental. It is the biggest issue that we're going to be dealing with. We are at the beginning of the 21st century, when we have the opportunity to lay down a really strong foundation for our approach as a society on how we want to deal with climate change, how we want to go forward, how we want to work together and ensure that we can continue having an economy that will sup- port us, that we can have communities that are strong and that we can have a healthy lifestyle — how we can move forward.

These are the very basic bl ocks that we are working on at the moment. These pieces of legislation that are in front of us — whether it's the cap-and-trade or other ones — are part of those blocks. We need to make sure that we get it right, because we have a legacy. The legacy isn't what's going to happen in three years' time at Whistler. The legacy is what's going to happen many years down the road in all our communi- ties. If we get this wrong, we've got a huge burden for our children, our grandchildre n and, as the Leader of the Opposition said, the seventh generation.

While I strongly believe that we have to find a way of dealing with greenhouse gas emissions and while I believe that cap-and-trade is a way forward — it's been p r o v e n t o b e a w a y f o r w a r d — I'm very, very disap- pointed in this bill. I'm very disappointed that we have something that's so pioneering, so advanced here in B.C., and that we're going to have to end up voting against it because of the lack of detail. When we could be looking forward and we could be looking at how we work together to move forward in the 21st century and beyond — and at how we make

11382 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 sure, when we're developing and nurturing our society as we go forward in this very new way of looking at things, that we're doing it with everybody knowing what's happening, with none of it happening behind closed doors and with everybody feeling confident that we're making the right decision — it's with regret that I stand here and will be opposing Bill 18. N. Macdonald: I rise for second reading to talk on Bill 18, which is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act. It's enabling legislation for cap-and-trade.

Earlier we had a motion that came from the critic for the NDP on the environment where we suggested that this legislation needed to go to the public for six months, that a legislative committee needed to engage the public, include them and make them part of discus- sion on what is a critically important issue, a critically important initiative and an initiative that we need to make sure is done properly. The piece that was talked about in the throne speech was about a number of initiatives that the gov- ernment intended to bring in this legislative session to deal with climate change.

I think it's clear that British Columbians, Canadians and many people throughout the world recognize that it's an issue that is going to challenge us and that need s to be dealt with. That makes it particularly important to do this properly. [1505] What we said here in the NDP immediately was that we recognized that big polluters are going to have t o b e p a r t o f f i n d i n g t h e solution. Major industry, the aviation industry — they need to be part of finding the solution. We need to balance the needs for a strong economy with the need to deal seriously with this issue.

Individuals need to be part of finding a solution, but so do the major industries, avia tion and those parts of the economy that are fundamentally the biggest polluters. Cap-and-trade. What people need to understand is that that is a fairly broad, overarching description of a strategy that can mean many, many different things. So beneath that term cap-and-trade, you can approach things in many very different ways. The term that has been used is that the devil is in the detail.

It is the detail that is important, becaus e within the term cap-and- trade you can either do this properly, or you can make it so that it is fundamentally flawed and that it will fail. So that the public understands what cap-and-trade is…. It's a pretty basic idea. You measure, as accurately as possible, the greenhouse gases that are being emit- ted by the major polluters — the large industry and the aviation industry. You put a cap, a ceiling, on how much greenhouse gas you're going to allow to enter the atmosphere from those sources.

You put a cap, and then you put in place a system that is going to accurately reflect, through what is es- sentially a new type of carbon currency, the reality there on the ground. There are many different ways that you can then allocate what is essentially permis- sion to pollute. There are many different ways that you can do it. How you choose to do it is a fundamentally important decision that needs to be made. If you do it by auction, you get one result. If you choose to simply hand out the credits to pollute, you get a different result.

Those are decisions that are fundamentally important as to whether this — what is called cap-and-trade — is going to work. It is just one of hundreds of decisions that need to be made, and need to be made properly. If you get it wrong, cap-and- trade will not work. The idea with cap-and-trad e, then, is having estab- lished what is essentially a carbon currency.

You give industry the flexibility and the incentive to be creative in finding solutions for reducing their greenhouse gases, and you reward that creativity with something that will be of value, which will actually be worth sub- stantial amounts of money — enough money to get business to invest in changing behaviours. It is an idea that is really appealing. It is also suitably flexible, if it is set up properly, so that it gives busi- nesses that are going to have more challenges, in terms of changing their behaviour, the ability to buy credits from other polluters who have these credits.

They have the ability to then transition at the pace they're able to, into a business that will pollute less and put less greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. It is an idea, a concept, that fundamentally can work. You have the principle put forward in this bill — even in the title, "Cap and Trade" — that is supportable and an idea that political parties on both sides are going to have to use as part of a strategy to move forward. [1510] That's the first part. You have a principle, a general idea, which is going to be part of the solution. Has it been used in other jurisdictions? In forms, it has.

My understanding is that when the Americans, in particu- lar, were trying to deal with acid rain, they used a form of cap-and-trade. That was back in the '90s , and it was a system that seemed to bear positive results. So they set up a system that could be described as cap-and-trade around solving a serious and difficult issue regarding acid rain, and they used it successfully. Members earlier have talked about the European Union experience with using cap-and-trade to deal with greenhouse gases. They have entered the cap-and- trade. They've experimented with cap-and-trade. They got in there quickly.

What they have found is that in doing that, they have misstepped, and there are mixed results. There are things that as we move forward, we should be aware of and consider. They were not able to do that, or they didn't set it up completely properly, and so they have misstepped. It points to the fact that when you set this up, you need to do it properly. We need — we have a responsibility — to make sure that we learn from what that jurisdiction has done.

As members have talked about, you also have the western climate initiative, which British Columbia is part of, where there is a wider attempt to put in place a regime for cap-and-trade. The fundamental problem with this legislation is that it is enabling legislat ion, which means that what

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11383 we have in front of us in the House is incredibly vague. It gives us — it gives the public, the people of British Columbia — no clarity in how the cap-and-trade sys- tem is actually going to be set up. It is that detail that is going to be so important and so fundamental as to whether this is going to be a successful exercise or one that is deeply, deeply flawed.

What we're being asked to do is essentially trust the Premier and cabinet and those that are closest to him to put in place all of the detailed parts of the cap-and- trade system, and that is something we could not re- sponsibly do in my view. We could not responsibly remove those decisions from public purview, from being tested in this Legislature, from being tested by the public of British Columbia. So you have some of the big players in B.C. indus- try. You have some of the biggest polluters who are major donors to the B.C.

Liberals, and there is no ques- tion that that influences the agenda for the party and for this government. That to me is clear, and I think to most British Columbians, that's clear. If you have a cap-and-trade system that's funda- mentally designed by big polluters, it's not going to work for the rest of us. It is not a system that is going to work for us. So there is a real danger when we set up a scenario where cabinet and the Premier — untested in this Legislature — behind a cloak of secrecy are able to set up a system. You can be sure that there are lobbyists.

You can be sure that there are discussi ons going on and have gone on for a long time in secret about what this cap-and- trade system should look like.

I think what is predictable is if you do it in secret — if you only include those businesses that have, quite frankly, a massive vested interest in designing a cap- and-trade system that will make them money — then you will end up with a cap- and-trade system that will not deal effectively with the problem of climate change but will make businesses a tremendous amount of money in what is essentially an economy based on this currency in carbon. [1515] There is a clear responsibility for all members of the Legislature to look at this legislation and insist that it be more than simply a framework, that it be more than just enabling legislation, that some meat is put on the bones so that we actually know as a Legislature what we are agreeing to.

As it stands, it is unclear to the public and to this Legislature the direction that the government is going to go. I would bring the public's attention to the B.C. en- ergy plan and use it as an example of where the public interest is compromised to serve private interests. That's something that should be fundamentally troubling for all British Columbians. It's certainly something that we're going to pay for.

When you look at the possibilities of cap-and-trade being set up in a similar way, we have a situation, which we are predictably setting up, that is going to damage the public interest — not only damage the public interest but cost the general taxpayer money. It is also going to be a failed initiative in what is funda- mentally important to British Columbians, which is dealing with climate change. Just a reminder about the B.C. energy plan and what our experience has been with that since 2002-2003 when it was first put forward.

You had the independ- ent power producers of B.C. — you had Alcan; you had Teck Cominco — in there lobbying this government and pushing them in a certain direction. That lobbying was done in secret. That lobbying pushed government to put in place an energy plan that very clearly served their interests and very clearly compromised the inter- ests of British Columbians. That's a pattern that repeats itself many, many times over these past seven years. We'll just talk about it for a minute to set up the parallels or the possible parallels with the cap-and- trade. The B.C. energy plan is this. The B.C.

Liberals chose to restrict B.C. Hydro from building run-of-the-river and wind projects despite the fact that they have the capacity to do that, despite the fact that B.C. Hydro had identi- fied many, many sites where wind and run-of-the-river projects may be feasible. Ratepayers paid to identify sites. With the B.C. en- ergy plan, you then had those sites. Those sites were t u r n e d o v e r t o p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s , a n d t h e y w e r e a b l e t o grab them for as little as $5,000 to $10,000.

That is in no way in the public interest, but it certainly suited private interests that were closely connected to the B.C. Liberals. You then had EPAs given from B.C. Hydro. B.C. Hydro was required to give EPAs that were so lucrative that they essentially funded or will fund the building of the power-generating plants. Y o u t h e n h a d , v e r y o f t e n , p u b l i c l a n d g i v e n f o r roads. You had public land given for the site of the power plant. You had public land given for the trans- mission lines. In fact, ratepayers were even going to pay, according to Dr.

Calver t's book, for the transmis- sion lines. We will pay, desp ite the fact that these are often in isolated locations. The other point, and another key point, is that when the contracts are up — and the contracts are be- tween five and 25 and 40 years — these facilities then become part of a private system that can sell into the North American grid. What you have is a very important part of what should be B.C.'s strategic economic plan put into place with interests that conflict with the public interest.

With cap-and-trade, you have that same possibility — especially if it is going to be put in place, if it's going to be organized, in secret. With cabinet, with the Premier, you have a com- plete cone of secrecy around it. You have secrecy that permeates this government. It is the culture of this government, and you have concern raised in a number of circles. [1520] You have it not only with the opposition, but you have many in the public. You even have Mr. Loukidelis, who is the officer of this Legislature who is responsible for freedom of information and for privacy.

What he has raised with this legislation, as he did with Bill 16 and as he does with Bill 20, are concerns around

11384 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES T UESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 this cone of secrecy that you're setting up around this system. My experience — not only here but, I think people would understand, in general, and the experience that most people would have — is that things done in se- crecy are fundamentally going to be problematic in a few areas. First, it builds the opportunity for corrup- tion, which we want to avoid. We need to make sure, if we set up a system, that it is open enough and that we can be clear that things are going to be done properly.

Everything about the system that we've set up with the parliamentary system is based on that openness, that testing of ideas. That's one problem. The second problem with secrecy is that it breeds sloppiness and incompetence. We see that with a number of projects that have gone on in British Columbia in recent years, including the example that I use often, which is the Vancouver Convention Centre expansion project.

It is a project that would have been best done in an open and transparent way so that the public could truly test the numbers that were being put forward, so that they could question i mmediately when the project started to go sideways. It would have benefited from the lack of secrecy. Similarly with cap-and-trade, if you allow that se- crecy, you are inviting problems for the system that you are going to set up. What we need to do with these ini- tial steps in trying to deal with climate change is engage t h e w i d e r p u b l i c .

W e n e e d t o m a k e a n o p e n e f f o r t — that's a key — but this is not an open effort. It needs to be a sincere effort, but it's questionable whether this is a sincere effort to actually deal with climate change. It needs to be open, it needs to be sincere, and it really needs to be successful. It has to work. Early mis- steps will jade the public with initiatives to deal with climate change, and that's something we cannot afford to do. We have to have the public confident that the government is moving in a direction that is rational, that is thought through and that is transparent.

We have to make sure the public feels that all are sharing equally what is going to be a burden. The first step that the government took with the gas tax was a misstep. It was a misstep because it did not con- sider the impact on rural areas, and it was met immedi- ately with opposition from rural and northern residents who quite justifiably felt they did not have the options that people in other parts of the province may have had and, therefore, felt they were going to be penalized with cost — without having the options to make the choices that the government said they should be able to make.

If the government had included the wider popula- tion rather than having a secret secretariat — it meets in secret, and who they meet with is secret — and if they had engaged the public in any meaningful way, they would have heard pretty clearly the difficulties that people in the north and rural areas had with that approach. There would have been an opportunity to fix it and get it right, which is the critically important thing with any moves you make on greenhouse gases. With cap-and-trade, it's the same thing.

You have to have clear ideas, and you have to be moving in a way that the wider public has confidence in the approach that you're taking. If you look at climate change and the impacts it will have, what is often said is that the communities that are going to do best, the communities that are going to be most re silient, are the communities that are able to react to the changes that climate change will bring — the changes in the economy and the changes environmentally.

To be able to react, individ- ual communities and individu al citizens have to be fully engaged and informed in the political process. [1525] I think one of the fundamental differences between the philosophy of this side of the House — the NDP, the opposition currently — a n d t h e g o v e r n m e n t i s t h a t w e do not believe in approaching a problem from a top- down, elitist way. We feel that the strength and the solutions lie in the wisdom that comes from the wider population. That's where th e ideas sit, and what we need to do is involve people and tap into that common sense, into that experience.

That's where solutions come from. I'll give you two examples of how that can work. We have an initiative with th e B.C. NDP that's called Sus- tainable B.C. It is a set of principles, a set of ideas that started in individual kitchens with people talking about how to move an issue forward. It then moved into con- stituency groups. It moved th en to a provincial council and eventually to the convention of the B.C. NDP. It took a long time and a lot of work to bring those ideas together, but you have ideas that are thoroughly thought through and that you have a wide number of people fully invested in.

Those ideas have flowed up to put together a package that we call Sustainable B.C. Similarly, we have, within the rural caucus, ideas that have come out of community meetings in our own com- munities about what rural B.C. needs to look like. Those ideas have flowed up into the things that we talk about here. From the top down is a fundamentally flawed way of doing things, in my view. It is the way this government does it, and it is the way they intend to do it with cap-and- trade.

A far better idea — in fact, a necessary way — is to engage the general population and bring them into what is going to be a very important initiative. What you have with Bill 18 is cap-and-trade ena- bling legislation. You have the idea of cap-and-trade, which is supportable in principle and really has to be the way that we move forward — it certainly looks like the most likely tool that you would use, some sort of cap-and-trade — but beneath that you have nothing. You have no explanation from this government of what that's going to look like. We are asked to trust that they are going to do the right thing.

Our experience has been that they will do something that will suit a narrow corporate interest and that, therefore, will not be in the public interest, in the wider interests of people in British Columbia. For that reason — that lack of detail — until it comes, you could not responsibly stand in this House and say that it's supportable. You couldn't responsibly s a y t h a t w e ' d t u r n o v e r those sorts of key decisions to a hidden, secret group of

TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2008 B RITISH COLUMBIA DEBATES 11385 people to have them flesh ou t what this will look like. To do that would be the height of irresponsibility. I stand to say that the principle is the direction we need to go in. But until we have detail, I would not — with any degree of responsibility — give carte blanche to this cabinet, to this Premier, to make decisions on cap- and-trade. I simply wouldn't do it. With that, I thank you for the opportunity to speak. Deputy Speaker: Minister to conclude debate. Hon. B.

Penner: I was just wondering if there were going to be some more speakers on the other side at- tempting to draw out this debate even longer. They've been on this particular stage of the bill, second reading, since last week. I made note of this earlier, in response to their motion to delay the matter even further. One of their members, the member for Vancouver-Fairview, made a fairly impas- sioned comment that governments everywhere should be moving quicker — not seeking to delay but rather to move quicker.

He complained about a "lack of rapid action" and further noted that governments around the world, when it came to political will, were "notably sluggish." [1530] He ended up by summing it up as follows: "It behooves us in this House to continue to ramp up the rate of change and force the pace of greenhouse gases reductions. The consequences for not acting quickly enough are staggering.

If there's one issue that we need to move on in terms of big legislation — in terms of empow- ering the citizens of British Columbia to making a differ- ence, individually, in terms of making change to our indus- tries — it is around climate change and ensuring that the impacts of climate change, either here in B.C. or globally, are nowhere near as severe as predictions now put them." [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] So on the one hand, you had the NDP member for Vancouver-Fairview arguing that the government should be moving quicker, while every other member across the way was asking us to go slower.

In fact, it was summed up by the member for Surrey-Newton saying that the government needs to "take a slower look." A number of members said they had questions on this. That's why they wanted to defer it off into a distant time. But, Mr. Speaker, you'll be familiar with the fact that once we get to committee stage of the bill, that is an op- portunity for all members to ask questions on a bill clause by clause as we go through the legislation. That's how the legislative process works here in British Columbia.

I would have to conclude that the fact that the vari- ous members of the opposition have different positions on whether or not we should be moving quicker or slower when it comes to addressing climate change really does underscore just how effectively leaderless the opposition is on the issu e of climate change. If you try and follow the thread, you find that the NDP posi- tion is confusing, disjointed and uncoordinated. The Leader of the Opposition herself spoke this afternoon, talking about pu tting together plans and how diligently they have been working on this issue.

In fact, it was just over a ye ar ago that she said to the media she wouldn't have any plan for responding to climate change until the 2009 election c

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	H0415pm 09
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	H0415pm 09
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	cbcfd89440a1d9a00c8e09e83af7a48ec333c1fb

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).