2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Thursday, September 3, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 1, Number 12

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Gurdev Singh Grewal

H. Bains

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

B.C. Disability Games in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows

M. Dalton

Surrey Hospice Society

S. Hammell

Victoria Greek Fest

R. Fleming

North Thompson Fall Fair and Rodeo

T. Lake

Edgar Dunning

V. Huntington

Guildford community

D. Hayer

Oral Questions

Budget revenue projections

C. James

Hon. C. Hansen

S. Simpson

J. Horgan

Harmonized sales tax

J. Horgan

B. Ralston

Hon. C. Hansen

J. Kwan

D. Donaldson

R. Fleming

N. Macdonald

Point of Privilege (Reservation of Right)

Hon. M. de Jong

Tabling Documents

B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, Annual Report 2008-2009

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate (continued)

S. Hammell

J. McIntyre

J. Horgan

Hon. G. Abbott

J. Kwan

D. Horne

L. Krog

Hon. S. Thomson

Royal Assent to Bills

Bill 3 — Supply Act (No. 2), 2009

[ Page 265 ]

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2009

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

D. Thorne: I have the pleasure today of introducing some members of my family who came over from Surrey for the first time in the Legislature, at least since I've been here. I'd like the House to make welcome my stepdaughter Shelly Edmondson; my stepdaughter Kathy Bloom; and her husband, Murray Bloom.

Hon. N. Yamamoto: I'd like the members to welcome my partner, Fred Pinnock, and my stepdaughter Julia. They're from North Vancouver. Julia's looking forward to attending Balmoral Secondary School in North Van.

[1335]

T. Lake: A little over 21 years ago my life changed dramatically, as did my wife Lisa's. That was on the birth of our eldest daughter, Shannon, who is here today as she attends UVic, studying anthropology and archaeology. I hope the House will join me in welcoming Shannon today.

B. Routley: I would like to introduce Debra Toporowski, who is the constituency assistant in the Cowichan Valley and is brave enough to take on a second Routley. Howard Wong, her dad, is here. He's our handyman extraordinaire. Linda Wong — an incredible volunteer. And Betty Iverson is now in her 70th year, taking care of carbon in the Cowichan Valley because she only rides a bicycle. She's never had her driver's licence. With that, I would ask the House to please join me in welcoming these fine guests from the Cowichan Valley.

M. Dalton: I'd like to acknowledge in the gallery today the attendance of the Maple Ridge Mayor, Ernie Daykin, and Jim Rule. Ernie was elected mayor this last term and was a councillor for two terms before that. His family goes back four generations in Maple Ridge, to the 1870s. I'm happy to be working alongside of him for the benefit of Maple Ridge residents. Jim Rule is the city manager. He has been working in the city for seven years and has come from Sudbury. Would the House please welcome them.

M. Elmore: It's my pleasure to introduce today a constituent from Vancouver-Kensington. He's the former MLA, and he is much loved, admired and respected by everyone in Vancouver-Kensington. I ask the House to please join me to giving a warm welcome to David Chudnovsky.

J. Thornthwaite: It is my pleasure to introduce Sarah Sandfuhr. Sarah is a law student from Germany. Her home university is located in Münster, and she is in her fourth year of law. Her interest in foreign law systems has resulted in her participating in a two-year program on the common-law systems in the world, and the program requires an internship in a common-law country such as Canada. For that reason, she now works in Victoria for several law firms, experiencing the common-law practice in Canada.

Welcome, Sarah.

D. Routley: I'd like to join the member for Cowichan Valley in welcoming Debra Toporowski, my former CA — the other Routley's CA. In fact, Bill took over my office and just had to change the first name on the sign — didn't have to do much else. The CA stayed at her desk.

I hope the House will help me welcome Debra; her dad, Howard, who did everything around the office — fixing, shovelling snow; and of course Betty Iverson, as Bill mentioned, is a great volunteer. She scrapbooked absolutely every mention of me, good or bad, in the media. Those are great memories, and I'm sure the member for Cowichan Valley will be very well served by Debra and those many volunteers, including her sister Linda.

L. Reid: I have some lovely friends and family in the gallery today. I would ask the House to join me in welcoming my mother, Catherine Reid. She's with Rheta Steer, who many of you will recognize as the lovely woman who assisted me in the care of my two babes, who are now five and nine. I'd ask you to welcome Will Reid-Friesen and Olivia Reid-Friesen.

Also in the gallery we have Mark Turner. He represents the House of Friendship Society, Hiiye'yu Lelum, in Duncan. It is his 50th birthday. I would ask the House to join us in wishing him the best 50 years.

[1340]

R. Fleming: Joining us today in the gallery is a constituent of mine from Victoria–Swan Lake, Chris Kask. He's joined by his brother-in-law Mr. Jesse Church, from the riding of Esquimalt–Royal Roads; and his sister-in-law Ms. Claire Church, both of whom are looking forward to returning to David Cameron Elementary School next week. Lifelong Victorians, but first time in the precinct. Will the House please make these three guests welcome.

Hon. S. Bond: I am delighted to actually introduce two sets of guests in the Legislature today. This morning I had the pleasure of meeting with two representatives of the Alma Mater Society of UBC. I'd love to wel-

[ Page 266 ]

come Adrienne Smith and Tim Chu, who were here to talk about transit issues in particular. They were very thoughtful, and I appreciated their input. I know the members would like to make them welcome today.

Secondly, it's not often that we get visitors from northern British Columbia, but today we have a number of them joining us in the gallery. On behalf of my colleagues the MLA for Prince George–Mackenzie and the MLA for Nechako Lakes and, indeed, the Minister of Health, who is a personal friend of several of these visitors today, we want to welcome a group of people who are absolutely committed to revitalizing the downtown of Prince George. They're doing a fantastic job.

Dan McLaren is here, the president of Commonwealth Financial; Norm McLaren of N.D. McLaren and Associates; Heather Olund director of planning with L&M Engineering; Shari Green, a newly elected councillor for the city of Prince George, doing a fantastic job; Bruce Sutherland, the chair of the Northern Development Initiative Trust and the chair of CNC; Howie Charters, the managing director of Colliers International; and Janine North, the CEO of the Northern Development Initiative Trust.

They're doing a great job in northern B.C., and I know they'll get an enthusiastic welcome here to Victoria.

R. Lee: We have some visitors from China today. They are from the office of the Ethnic, Religious, Overseas Chinese and Foreign Affairs Commission of Hubei Provincial People's Congress, represented by Shiping He, Guang Ping Wang, Yuanchao Shang and Yonghong Li. Would the House please make them welcome.

J. Slater: I'd like the House to welcome my brother Kim Slater, who is a high school teacher in Nanaimo.

H. Bloy: I would like to introduce to the House the future of British Columbia, my great-nephew Oliver George Macleod, who was born yesterday at 10:03 a.m. He is doing fine. His mom, Fawn, and his dad, Matt, are all doing fine. Would the House please make him welcome.

Tributes

GurdEV singh gREwal

H. Bains: With deep sadness I report to this House the passing of the last surviving hero of the struggle to get South Asians the right to vote in Canada. Mr. Gurdev Singh Grewal died yesterday morning at the age of 87. Their long, arduous fight finally resulted in Indians and other South Asians getting their right to vote restored in April 1947.

No doubt, the work of people such as Mr. Grewal and many others that came before us is the reason many of the visible minorities are sitting in this House today, and it is their struggle, sacrifices and foresight that led to a better society that we enjoy today. I ask this House to join with me to pay respect to this giant of a human being.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

B.C. DISABILITY GAMES IN

MAPLE RIDGE AND PITT MEADOWS

M. Dalton: Today I would like to pay tribute to the many hundreds of athletes, volunteers and caregivers of the 2009 B.C. Disability Games held this summer in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows.

The B.C. Disability Games give British Columbians with disabilities the opportunity to compete in an organized sports event that promotes physical fitness and community pride. The games also provide national and international qualifying standards.

Jennifer McKenzie is an athlete who has competed in international events, including the 2008 Olympic and Paralympic Games. She said that the Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadow games were the best that she has experienced in terms of community generosity and organization.

[1345]

Some of the key volunteers were Anita Perler, Robert Campbell, Mike Murray and Cathy Marshall. I would like to say a big thank-you to every person who helped out in one way or another. A great deal of work and organization goes into hosting an event like this. It demonstrates that the residents of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows have a lot of heart.

The games had events for athletes who are blind or deaf, athletes who are amputees or others with other disabilities. Sixteen local athletes made it to the podium, including gold medalist Sierra Morissette, Marie Hol, Jeanne Durnion and Jennifer McKenzie.

Thanks also to the different partners who helped make this possible: school district 42, local Rotary clubs, Westminster Savings, the CBC, the cities of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows, B.C. Games and the province of British Columbia.

Congratulations once again to all the athletes and to all those who contributed to making the 2009 B.C. Disability Games into such a big success.

SURREY HOSPICE SOCIETY

S. Hammell: Last week I introduced hospice to the members through the story of a young girl losing her dad. I shared how hospice was able to help her and her family come to terms with their grief.

There's a second

chapter to the Surrey Hospice story. Three years ago it became evident to everyone at hospice

[ Page 267 ]

that significant changes had to happen. They needed to expand. Surrey Hospice was experiencing a demand for services that far outweighed what could be provided under their current circumstances.

Barb Morningstar, the program director, was working in a cramped, dark space with no doors for private interviews or counselling. Their palliative and grief coordinators were in a big open room that doubled as a room for programs, board meetings and counselling. There were no private rooms for bereaved family members to share in a private environment. There were times when they had double the number of children registered in Hopeful Hearts than they could accommodate.

Surrey Hospice rose to the challenge of renovating their space at Newton Regency Care Home by raising $200,000. They now have those private counselling offices, a beautiful room for the children, a family meeting room and a larger group room. All of the training for volunteers happens at Newton Regency. All of the grief counselling, grief programs and administration happen at Newton Regency.

This effort is now at risk of an unintended consequence, I am sure, of the closing of long-term care beds at Newton Regency Care Home. Marion, the executive director, said: "We cannot cease this vital service to the community of service. We need to keep Surrey Hospice open."

VICTORIA GREEK FEST

R. Fleming: I rise today to talk about the annual Greek Fest, which opened yesterday in my community and runs through to September 7 over the entire Labour Day weekend. This festival, which attracts a growing audience of thousands of people each year, is hosted at the Greek Orthodox Church and community centre located on Elk Lake Drive.

Greek Fest is a wonderful time for food, for fun and for community. For the eighth consecutive year, the Victoria and Vancouver Island Greek Community Society has put together Greek Fest, showcasing Greek culture in British Columbia in support of our local multicultural community. The festival will feature delicious Greek food, Greek desserts, baked goods and traditional Greek dancing, some by international dance groups.

There will be live music from local artists and many other different programs of entertainment, reflecting the fusion of our global culture. This year's Greek Fest will also see a return of the heritage exhibit, which will explore the history of Greece and Greeks in British Columbia, with some very special attention paid this year to the explorer Ioannis Fokas, otherwise known as Juan de Fuca, the first Greek to navigate our coast in 1592, albeit in the service of Spain.

Juan de Fuca settled at Fort Victoria and married Marrie-Ann, the daughter of the then chief of the Songhees Nation, and had a very large family. That history will be highlighted over the weekend.

[1350]

Since its inception the Victoria and Vancouver Island Greek community has been sponsoring community events on an ongoing basis as part of their mandate, and each year the proceeds from Greek Fest are directed to charitable purposes to help individuals and families in need in our community.

This year Greek Fest is partnering with the Saanich firefighters to assist in the school hot lunch program in this school district. This program provides prepared, nutritious meals for school children throughout Victoria, filling a need that ensures that our children receive healthy, nourishing food. It's is an investment in our future, and I commend the Victoria and Vancouver Island Greek Community Society for being a sponsor of that.

I ask this House to thank all of the volunteers and the many hours they put in to host this important annual festival.

[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker: I hope I didn't hear what I just thought I heard.

NORTH THOMPSON FALL FAIR AND RODEO

T. Lake: Saddle bronc and bareback horse riding, bull riding, steer wrestling, ladies barrel racing, pancake breakfasts, equestrian events, livestock exhibits, a town parade and an old-fashioned Saturday night barn dance. These are just a few of the exciting events happening this Labour Day weekend as part of the 60th North Thompson Fall Fair and Rodeo in Barriere. The first-ever fall fair back in 1950 drew a crowd of 500 people, and it's estimated over 9,000 people will attend this year, celebrating all that the rural culture and lifestyle have to offer.

Our fall fair and rodeo is a celebration of local agricultural production and a forum to educate the public about where their food comes from, how it's grown, and it encourages people to eat local, healthful meat and produce. From livestock competitions, fine arts, sewing, baking, gardening, beekeeping and so much more, this weekend promotes an essential part of our heritage and Canada's rural lifestyle.

The Salle and Rainer families are two of the families in the valley that have contributed to this fair for decades. Their vision, time and effort are cornerstones to the success of one of B.C.'s favourite Labour Day traditions and a past winner of the best fair in B.C. award.

I'd like to thank the president of the Fall Fair and Rodeo Association, Jill Hayward, for all of her tremendous work, along with her list of directors, conveners and hundreds of volunteers who make this event pos-

[ Page 268 ]

sible and, indeed, such a success, year in and year out. Their commitment and excellence have proven over the past 60 years this is indeed a success.

It will be a pleasure to pull on the cowboy boots for this year's fall fair and rodeo. Along with my family, I look forward to taking

part in the parade and touring the marvellous fairgrounds. Here's to the next 60 years of fall fairs in the beautiful North Thompson Valley.

EDGAR DUNNING

V. Huntington: Most towns have archives for their historical record. In Delta we have Edgar Dunning. This amazing gentleman's resumé includes original editor, reporter, photographer and publisher of the award-winning Delta Optimist for a career covering 45 years; editor of the Pacific region edition of the CBC radio program Neighbourly News for 26 years; founding member of the Kinsmen Club of Ladner, the Delta Community Band Society, the Delta Museum and Archives Society; and executive board member of the Delta Board of Trade, the Beach Grove Golf Club, the Delta Memorial Park Association and the Ladner Business Association.

He is a commissioner on the Delta Heritage Advisory Commission, a director of the Burns Bog Conservation Society and a continuing columnist for local Delta newspapers. Mr. Dunning was the first-ever recipient of the Freedom of the Municipality, the highest honour bestowed to an individual by the corporation of Delta.

In his columns and articles Mr. Dunning continues to recount the rich history of Delta as he witnessed it since his arrival in Ladner in 1922, from major events such as the opening of the Deas Island Tunnel to vignettes such as the young boys in the 1920s selling and then reselling muskrat tails to the city clerk.

Edgar Dunning is honest, informative and entertaining. His voice is indeed the voice of Delta.

[1355]

Of course, filling these roles with distinction takes some time. In Edgar Dunning's case, that time verges on a century. He even jokes that he's outlived ten of his family doctors. Edgar Dunning recently celebrated a milestone, his 99½-year birthday, and next week on September 12 the Kinsmen are honouring this esteemed pioneer in a public celebration. I ask this House to add its voice to Delta's as we say thank you, Edgar Dunning.

GUILDFORD COMMUNITY

Over the years Guildford has become a vibrant residential area that has an incredible sense of community. For several years, despite the area west of 152nd Street only being part of my riding after the May election, I have supported the Guildford Community Fair. That is not new to me, because I had lived in Guildford when I was a teenager. I always take great pleasure in attending the festival.

MP Dona Cadman and myself sponsored a children's event. I also donated food and drinks for all who attended.

The Guildford Community Fair is hosted by the Dogwood Anti-Poverty Society, led by Patricia Cuthill. The many volunteers included Shelly Baxter, Jim and Alex Wirsilas, Gail Robinson, Maryann Kristensen, Lila Cresine and Susan Harris.

Many other individuals and organizations are involved, including Tim Bailey of Surrey Fire Fighters; Guildford Lions members Denise Creed and JoJo Lentz; plus members of the Guildford Leo Club Jenny Singh, Brianna Piggott, Leslie and Janine Heinrich, Katie Charlie; and my volunteers, Penny Hazel, Marianne Brown, Russ Burtnick, Paul Keenleyside, Gina Andersen, Alex Peter, Sherrold and Marina Haddad, Manuel and Marilena Santos, Ken Fisher; and Isabelle Hayer.

I ask the members to help me in recognizing all these volunteers who make our communities wonderful and vibrant places to live in and to raise our families in.

Oral Questions

BUDGET REVENUE PROJECTIONS

C. James: Last week the Minister of Finance told this House that he never meets with Finance officials during an election. Well, this week he changed his story. He said he had a casual conversation with his deputy minister, where he was told that revenues were tanking. But according to the minister's own

schedule he met with senior Finance officials the day after the election call on April 15.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. Will he tell this House exactly what he was told by his deputy and assistant deputy minister to Treasury Board at that April 15 meeting, or was it just another casual conversation?

Hon. C. Hansen: I have said that I never met with officials of the Ministry of Finance during the election, and that is a fact. I have indicated that there were two or three telephone conversations with the deputy minister during that period of time. These are not calls that I initiated. They were actually initiated by him, and they were with regard to matters that had been in discussion prior to the call of the election.

[ Page 269 ]

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

C. James: It's interesting how the minister uses terminology around calls or meetings. Just to read from his own calendar….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

C. James: The minister's own calendar says: "Call Graham and Nick." Graham and Nick would be the deputy minister and assistant deputy minister. So the Minister of Finance has said he's had conversations, not meetings, on at least two other occasions beyond the April 15. But he can't remember exactly when he was told the revenue was tanking, and even more alarming, he didn't ask a single question, he claims, about revenue-tanking.

My question is to the minister. When exactly did these phone conversations take place, and will he tell this House today exactly what he was told by ministry officials?

[1400]

Hon. C. Hansen: First of all, the deputy minister, in one of the conversations that we had during the election campaign, had indicated to me that there were indications that revenues might be off by $200 million to $300 million. That actually amounts to about one-half of 1 percent of the revenues of the province. It was obvious to me that that was still very manageable within the fiscal plan that we had tabled in February.

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

C. James: The story changes daily from this minister.

First: "I didn't talk to any Finance officials. I had no conversations during the election."

Second: now he says he didn't have any meetings.

Third: "No, I had phone calls, not meetings."

The public deserves answers. We've now heard about three meetings that the minister had with officials.

Again to the minister: you've now had a few days to go back and check. It's inconceivable that Finance officials talked to the minister about revenue tanking without some kind of analysis done. So I'd like to ask the Minister of Finance to tell us today: precisely what day was he told that the projections were tanking, and will he come clean and table in this House all the information he received about those revenues?

Hon. C. Hansen: It is the Leader of the Opposition who is lacking consistency. I indicated from the start of this discussion that I had had two or three conversations with the deputy minister during the election period.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Hansen: They were not meetings. I have never said they were meetings. They were telephone conversations that were initiated by the deputy minister.

I have also said that it is generally inappropriate for a minister of the Crown to seek advice from a deputy minister during an election campaign. I never once called the deputy minister to seek advice. These were conversations that were initiated by the deputy minister, matters that were relevant to the ministry, and I stand by everything that I have said.

S. Simpson: Neither the opposition, the media or, more importantly, the people of British Columbia can get a straight answer out of this minister, which probably explains why his credibility is in tatters today.

The minister told us he wasn't supposed to meet with officials during the election, but we know that he talked to his deputies or met with them on more than one occasion. This minister knew before, during and after the election that B.C.'s finances were in serious trouble, and considering how deep this economic crisis is, it is reasonable to expect that officials in the Finance Ministry were tracking this on a daily basis.

So does the minister expect us to believe that nobody told him and he didn't ask about the status of those changes literally for months after the February budget?

Hon. C. Hansen: We have excellent public servants in the Ministry of Finance. In putting the February budget together, they actually developed some pretty good projections on what we could anticipate for the year, and they went out and sought independent advice around what we could expect in terms of things like gross domestic product and housing starts and Canada-U.S. exchange rates. Not only did they seek that advice from independent sources, but they added an added level of conservatism to the projections that they were making.

When we put the budget together, I accepted the advice from the Ministry of Finance staff. They took the responsible action of tracking indicators that would, over the following months…. They at no time advised me that our $495 million deficit target was not doable until we actually got new information after the election.

[1405]

We have excellent public servants, Mr. Speaker. They do track the indicators.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member has a supplemental.

[ Page 270 ]

S. Simpson: The lack of excellence isn't in the ministry's offices. The lack of excellence is at the cabinet table. This minister has taken a "don't ask, don't tell" approach to the biggest economic crisis of our time. The only explanation for this was his desire to avoid being open with British Columbians during the election campaign. The economy was in trouble before his February budget, and it's been nosediving ever since.

It's not a question of what the February numbers were but of what happened after that. What happened after that? This minister was either oblivious to the facts, or he chose to hide them from the people of B.C. Either one of those is unacceptable. Which one was it, Minister?

Hon. C. Hansen: I suggest that the member actually look at what has happened in other provinces across Canada as well. At the very end of March, Ontario tabled a budget, and they have had since that time….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: By the end of July the Ontario government had had to revise their revenue projections down by $4.4 billion. The province of Alberta tabled a budget in April. Just last week, in the time from April to last week, they have had to revise their revenue projections down by $2.1 billion.

If this member is so oblivious to what's been happening in the world economy over the last four months, I suggest he pick up some newspapers and actually read that British Columbia is not alone. British Columbia can be proud of the record that we have shown.

J. Horgan: I have to say it's pretty rich to hear the Minister of Finance saying that we're oblivious on this side of the House, when he sat for four months and didn't ask his Finance officials how he could possibly manage a spiralling downturn in our resource revenues, in our income tax revenues and in every other revenue target that he had said was going to be achievable in February. How is it possible, Mr. Speaker?

To the minister: how is it possible that he could ignore the trends that everyone could see if they picked up the Globe and Mail on a day for four months…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: …and go through the entire election, with phone calls from officials saying revenue is going sideways, and it was two months after the election when he said: "We're in trouble"? How is that possible? Does he not see why the people of British Columbia can't believe a word he says?

Hon. C. Hansen: I would like to ask: where was the integrity when that member and that party presented a budget plan to the voters of British Columbia in April of this year that was based on $600 million of extra revenue that they magically invented?

Where was the integrity when that party and that member presented a budget plan to the voters of British Columbia that was based on the same February budget assumptions that, we now find out, they say nobody should have believed at that time? If they didn't believe those budget assumptions, why did they mislead British Columbians?

[1410]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Take your seat, Member.

Member has a supplemental.

HARMONIZED SALES TAX

J. Horgan: The Minister of Finance said this week that his officials are among the best in Canada, and I would agree with that. I worked with those officials. They are the top-quality officials in this country.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: The challenge that the public has….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat.

Members. Members.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, let's listen to the question so that we can hear the answer.

Continue, Member.

J. Horgan: The issue before us today is: why is the Minister of Finance, the father of the $2.8 billion deficit of this week, throwing those officials under the bus and ignoring their advice? They told him during the election campaign that the numbers were going sideways. They told them the day after the election that they were in the tank, and yet the minister said nothing.

Is it true that the minister said nothing because he already had $1.6 billion of blood money from the HST

[ Page 271 ]

in his back pocket? Is that why he didn't say anything — because he already had the money in the bank?

Hon. C. Hansen: There's actually only one party in the last 20 years in this Legislature, and one government in the last 20 years, that has overruled and ignored the advice of Ministry of Finance officials, and that is the government that that member served for under Glen Clark.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

B. Ralston: In a news story carried Canada-wide on March 30 of this year, federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said that other non-HST provinces had approached him with a view to going in the same direction as Ontario. In response to that March 30 story, a spokesperson for Manitoba Finance Minister Greg Selinger said that his province had not approached the federal government to talk about harmonization. Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall reminded the reporter that he had made a commitment in his recent election campaign not to bring in harmonization.

But when the B.C. Finance Minister was approached for comment, he said: "No comment." Will the minister confirm that the reason he declined comment is because he already had begun negotiations with Mr. Flaherty but didn't want to tell the public until after May 12?

Hon. C. Hansen: I'm actually aware of that particular news

article because it has subsequently been brought to my attention. It was not that I said: "No comment"; it was that I was not available to comment. The reporter sought out an interview with me, and my staff advised him that I wasn't available that day.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Unless I can hear the question and unless I can hear the answer, we're not going to continue.

Just stay sitting.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: I can assure this House that British Columbia was not negotiating with the federal government. If Mr. Flaherty was referring to a province that had expressed interest in moving to an HST, that province was not British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: It wasn't Saskatchewan. It wasn't Manitoba. It wasn't Prince Edward Island. The minister answered in a very reputable newspaper. The comment was "No comment." The minister's response of "no comment" is very rare indeed, especially on a matter of such importance. If he wasn't in negotiations with Mr. Flaherty, why didn't he just say so?

[1415]

Hon. C. Hansen: I was not even aware of that reporter's call. They had phoned my office. The reporter asked…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: …if I could return the call, and my staff informed them that I would not be available to return a call that day.

J. Kwan: So per usual, it's the media's fault.

January 23, 2009: Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty publicly confirms that he's considering moving to the HST. January 27: federal Minister Flaherty brings in the budget that suggests his government is flexible in negotiations with provinces that want to bring in the HST. March 30: Flaherty says that he's discussing harmonization with other provinces.

With the provincial revenues tanking to the tune of $200 million to $300 million in the first month of the fiscal year, does the Minister of Finance really expect British Columbians to believe that he never thought about performing the mother of all flip-flops in an attempt to cover up his government's deficit deceptions?

Hon. C. Hansen: I can assure this House that we had no discussions with the federal government with a view to us changing our previous position on HST until the end of May.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. Kwan: At the time the prairie provinces and P.E.I. had said on the record that they were not interested. That leaves only British Columbia.

Is the Finance Minister suggesting that Minister Flaherty doesn't know what he's talking about on March 30, 2009, when he said that he was in discussion with other provinces about harmonization? Or is it just that this minister is misleading the public?

Hon. C. Hansen: I'm not suggesting anything. I am telling this House that if Mr. Flaherty was talking about a province that they were negotiating with that was inter-

[ Page 272 ]

ested in adopting HST at that time, he was not referring to British Columbia.

D. Donaldson: The Finance Minister claims that on May 25 at a provincial-federal Finance ministers meeting he met with Minister Flaherty at the coffee machine and told him that B.C. was interested in bringing in the HST.

Does the minister really expect British Columbians to believe his claim that he abandoned his promises to the people of the province in a casual conversation at a coffee machine? Or was the conversation so casual because it was just a check-in because he was already deep in negotiations with the federal government about the HST?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister.

Hon. C. Hansen: I have made it quite clear to this House the timeline of various discussions. As of May 24, when I was at the federal-provincial Finance ministers meeting, we knew that we needed to start discussions with the federal government to better understand the ramifications, the timelines and the transition so that I would be able to take fulsome information back to my cabinet colleagues.

It seemed appropriate that I give a heads-up to Minister Flaherty that there were going to be those contacts made by my officials to his officials. I did that at Meech Lake in a discussion with Mr. Flaherty and gave him a heads-up that British Columbia was considering changing our previous position of opposition to the HST.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[1420]

D. Donaldson: Well, that's a heck of a way to run government — nabob policy development around a coffee machine. The HST, seriously.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

D. Donaldson: No one buys the minister's excuses anymore. Small businesses certainly don't.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, just take your seat.

Members, let's listen to the question, please.

Continue, Member.

D. Donaldson: Just ask J.F. Belanger, who runs a chip wagon in my community and says that the HST will harm his business.

By the time the minister was sworn back into cabinet on June 10, he claims he had already decided to take the $1.6 billion from the federal government to bring in the HST. Is the minister trying to say that it took less than two weeks to agree to a complex federal-provincial agreement to bring in a new tax regime? Or had he agreed to the HST by June 10 because he was already in negotiations well before election day?

Hon. C. Hansen: At that point, we had already been in discussions with the federal government for about two weeks. Also, at the time, on June 10, I knew that this move for British Columbia was the best thing that we could do in terms of stimulating the economy, creating jobs for British Columbia. As of June 10, I knew that I would be recommending HST to my cabinet colleagues.

R. Fleming: The minister's story is that he had only casually raised the issue of HST negotiations with Minister Flaherty on May 25. Can the minister tell this House why his calendar shows that on April 4, weeks before the provincial election and only four days after Jim Flaherty told national media that he was discussing the HST with all of the other provinces…?

Why did this minister have a scheduled meeting over the phone with the federal minister? What did the minister talk about? Is he asking us to believe that this conversation didn't touch on the HST, casually or otherwise?

Hon. C. Hansen: I'm not surprised that this member would find it surprising that a B.C. cabinet minister would have a good relationship with the federal Finance Minister, given the reputation that that government had for federal-provincial relations.

That telephone conversation was instituted by Mr. Flaherty's office. That was a telephone conversation that was in advance….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister, take your seat again, please.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, Members.

Continue, Minister.

[ Page 273 ]

Canadians at meetings that were being held in Europe with regard to the growing financial crisis.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member has a supplemental.

R. Fleming: The minister has said various things at various times during these past few days. Last week he said that during the election he had no discussions — none — with ministry officials or with federal officials about the ballooning deficit or about the HST. He told this House that he was too busy on the hustings for such things, and he even implied that it would be inappropriate to do so.

Now he has revealed that he's had several meetings, except that phone calls aren't meetings. That's what his story hinges on. That's how pathetic it is. He asked British Columbians….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Interjections.

R. Fleming: There's nothing to withdraw there.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat, Member.

Continue, Member.

[1425]

R. Fleming: He's gone from saying he had no meetings to admitting several on several topics: the deficit and the HST.

Can the minister explain another appointment in his calendar? Can he tell us why, when he was too busy on the hustings, he took time from the election for a scheduled teleconference with Minister Flaherty on April 27? And again, is he asking British Columbians to believe that he didn't talk about the HST just once during that 75-minute conversation with the minister, even casually?

Hon. C. Hansen: I had no conversations with Minister Flaherty about HST prior to the 25th of May.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

N. Macdonald: Well, the Minister of Finance, in a scrum just outside of this room, this chamber, as he came in here, said: "Better communications on the HST would have toned down the hyperbole." So the Premier is at 17 percent in the polls because of a communication failure. Is that what the minister is saying?

Wouldn't it have been more accurate to say that honesty about the government's true intentions on the HST would have toned down the outrage in British Columbia?

Hon. C. Hansen: We've heard a lot of malicious and scurrilous accusations from members of the opposition over this last number of weeks. We have seen a lot of political theatre in this House. I've been a member of this chamber for 13 years, and I've seen a lot of political theatre from the NDP opposition.

I am proud of what I have accomplished in the 13 years in this chamber. I have approached every responsibility that I have been given as a member of this chamber with the highest degree of integrity.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Hansen: I will put my record and I will put my integrity up against that of any member of the opposition.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, Members.

[End of question period.]

Hon. M. de Jong: On a point of order. Earlier in question period the Finance critic for the opposition attempted to build a line of questioning around a particular

article and a particular phrase. He was very specific about the language he used, which was that the Finance Minister had offered no comment.

[1430]

In fact, the

article suggests something very different, and I offer the hon. member an opportunity to correct the record, because in fact, the

article says: "The B.C. Finance Minister…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: …declined to comment on the issue."

I offer the member an opportunity, before this advances to a privilege motion, to correct the record.

Interjections.

[ Page 274 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Farnworth: That's not a point of order. It's a difference of opinion.

Point of Privilege

(Reservation of Right)

Hon. M. de Jong: I firstly reserve my right to raise a matter of privilege, in that case.

Tabling Documents

Hon. M. de Jong: Secondly, I have the honour to present a report, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal Annual Report 2008-2009 .

Orders of the Day

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

Mr. Speaker: Members, if they have other duties to attend to, could they please clear the House as quickly as possible.

Members, please clear the House as quickly as possible if you've got other duties to attend to.

Budget Debate

(continued)

S. Hammell: It gives me great pleasure to again rise in this House to represent my constituency of Surrey–Green Timbers. As others have said before me, it takes great constituency assistants to make an MLA. I'd like to thank Brett Barden and Vera LeFranc, my two constituency assistants, who have assisted me and my constituents on a daily basis. Knowing they are in Surrey minding the shop and doing the great work they do, I can relax and focus my attention on my work here.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

My boundaries changed, this election, quite significantly. I lost about half of my old constituency and gained it back with a new. When you lose something, even though you gain something new, you lament the loss. I'm losing the schools Lena Shaw, AHP Matthew, Bonaccord and Green Timbers, all elementary schools that I have visited during the years I've served as an MLA. I will miss them.

However, I'm looking forward to supporting the teachers and students at Newton, Westerman, Strawberry Hill, Kennedy Trail and Brookside elementaries. These are all new to me, but elementary schools who have teachers who have been teaching the students of my constituencies for years….

I have also added to my constituency Bear Creek Park, the art gallery and the Bear Creek seniors — all jewels of Surrey. I'm looking forward to representing the people and the interests of my constituency here in this wonderful House.

Today we are debating the government's second budget of the year, a document that is vastly different than the budget we debated in February. Back then, in that budget, we were promised a deficit of $495 million, with health and other services protected. There were no dramatic new taxes.

But now, this week, we were presented with a second budget for the current year that contains a record deficit of $2.8 billion, along with cuts to health, education and other government services. Worst of all, British Columbia families and small businesses are being hit with two sets of massive tax increases at a time when there's a recession and it's harder than ever to pay.

[1435]

We have a tale of two budgets: then and now. So today, now, we in this House have to ask why our budget for this year can change so dramatically over the passage of only a few months. How can the February budget be so different from the September budget? What could provide the circumstance that would note the presentation of a budget now that predicted a deficit of six times greater than the $495 million deficit predicted only a short few months ago?

I have to say that the $495 million budget always has reminded me of some kind of sale. It wasn't $501 million or $510 million or…. It was $495 million. That should have sent the hackles on the back of your neck up.

Let's look at the tale of now and then. Most importantly, let's look at what has happened between February and today. Back in February this B.C. Liberal government was just a few weeks away from facing the electorate, from calling an election. This was a government that saw itself as good fiscal managers and, I believe, to a large extent was seen by many as good fiscal managers. So they tabled a budget, and they campaigned around the province promising that the deficit for this year would be no more than $495 million.

Now, that could have been a loss-leader. They said and pledged that it would stay that way after the election. They calculated that the people would believe them, being good fiscal managers and all that, and many did. Then they won the election. After all, the end-game is winning.

When the Premier was speaking before the February budget, many economists were questioning the deficit figure. These economists warned that the economy was going in the tank. Those of us who have known the real value of this government's promises kept asking, in this House and on the campaign trail, whether the deficit figure was a story or was it a fiddle.

[ Page 275 ]

Then every time we questioned the number, we were assured by the Premier and the Minister of Finance that the deficit figure was firm. In the middle of the campaign, April 24, the Premier said: "I can tell you this. The deficit for 2009-10 will be $495 million…." There's that loss-leader.

Even after he was sworn in nearly a month after the election, the Minister of Finance repeated this promise that the deficit for this year would remain at $495 million. It was only in July that the Minister of Finance backed off his assurances, and today we see a deficit of nearly six times what the minister and the Premier promised and campaigned on.

Why? That was then, before an election, and this is now, after the election. And the end-game is winning. As I mentioned, the then February budget contained no changes in taxation. Not long after, the government of Ontario announced that it had reached agreement with the federal government to harmonize its sales tax with the federal goods and service tax.

Then, in a very astute move, the B.C. Liberals' friends in the restaurant industry asked the parties in the May 12 provincial election if they planned to follow the lead of Ontario in making this far-reaching tax change. The B.C. Liberal party reassured their supporters in the restaurant industry this way: "The harmonized GST would make it harder for future provincial governments to lower or raise sales taxes, which reduces flexibility." In short: "A harmonized sales tax is not something that is contemplated in the B.C. Liberal platform."

[1440]

Now it's now — the tale of now. In July the Minister of Finance and the Premier announced that they would harmonize the provincial sales tax with the GST. I have to assume that they want us now to believe it does not make it harder for future governments to lower and raise sales taxes or reduce flexibility.

This is a massive tax increase for most ordinary British Columbians, and a crushing new tax burden that will cost restaurants and many other small businesses around the province. And why? That was then, and this is now, and there was an election in between.

Now, in this week's budget, the same British Columbians and small businesses that are already staggering under the burden of this new sales tax were told they will face annual and perpetual increases in MSP premiums. For a government that claims to put money in people's pockets, a government that claims to listen to small business, these two attacks on B.C. families and businesses are almost without parallel. Why the change? Well, that was then, and this is now, and there was an election in between.

British Columbians know what is now. They know they have the lowest minimum wage in the country, and those people will bear the brunt of both of these tax explosions. Currently, right now, B.C. has the worst poverty rate and has the worst child poverty rate in the country. It has had it for five years, and there's no plan to change that.

Much of this poverty is felt by working families. Higher tax burdens and reduced services mean that British Columbia will continue to lead this country in poverty for years to come. There is no plan to change that. There's only a plan for higher taxes, higher HST, higher MSP premiums.

In the February budget, this government promised to protect health care and other government services. The B.C. Liberal platform in the May election pledged more nurses, more doctors, more patient care. Since the votes were counted on May 12, all the efforts of the Premier and the cabinet minister and the public affairs bureau and the health authorities have not been able to conceal cutbacks to the patients' services all over this province — most of them revealed by my colleague from Vancouver-Kingsway.

Why? Well, that was then, and this is now, and there was an election in between. Schools, colleges, universities and most other government services are being cut. Even community groups and art providers that had written contracts, written agreements with the government found out those promises weren't worth the paper they were written on.

Why? Well, that was then, and this is now, and there was an election in between. How could anyone be surprised about these broken contracts, given the experience of health care workers back in the early days of this government? I wonder if the flip-flop of this government wasn't motivated by the legal price they paid when they ripped up contracts signed in good faith by the citizens of this province.

My own constituents in Surrey know the value of a promise from the members opposite. They have been waiting and waiting for a much-needed expansion of Surrey Memorial Hospital. Knee deep in water, the Premier in 2001 promised again a new hospital, and all indications are that it will be years yet before it comes.

Every time we ask why the government is cutting services they had promised to the people of this province, the answer is always the same, "Well, that was then, and this is now," and we know there was an election in between.

Now, today, British Columbians are wondering how they will pay for the HST and for annual increases in MSP premiums. They are taking a hard look at the record of this government. They will look at a government that was handed a surplus of $1.1 billion by an outgoing government — at that time, the largest surplus in the history of British Columbia — and that the Premier's first act was to blow a hole in the budget with a gift to the wealthy and the big business that supported him.

[1445]

He made civil servants, health care workers and ordinary British Columbian families pay for his massive cuts to government services.

[ Page 276 ]

Thanks to dramatic increases in world commodity prices, this government was saved for a time from the deficits they created. Despite these commodity prices, the records will show that in the years of this government, the years of the supposed fiscal masterminds, they have produced seven out of 12 budgets with deficits and three of the highest budget deficits in the history of this country.

No wonder the Premier lost sleep. He was living in a nightmare of his own making — this despite starting off with the largest surplus in the history of the province and record commodity prices. Who was being given the bill for this financial ineptitude? Working British Columbians, small business people, British Columbians who need health care, British Columbians looking for help to lift themselves up from a recession, children needing care and protection, students looking to educate themselves. We see here a disturbing pattern of government increasingly out of touch with the people it purports to represent.

We see big promises: the year of the seniors, the heartland strategy, a housing program, action on climate change, help for children, a new relationship with our first nations. Every one of these promises broken.

Now the Premier and the Minister of Finance have many questions to answer. What did the Premier and the federal government talk about when the Premier went to Ottawa to cheer on the federal budget on January 27? During the weeks before the beginning of the provincial election campaign, Stephen Harper and many of his cabinet came out to B.C. to give out money and to help the B.C. Liberal campaign. What did the Premier and the minister talk about? What did the Finance Ministers discuss? What undertakings did Harper get in return from the Premier for all his help in March and April?

Many things have changed between February and this week. The main thing is that the 2009 election has come and gone, and the members opposite believe and are comforted by the understanding that they have four years till the next election. All will be forgotten. After many winters, falls, springs and summers, all will be forgotten.

The Premier likes to talk about courage. He and his members have shown that they have no courage, and in the eyes of a growing number of British Columbians, they have no credibility. They have lost their legitimacy.

Every day, people are questioning the stories that the Premier and the Finance Minister have told British Columbians to explain exactly when it was they realized that it would be impossible to keep their promise of a $495 million deficit.

Then there are the claims from the Premier and the Minister of Finance that no thought, not even a little trickle, not even a flicker was given to the HST until after May 12. No one believes it when they say it. That was then, and this is now. Everyone knows there was an election in between and that they weren't given the straight goods.

No one believes that taxing the middle class British Columbians in the middle of a recession will return them to prosperity. No one believes that placing additional tax burdens on small business people will help them out. No one believes that promises from across the way are believable at all.

People are coming to my office, calling me and my staff and sending letters to say the HST is bad for them. They say this budget is a failure. The next time British Columbians get a chance to pass judgment on this government, I'm confident that the members opposite will be turned out of office. British Columbians who have lived through this budget of deception will have one message for this government as it is shown the door: that was then, and this is now.

[1450]

J. McIntyre: Madam Speaker, let me begin, as others have, with complimenting you on your election as Deputy Speaker and also to the member for North Island and to Mr. Speaker for being re-elected. It's a delight to see you, and I look forward to working with you all in the next four years.

I also wanted to start with some thank-yous as others before me have. I'd like to start with thanking the constituents of what is a new riding now, the riding of West Vancouver–Sea to Sky. I really appreciate the confidence that the voters placed in me to continue to strongly represent their interests and their views to my colleagues here in Victoria and also to ensure that where feasible, we are fully prepared to showcase our region as February 2010 fast approaches.

I'd also like to say thanks to my past constituents and supporters from the previous riding of West Vancouver–Garibaldi. The boundary moved west just a short way from 22nd Street to Rodgers Creek, which is effectively 29th in West Vancouver, but it does represent about 5,000 people — 4,000 eligible voters — that will now be very ably represented by my colleague from West Vancouver–Capilano.

Also, the southern

section of my previous riding, home to the In-SHUCK-ch First Nation traditional territory, whom I've been very proud to represent as they move closer to treaty settlement, has moved back into the Fraser Valley region.

Also, a hearty thank-you to my campaign team, especially to my chair, Derek Lew, and to Dave Davenport, who was the campaign director and did a great job. I had lots of friends and supporters — personal friends — who encouraged me to do this again and who saw me through to the end.

Thank you to my constituency assistant, Judi Fee, who has served this riding for a long time. She was my predecessor's assistant and has been my able assistant for the

[ Page 277 ]

last four or five years and just does a wonderful job for our constituents, especially for those in need. She has a big heart and has done a wonderful job to be, sometimes, the very last resort for some people in dire straits.

Also, of course, as others before me have thanked, I could not do this job without the support and love of my family: my husband, Andrew Pottinger; my two children, Leigh and Drew; and my father, John Gillespie, in Toronto. Their continuing support and encouragement keeps us all standing.

Also, of course, past and current staff here in the Legislature, who do a wonderful job about keeping us on

schedule and being in the right place at the right time and focused.

Before moving specifically to my remarks on the budget update, I'd like to take some time in my remarks today to reflect on the many accomplishments, the successes, the changes in the various communities that I've had the privilege to represent in Sea to Sky country. Since 2005, when I was first elected and the economy was taking off, the corridor in particular has flourished, and I thought I would just take us on a little tour today.

I'm going to start in the northern region. As mentioned in my recent tribute to the residents of the village of Pemberton last week, the village and their Lil'wat First Nation neighbours are enjoying the rewards of economic development. Funding has gone into some major infrastructure projects in the small communities — diking, wastewater treatment, increased well capacity, new community centre, library complex, child care centre. Now we have the prospect of the upcoming seniors housing in partnership with the federal government.

They have a great opportunity with what's known as a GEMS school. It is a private school. They've selected as one of their few sites in North America to site a school for International Baccalaureate students from kindergarten up. They are going to specialize on agriculture and first nations. It made Pemberton, obviously, a great area for that. I wish them well as they move forward with that.

Of course, the memorable Pemberton music festival of summer '08 brought both millions of dollars and a spotlight on the Pemberton and Mount Currie area. We're looking for an encore presentation.

Also in this area, before leaving this area, the Lil'wat Nation has developed unprecedented opportunities through their involvement as one of the four host first nations for 2010. They've had highway construction jobs, a local cement plant, construction. They formed a construction company for building in the Callaghan Valley. They've had a significant amount of land transferred for development that will give them opportunities for economic development. Capital grants for their Olympic Live sites in their new gym complex, and of course, additional child care spaces have all been welcomed.

Now on to Whistler. As you might well imagine, there have been many changes and challenges in the Whistler community as the residents are preparing to host the world in February. The upgrades to Whistler Mountain and the buildings of the sliding centre at Blackcomb have been completed well in advance, with opportunities to host and test World Cup events, providing economic benefits and opportunities for dry runs for the organizers, the athletes and all the volunteers. We just need Mother Nature to cooperate in February.

[1455]

One of the most anticipated legacies, of course, will be the athletes village, recently renamed Cheakamus Crossing, that will revert to affordable — that's below market — housing for local residents following the games. Of course, there's also going to be the high performance centre there to assist in training for our future athletes and Olympians.

On other fronts, Whistler has also made a number of advances.

Financial tools. As a resort community, they now have access to an additional four points on the hotel tax for tourism efforts. That can amount to as much as $6 million or $7 million to this community — significant.

Community forests. They've received the first 25-year tenure in the province in a joint partnership with local first nations. We've had upgrades on the parks, the trails, all the infrastructure, bear awareness programs, transfer of the day parking lots to the resort municipality of Whistler. And of course, the opening of Whistler Blackcomb spectacular peak-to-peak chair.

They were awarded a green city award from the province, and they were awarded a cultural capital award from Ottawa. So the list of accomplishments goes on and on.

Now, on our tour, down to Squamish. Squamish continues on its path to becoming the outdoor recreation capital of Canada, as it transitions from a resource town to one more centred on tourism, recreation and education.

Quest University and the proposed expanded downtown campus of Capilano College, which is now proudly Capilano University will over time add significantly to the social fabric and economic success of the community.

In the meantime, work continues on revitalization of the downtown, including some of the renewed planning for the waterfront on the lands, which was property that the province transferred to the district. We look forward to the prospect of the green power project on the Ashlu river opening soon. It's been a wonderful, wonderful opportunity for first nations, for economic development. The Ashlu was identified as one of the top rivers in this province about 20 years ago, by B.C. Hydro, as an opportune place to do green power generation.

We also have O'Siem pavilion opening in the downtown as a central gathering place. It's built on the theme of a longhouse to honour their longtime relationship with the Squamish Nation. That's been supported by a Towns for Tomorrow grant.

[ Page 278 ]

Provincial and federal funding have also been applied to the Riverstones project of Michael Hutchison to provide much-needed affordable housing for both seniors and those with disabilities.

On the social side, the province has supported 24-7 funding for Pearl's Place, the transition house for women and children escaping violence. The work goes on to expand services at the homeless emergency shelter that's so capably managed by the local Helping Hands Society.

I was also personally pleased to be involved when we obtained capital funding for new child care spaces in the renovated courthouse, and we've made it now a hub for early childhood services, for the delivery of services. It's been a big success, and I've also been involved in the opening of two StrongStart centres in the community at the local elementary schools. Seeing those youngsters firsthand see the benefits when you see them in the classroom and see their wide eyes as they get to enjoy some of the play and early learning opportunities is a wonderful treat.

Also, continuing on, we have the expansion of the hospital, the emergency department and the expansion of the Hilltop House for seniors. They're all very important amenities for a fast-growing town.

Of course, one of the most exciting developments in the area is the opportunity for the local organizing committee to do the hosting in the Callaghan Valley where B.C. has the opportunity to put our region on the international map for not just alpine but now for Nordic events. It's been managed by John Aalberg, who's a Norwegian Olympian and is now a resident of Squamish, and who has really developed this Whistler Olympic Park. It's emerged right out of the forest to be a magnificent facility with three stadia for cross-country biathlon and ski-jumping.

So the volunteers in the area have just done a marvellous job of hosting the events and getting all organized and doing the dry run. They've moved their local arts festival, Wild at Art, to that time of the year to accompany some of the sporting spectacles.

Last, but not least, the huge development at the railway park is going on forward, with the roundhouse and conference centre nearly finished. All of these things will add to Squamish and Squamish area's economic opportunity as we move forward.

Then we go down through the small communities — Britannia Beach, Lions Bay — all of them in different stages of development. Britannia Beach looks completely different. For any of you who have travelled that road, it looks very different from five years ago with the concentrator building all fully refurbished, and the commercial area and the housing that's going on there. There have been wonderful opportunities given to some of the people who lived there — opportunities for home ownership now.

[1500]

The museum is coming along beautifully. We've been able to help them refurbish some of the old buildings that they have there, and they are educating thousands of children on the benefits of mining, both past and future. These are wonderful opportunities.

Lions Bay has now, at long last, received their fire truck, which has been very, very important. They have a wonderful volunteer fire department there that is involved in search and rescue as well. So I think that things are looking up in that community as well.

On to Bowen. Wastewater treatment. A wonderful golf course development that's doing wonderfully there for youth and older people. They do Cops for Cancer tournaments, they continue with Bowfest, and they're working on a multipurpose community centre and seniors housing. They've been a shining example of environmental stewardship.

Then finally, West Vancouver, my home community. They have achieved, with great effort, the designation as a 2010 venue community because, of course, they'll be hosting the events up on Cypress Mountain, both the aerials and the snowboarding. We've had the wonderful opportunity to have two seasons of World Cup events there as well.

They received a Cultural Capital award from the federal government several years ago. They have a wonderful summer festival called Harmony Arts, which I've had the privilege of doing the opening remarks at for the last five years. They are really getting on the map.

They've had some significant opportunities, with some infrastructure, with their Eagle Lake filtration plant and with the blue bridge announcements. They'll be refurbishing the blue bridge at the entrance of the community. Of course, one of the things I'm proudest about is the opening of the new community centre, which is indeed becoming a focal centre in all of West Vancouver. We were able to contribute money through the atrium to form a Spirit Square. That is making a big difference in the communities.

But all this investment in community would not be possible without the power of a strong economy. Our budget reflects our intention to lead the province out of this downturn on an even stronger keel. With all this progress and development, the rate of which has likely been unprecedented — particularly, it's been accelerated by the hosting of the 2010 games — it undoubtedly creates challenges and the need for both perseverance and optimism.

I'd like to give a big thank-you to our residents and travellers for their patience for not months but years as the Sea to Sky Highway has been undergoing its much-needed safety upgrade. This highway links virtually all of the communities, and it is on the very last steps of being finished. It is absolutely — there are no other words that could describe it — spectacular.

There has been a buzz in the corridor for the last number of months, especially as the Eagleridge

[ Page 279 ]

Interchange was completed in the spring. It represents now an absolutely breathtaking entrance to the mountains and oceans of the corridor as you go north and an equally breathtaking glimpse of Vancouver and the city and Lions Gate Bridge as you travel around the corner at Horseshoe Bay and onto the Lions Gate Bridge.

The goal of that upgrade has been 30 percent less accidents for the almost 15,000 people that travel that highway daily — commuters, visitors, commercial vehicles. There have been, I believe, almost a hundred kilometres of additional lanes, rumble strips, medians — all of this making the trip safer and opening up economic development for the towns that dot the corridor.

This has been particularly important for Squamish, as I'd mentioned, as it's undergoing this transformation.

Despite the upsides of the growth, there continue to be major challenges — and we know that — such as the need for improved public transit; more affordable housing; the constant need for infrastructure upgrades in wastewater, diking, trails; and, of course, the ever-increasing need for social supports.

Despite these economic conditions, we will be working with communities to ensure that the most vulnerable are cared for and that communities can reach their goals. But no question, this cannot be achieved as quickly as we would all want and as we anticipated just a year ago, before the global economy began to collapse.

Our economic problems did not start in British Columbia or Canada, and they're not going to be totally solved here. You have now heard about the rapidity and the depth of the deterioration of our provincial economy. But not until the U.S. economy recovers will we be able to fully meet our potential.

That said, there's not a jurisdiction anywhere that is not envious of the economic opportunities that we have in hosting the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The opportunities that will come to British Columbia are a shot in the arm when we most need it, and the Sea to Sky corridor is beautifully positioned to take advantage of these opportunities. But we need to be proactive.

[1505]

Some of the opportunities spring from the early completion of the games venues. Communities in the Sea to Sky corridor have enjoyed the spinoff benefits of hosting these tests and World Cup championships over the last two years, not to speak of the potential for the future. Opportunities for volunteers, for those willing to open their homes for the VANOC homestay program, which provides tickets to the games as an incentive. All of you who still haven't done that, who may be watching and living in the corridor: remember, those opportunities still exist.

There are the publicity and the media stories, with billions watching us. This budget, in fact, sets aside a one-time investment of $39 million for tourism, to take advantage of the 2010 exposure. I think that the district of Squamish has also recently received a $750,000 legacy from VANOC, likely going to sports, youth and other legacies. In another opportunity, a legacy not for sport but for culture, is the spectacular Squamish Lil'wat Cultural Centre, which I have praised here in the House a number of times.

The first nations involvement and support was integral to B.C. being awarded the games. The four host first nations have been active in inviting aboriginal communities from around the world to visit Vancouver in 2010. Their pavilion downtown will be a showcase for their heritage and first nations culture, and the Squamish Lil'wat Cultural Centre, in Whistler, will also be a wonderful complement to that. At both ends of the corridor will you have the opportunity to see and revel in our heritage and culture.

The Lil'wat Nation and Squamish First Nation have received lasting legacies in the Sea to Sky corridor in the form of land and economic development opportunities. There are great examples in the historic legacy lands in the resort municipality of Whistler, in the Callaghan Valley and from the accommodation agreement for the Sea to Sky Highway.

First nations also played an integral role in bringing the Sea to Sky land and resource management plan, or LRMP, to completion recently. There have been years of work from community groups — from recreation, from business, from environmental, loggers, and so on — to produce a high-level land use plan that incorporated first nations interests and aspirations. It's produced eight new conservancies, Wild Spirit Places and designated places for economic development that most of us can largely agree on — an amazing feat.

I'm very pleased that the throne speech has committed to further strengthening of the new relationship with first nations. The negotiations did reach a breakthrough in the spring, with the possibility of the reconciliation act.

I think that the mutual consultation apparently does not support this framework at this time, but I wanted to mention today that I do not think that we should forget that that represents a legitimate attempt to enshrine a way in which we can move forward together, in land use planning and in resource revenue-sharing. I believe it's incumbent on us all to reach a path and reduce our reliance on litigation and adversarial relations, as well as to redress the past wrongdoings.

Our recent throne speech has also laid out our government's direction for economic recovery, to emerge from recession even stronger. The Globe and Mail editorial of August 27 judged it well. "It provides a welcome renewal of the Premier's commitment to fiscal and economic prudence." The editorial goes on to applaud our plan to harmonize the PST with the federal GST.

I'll read from this. "This is a brave move in the face of considerable, if ill-informed, opposition in a diffi-

[ Page 280 ]

cult time. But B.C.'s shift to a harmonized sales tax will confer clear benefits on the provincial economy, as well as the country at large. In following Ontario's lead on this matter, B.C. has set the stage for a truly national consumption tax that avoids penalizing business inputs."

We are engaged in a vigorous rollout of accelerated economic stimulus measures, with the assistance of our federal counterparts, all designed to keep people at work. So far 480 projects worth $3.4 billion have been announced. The goal is $14 billion, with 88,000 potential jobs at stake here.

The next stage that's detailed in our budget is a plan to move out of debt, a plan to return to balanced budgets in four years. As the same editorial points out: "With the throne speech, as well as next week's expected budget update, B.C. becomes the first Canadian government to lay out the concrete steps it intends to take to get its finances back in order. Everyone else ought to pay attention and follow suit."

[1510]

I support our approach to minimizing debt, not mortgaging our grandchildren, having them pay for services that they'll never have used. Deficit spending is against our grain, but in these exceptional times we've had no choice, even to protect core services. Elected on our track record to go through difficult economic times, no one said this was going to be easy.

We've been taking steps since last fall. For example, last November when we introduced our ten-point plan. Then in our February budget preparations we relied on the external panel of a dozen economists. All of us have been taken off guard with the magnitude of the impact on our revenues.

This, I must point out, is all unlike the NDP with their famous fudge-it budget in 1996, which actually involved some internal tinkering prior to the election, where they went so far — I think it was pointed out earlier today — as to overrule professional staff. But that said, we now have to play with the cards we've been dealt.

Our revenues have dropped like a stone. Since February almost $4 billion of projected revenues have evaporated from our three-year plan due to economy and global recession. Plus vital expenditures for things like firefighting and increased demand for social assistance have increased by over $500 million. So with protecting vital services and laying a foundation for economic recovery in mind, we now find ourselves in a deficit position of $2.8 billion for this year alone.

But let's keep this in perspective. Other provinces, like Ontario, are now looking, I think, at the levels of about $18 billion, and Alberta, which just about a year ago projected an $8 billion surplus, is now looking at almost a $7 billion deficit. That is a $15 billion swing in very short order, and it just shows you the volatility in a resource-based economy. And we must remember that resources are still the engine of our B.C. economy.

It has been said much lately that we've been through a process of identifying priorities and making difficult choices for this budget update, just as individual households have to do when money is decreasing and expenses are mounting.

These priorities are (1) increasing health care — and, I have to say, to the tune of 18 percent over the next three years to a whopping $15.8 billion, which is virtually double what we inherited in 2001; (2) at least holding the line on education skills training, which we're funding at record levels; and (3) increasing the services for the most vulnerable — for youngsters, for those on social assistance, for those with disabilities, lower-income families and those at risk.

For youngsters, we're investing $151 million to introduce full-day kindergarten over the next two years. We know that investing in youth development will pay dividends down the road. Contrary to what the opposition says, child poverty in B.C. is declining. I know I heard the member before me, the member for Surrey–Green Timbers, once again mention the famous LICO, the Stats Canada measure of child poverty, which Stats Canada — I would like to take a moment to explain to the House — themselves have gone to great pain and effort to make sure is not used as a measure of poverty.

It takes into account things like housing, which I know is an important thing. But it already discriminates against a market like British Columbia where we have the highest housing in the entire country. But most importantly, it does not take into account any of the tax policy measures that we have used to make sure that those at the lower end of the income scale are well looked after — things like the lowest taxes in the country, things like access to drugs through the Fair PharmaCare for those who are less well off, etc. The list goes on.

Through our tax policy we have made sure that the lower-income families are well taken care of. That particular definition does not take those policies into account, and I'd like to have that on the record.

For those in need of employment and social assistance programs, there is now $420 million additional over the next three years. We already committed in February to an additional…. I think it was over $300 million of social supports. And I might add that the MSP premiums, the HST and the carbon levy all have protection for those on the lower end of the income scale.

The rise in the threshold to $11,000 before provincial tax kicks in is also a welcome surprise in this budget update. It saves a family of two about $150 a year, but most importantly, it eliminates provincial personal tax for an additional 75,000 British Columbians. That brings the total to 325,000 British Columbians who pay no provincial tax at all.

For business, we're moving to harmonization, as we've all been talking about. It's an important step. It will make the economy more competitive, more attractive for

[ Page 281 ]

investment, lowering production costs and streamlining administration — $150 million in savings in compliance and $1.9 billion of savings in costs.

[1515]

As I have heard many times now, the mining community has been saying that it's the best news they've had in 18 months. It represents $140 million to the forestry industry alone.

Let me just tell you what Rick Jeffrey, who is President of the Coast Forest Products Association, said about that: "The harmonized sales tax is the biggest measure taken by the government to help turn the industry around. It will take the marginal effective tax rate from 26.4 percent to 15.7 percent, making the industry more competitive and more able to attract investment. It will put people back to work when the recovery comes."

When resource workers are back at work, our economy immediately becomes more robust. For small business specifically, this budget update provides two major steps. We are increasing the threshold to $500,000 on January 1, 2010, the highest in Canada, and it's a 150 percent increase from the $200,000 threshold in 2002. This is a savings of about $20 million annually.

Another great feature: no small business income tax by April 1, 2012. Having spent 30 years or more in the world of small business, these are wonderful measures, and they will contribute to a stronger, more competitive economy. And when this tax is fully implemented, this budget will provide over $400 million a year in income tax relief for individuals, families and small business.

To aid in keeping down the deficit — which, fortunately, will decline as the economy improves over the next three or four years — we are tightening expenditures. Let me reassure you. In February we aimed for $1.9 billion in savings across the system. Now we're looking at $3.4 billion over the three-year budget cycle — decreases in contracted professional services, travel costs, office expenses, advertising and discretionary grants.

In short, we're asking everyone in British Columbia — private and public sector workers, consumers, those in non-profit organizations, sporting groups, arts and culture groups, in fact, a cross-section of our populace — to understand that in these unprecedented times, we do have to make do with less, less than we've enjoyed in our recent boom times.

We are protecting the most vulnerable and the disadvantaged while we work our way out of this recession. We need to keep our eye on the ball and ensure that we do not drown in red ink on the backs of future generations — yours and my children and grandchildren.

This budget update sets out a fiscally prudent course for economic recovery. I support it and will do my best to help my constituents understand the wisdom of this approach and its long-term benefits. We were elected to manage the economy in tough times, and that's what we're doing.

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

J. Horgan: Hon. Speaker, at the outset, I want to congratulate you on your appointment as Assistant Deputy Speaker and advise those watching at home and those in the gallery that the Deputy Speaker who just left the chair was, in the previous Parliament, the minister responsible for child care. The member for North Island who just took the chair was the critic, on this side, responsible for child care.

I think that I speak for most people in this House when I say that both members, the member for Richmond East and the member for North Island, are shining examples of what we could do if we all decided to work together.

Regrettably, I'm not 30 seconds into this and the member for Mackenzie can't stop popping off. I look forward to 30 minutes of irrelevancies from that minister. Perhaps, during his infrequently lucid interjections, he might say something about Western Forest Products and the debacle in my constituency brought upon us by that certain member and his colleagues.

Nonetheless, I will go back to the measured and responsible comments I was hopeful that I could make today in the tone of the member for North Island and the member for Richmond East, both working together to bring decorum to this place.

I do think — and I'm quite serious when I say this, and I know members will agree on both sides — that the implementation of an Assistant Deputy Speaker from the opposition side provides all of us with an opportunity to have absolute confidence, as we should, that the Chair is truly impartial and doing their level best to ensure that the work that goes on this place is measured and reasonable and in the best interests of all British Columbians.

So hon. Assistant Deputy Speaker, it's good to have you there. Well done.

[1520]

I also want to say, before I get too far into my remarks, that the other day I made reference in this place to my oldest son Nathan going off to Germany to study. I referred to him as "my good son," which I have to say really disappointed my other son. So I want to say for the record that although my good son Nate is now on his way to Freiburg, Germany, my "gooder" son — and I want to stress that, my gooder son — Evan is still at home helping me pick up the heavy stuff that I can't lift by myself.

So Evan, thanks for being there, and I'm really happy that you're still at home, at least.

I am pleased and privileged, as always, to stand in this place and speak on behalf of the residents of Juan de Fuca. Members will know from the previous parliament that I am a passionate defender of my constituency's various and sundry activities, whether it be tourism, whether it be sport, whether it be the forest industry, which has been certainly brought to its knees over the past eight years by B.C. Liberal policies.

[ Page 282 ]

The fishing industry. Of course, Juan de Fuca, by its very name, speaks to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. For those in the gallery from outside of British Columbia, if you look that way, you're looking at the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and you're looking at, literally, the lifeblood of my constituency as the salmon come back and forth annually on their way back to where they came from, the San Juan River, A.M.R. Creek, Ayum Creek and various other small rivers and large rivers on the west coast of Vancouver Island.

It truly is a thrill to be here for a second term. The election campaign was a vigorous one. I had much help, whether it be volunteers like my campaign manager Bruce Fogg, John Lewinsky, who helped with voter contact, Sandy McLean. I could go on and on and on listing people. Bernice from Sooke, thank you very much.

I had two campaigns, really, and I'm sure members did as well. You had the campaign at home, where you have your loved ones and supporters ensuring that you're fortified with the appropriate vitamins and other foodstuffs to get you through the day, but I had all the people that came into the campaign office, whether they brought a loaf of bread that they had baked or brownies, which are a big favourite of mine, as people can see on the cameras….

It's the volunteers that are the lifeblood of an election campaign. All of us know that. We wouldn't be here were it not for our families, our friends and those who passionately believe that the work that takes place here is important and valuable, not just to our constituencies but to the people of British Columbia.

It is truly an honour to be here. I know my friend from Shuswap, who has just arrived — always delighted to have him. There are often lucid comments from him. In fact, we were at an event in my constituency of Sooke — as I go to the next portion of my comments that I wanted to make — of the T'Sou-ke Nation.

As a former Health Minister, we never had much in common, because everything I wanted, he said no to. But now that he has a new portfolio, aboriginal affairs, I'm hopeful that we can work very closely on a number of issues for the three first nations in my constituency: the Pacheenaht people in Port Renfrew, the T'Sou-ke Nation where the minister has visited in the community of Sooke, and also the Scia'new, or the Beecher Bay Band, in Metchosin — three bands in my community that are dynamic and aggressive in their desire to become an integral part of the economy and the community of south Vancouver Island.

And I know, I'm confident, that of all the ministers on that side I can rely on the Minister for Shuswap, the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, to listen to the concerns of the people in my riding and do everything he can to promote and accelerate their economic development and their cultural and spiritual lives.

Interjection.

J. Horgan: Yes, I can take that to the bank. Excellent. I can take that to the bank, just as I can take to the bank the commitment to just a minimalist approach to deficit financing that was announced in February. But I will get to those comments in a moment.

Before I do that, I want to talk a little bit about what redistribution of the electoral areas on Vancouver Island did for me and for my colleagues represented in this House. You will know, hon. Speaker, a representative from Vancouver Island, that when the ballots were counted on election night, there were very few votes for the government side, and there were an enormous number of votes for people on this side of the House.

There were a lot of votes in Juan de Fuca for this side of the House, not a lot of votes for the Juan de Fuca candidate that represented that side of the House, and that was duplicated in constituencies up and down Vancouver Island.

There's a very good reason for that, hon. Speaker, as you know well. Not at this moment, as you're being impartial, but on other occasions we've had opportunity to talk about the needs and values and hopes and aspirations of people on Vancouver Island and whether or not those are being reflected by the government of the day, the B.C. Liberal party.

[1525]

I think it's fairly clear, when you look at the results from May 12 of this year, that the people resident here, 750,000-odd folks, don't have a great deal of confidence that their issues, the important things that are going on here in the greater Victoria area…. Whether it be in the Cowichan Valley; Nanaimo; North Island; the Comox Valley, one of the rare beachheads for neoconservatism on Vancouver Island — by and large, the people that reside here are New Democrats.

I'm not suggesting for a minute that everybody that voted for me is a doctrinaire New Democrat. I don't think that for a minute, but I do think that the values of the people of Vancouver Island are best reflected by those who are currently sitting on this side of the House.

I also think, hon. Speaker, that were it not for what I believe to be a significant deception during the campaign with respect to what the true state of the books were in British Columbia, we would be sitting on that side of the House and those folks, very few of them, would be sitting on this side of the House.

We had a poll out today. I recognize that, you know, the election is now four years out. They won; we lost. I get that. I understand that. Were it not for the fact that the books appear to have been deceptive, I would have been quite happy to accept that.

In a democratic society, we have a day when people go to a polling place. They didn't come in large numbers this time, regrettably — not the numbers that we would have hoped for, not the Obama-type outcomes and turnouts. I know that.

[ Page 283 ]

I heard one of the members this morning, a member from Richmond, talking about democracy, and I was looking at the voter turnout in Richmond. For the record, I see the member for Richmond Centre. I don't want to besmirch the good folks that live on the flatlands on the other side of the water, but not a lot of people showed up to vote.

I'm wondering: why is that? Why didn't they show up in Richmond? Why did they show up in large numbers here on southern Vancouver Island — some 60 percent voter turnout?

Again, for those watching at home, that's not record-setting, but relative to other parts of British Columbia, that's a pretty high turnout.

It's also interesting, with that significantly large turnout here on southern Vancouver Island, that the majority of the votes went to people on this side of the House. I think if the government were paying attention — and it's regrettable that they rarely do that when we're talking about issues on Vancouver Island — they might want to modify some of their behaviour if they want to encourage people to support them in the future.

One of the issues that really resonated in my constituency — I touched upon it when my good friend from Mackenzie had an interjection earlier on in my remarks — was the issue of the Western Forest Products forest lands that were deleted from a tree farm licence in January of 2007. Now, I know, hon. Speaker, you'll indulge me taking a walk down memory lane because, of course, we hear about the 1990s every 15 minutes from speakers on that side of the House.

I don't want to go back 15 years. I just want to go back 15 months and talk about the impact of a government policy decision made without any consultation with people in my community, in fact, without any consultation with forest workers, without any consultation with small business or with anyone on Vancouver Island. Of course, it did have an impact on your constituency, the three tree farm licences on the Island that were dismantled by fiat by the former Minister of Forests, endorsed and reaffirmed by the current Minister of Forests but condemned, I should say, by the Auditor General — condemned as inappropriate and not in the public interest.

It's stuff like that that turned people away from the B.C. Liberal Party. It's stuff like that that turns Vancouver Islanders to this side of the House. I see my friend from Nanaimo–North Cowichan and my new colleague from Cowichan Valley, who represents the second half of my former constituency, in areas like Cobble Hill, Mill Bay and Shawnigan Lake.

The heart of forestry on Vancouver Island was ripped out by this government, ripped out, during the eight years from 2001 to 2009. It's interesting. When they introduced the HST, they said it would be a boon for the forest industry and input costs would be down. They completely ignored the fact that two of the largest equipment auctions in the history of British Columbia took place in 2007 and 2008, when the forest industry sold all of their equipment. Now we're being told, now we're supposed to believe it when the Minister of Finance says this will be good for forestry.

[1530]

Rick Jeffrey — noted New Democrat — who was referred to by my friend from Whistler just a moment ago, said: "This is great news. We'll go out and buy new stuff." Well, they just sold all their stuff — gave it away, fire sale prices, so that they could have some capital to get back to their shareholders to give to their employees.

Now somehow, even though we didn't hear about it until July, the single most important thing that we could do for the B.C. economy is take $1.9 billion out of consumers' pockets and transfer it to the corporate sector. A $1.9 billion tax shift is not in the interest of the people in my community — not the individuals, the working men and women who go to work every day, whether it be in the tourism sector or other service industries on south Vancouver Island.

Because there isn't a forest industry anymore — not here. There's not a mill that I'm aware of south of Cowichan Bay that's operating in this community, yet somehow the Minister of Finance and the Premier seem to think the single most important thing they could do to revitalize the economy is impose a $1.9 billion tax on consumers. What a joke.

I know that the members on that side of the House prefer to dwell in the 1990s, but let's just go back to last October. You'll remember we had just cancelled the fall sitting for the third consecutive year. The current Attorney General had said: "There's no business for the people of B.C. to discuss here in this Legislature. We're going to cancel the fall session."

Then the credit crisis came upon us. Banks were dropping like dominos, and all of a sudden the Premier said: "Well, we better come back and talk about something. I've got a ten-point plan." One of those ten points was to come back to this place. We're now down to nine points on the plan.

"So here we are, Mr. Premier. Tell us what we can do to revitalize the economy."

"Well, we're going to freeze ferry fares. In fact, we're going to reduce ferry fares for December. That's what we're going to do to spur economic development here on Vancouver Island. At the low shoulder season for B.C. Ferries, we're going to reduce the rates. That's going to turn the economy around." That was one of the remaining nine points.

Another point in the ten-point plan was to freeze assessments in a tubing real estate market. There's a good idea: "We'll keep them high as the prices go down."

We're down to seven points left, and I want to say…. I'm not going to go through the rest of the seven. Suffice it to say, none of those made any reference to what was

[ Page 284 ]

now, we understand, the single most important thing that the government could do.

That was in October. Ten points. I've given you three of them. One of them was to just show up here. Nothing about harmonizing sales taxes in October.

So what we were supposed to do…. We were supposed to come back here in February of 2009. "We'll table a budget. We'll debate that budget. It'll lay out the fiscal framework for the next three years." So said the government.

"But wait a minute. We're going to have a deficit this year." The Premier lost sleep over it. He lost sleep over it, and I felt terrible for the man — just felt terrible for him. We come back in January because we have to amend the balanced budget legislation.

So here we go. We had nothing to talk about in September. We're going to cancel the fall session, and then all of a sudden we come back for a ten-point stimulus package, which did not include a harmonized sales tax.

Then we've got to come back in January and amend the balanced budget legislation so that we could run a deficit for two years. Two years — that was the plan in January. The good managers on that side, the business people who knew how to manage the economy: "We're going to have a deficit for two years."

We're here in February. We hear from the current Minister of Finance: "The deficit will be $495 million. We will protect health care and education. Social services will be maintained. All is good. Everything is fine. We've turned the economy around. The ferry fares have stabilized everything. We reduced ferry fares. Everything is going to be great from this point on." That's what we heard in February.

Leading up to the election campaign, we continued to hear that, oh, everything was just great, that we were going to be fine. "Only two years of deficit financing will be the responsibility of this government. We're the good managers."

"Don't worry your little head, pretty lady," they said to the Leader of the Opposition. "We'll take care of everything. You have no experience. We're the only people that are capable of governing the province of British Columbia."

That's very dangerous. [Applause.] I hear the brown shirts clapping over there. It's very dangerous to democracy and the parliamentary process to have one side of the House thinking they are the only people that have the answers and solutions to the challenges of the 21st century. That is very, very dangerous.

[1535]

We live in a mixed economy. We all know that. We don't hear that in the bluster from members like the Minister of State for Mining, who thinks it's only business. If it were not for business, the economy would fail.

What do business people need? I see there are a few of them in the House — new members — and they're probably hearing me for the first time, thinking: "What's the deal with that guy? What's the member for Juan de Fuca talking about? He's making sense. We're not supposed to do that. Why isn't he reading the public affairs bureau speech that I was given to read?"

The member for Surrey-Panorama, welcome to this place. All of her friends left B.C. in the 1990s. I heard her read that. Yet the member for Kamloops–North Thompson arrived in the 1990s. He's happy to come here. He said: "I love B.C. I brought my family here because it's a great place." One side of the House: "Great to be here. I came in the 1990s. Man, I'm having a good time." Other side of the House: "All my friends left. They've abandoned us."

Well, let's talk about some of the facts. I know that the public affairs bureau doesn't have any of this on their radar, but if you compare GDP growth in the 1990s to GDP growth during the course of this government on that side of the House…. What was the growth in the 1990s? Some 2.9 percent. Gross domestic product increased on average 2.9 percent. They call it a self-imposed meltdown.

Interjection.

J. Horgan: Do you remember — the banker from Abbotsford over there — what was happening to the Asian economy in 1996-97? Any idea? I know what it was. Glen Clark took a plane trip over to Taiwan, and all of a sudden the economy of Asia collapsed. The NDP plan was to collapse the Asian economy in the 1990s. Commodity prices….

Interjection.

J. Horgan: Well, yeah, I'll see your conspiracy theory, and I'll raise you two more. Again, I'm very pleased that the member for Shuswap is here, because he is lucid, and he does have something interesting to say, unlike the member from Mackenzie. And then Abbotsford, my goodness…. I'm sorry. If this is entertaining people, please, just pay no attention to me. I'm just here reading facts out to the trained seals on that side of the House. I'm just reading facts out.

We've got 2.9 percent gross domestic product growth on average over the 1990s. What do you think? Any guesses on what the GDP growth has been, not counting the negative growth over the past 12 months in British Columbia? Let's ignore that for now, because I'd have to downgrade the GDP number I have in front of me. Let's just go from 2001 to 2008. What do you think? Member for Shuswap, give me a guess.

Interjection.

[ Page 285 ]

J. Horgan: Please phrase your answer in the form of a question. The answer is: what is 2.7 percent? That's less. I mean, I'm not the numbers guy. The member from Quilchena is the numbers guy. But check me if I'm wrong on this, hon. Speaker, and I know you will — 2.9 in the dismal decade of the 1990s and 2.7 by the rocket scientists from the Fraser Institute. How does that happen?

Let's talk about balanced budget legislation for a minute, because we've had a nice little twist with this budget. Now instead of having five deficit budgets in 12 years, we'll have seven deficit budgets. These are the good fiscal managers over there. Gold medal for the highest deficit in the history of British Columbia — B.C. Liberals.

Let's have a hand for the B.C. Liberals. Silver medal, second-highest deficit in the history of B.C. Who was it? B.C. Liberals. [Applause.] Let's hear it.

Bronze? Social Credit. Sorry. You might remember them. That's what you used to call yourselves — Social Credit. Gold, silver and bronze for the neo-cons on that side of the House.

I'm told that social democrats are not fit to govern in British Columbia. That's what we hear on that…. [Applause.] Yes, let's hear it. Let's hear it. Never again shall we have working, ordinary people helping to manage a mixed economy. Never again. Only the business class, supported by the editorialists at The Vancouver Sun. That's it. I'm sorry. Am I reading the PAB stuff? I said, yeah, editorial board of The Vancouver Sun , brought to you by.… I don't know how this stuff gets out.

We have a paper here called the Victoria Times Colonist. It has a contrary view to The Vancouver Sun and a contrary view to the member from Quilchena and our good buddy from Point Grey, the Premier, currently, of British Columbia.

This is what we see today in the Victoria Times Colonist . The headline on the editorial is: "A Question of Credibility."

[1540]

Oh my goodness. How did that get out? Somebody's going to lose their job over this. Somebody's going to lose their job.

It goes as follows. I'll just read the first two paragraphs. I know that members are scurrying to their Today's News on line so they can read it themselves. These are the first two paragraphs.

"Finance Minister" — who is named — "had a chance, when he unveiled his budget update, to explain to voters how the province's finances managed to fall so far so fast and why it took the government so long to notice.

"He failed, however, to provide the answers. In fact, he raised more questions. The result is a widening credibility gap between the government and the people it serves."

Interjections.

J. Horgan: Wow. I know.

I'd like to send you for some diagnostic services, Member for Shuswap, but they've been cut here in their most recent budget. Four thousand fewer….

Interjection.

J. Horgan: You're currently on Vancouver Island. If you need an MRI, you'd have to get in line with a whole bunch of other people, because there are going to be 4,000 fewer of them this year. This is the government that's protecting and preserving health care — 4,000 fewer MRIs on Vancouver Island, a record number.

I'm sorry. I don't have the public affairs bureau information at my disposal. Perhaps the member will send it over, and I can read the same speeches I've been hearing from the new members, like the member for Surrey-Panorama.

It's a travesty that the people on that side truly believe that they are the only people fit to govern in British Columbia. Give a clap if that's really what you think. I'm hopeful it's not.

As I said in my throne speech remarks earlier in the week, I truly believe and I know…. I have friends on that side of the House. Regrettably, my favourite Liberal happens to be the Minister of Energy, and I'm the Energy critic. That presents a problem. I have to poke him in the eye because that's my job.

The Queen pays me to be Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, and I have to find what's wrong with the plan. In the case of the energy plan, of course, it's very, very simple.

I do feel badly for my friend from Peace River South, because I do genuinely enjoy his company. I think he's a thoughtful fellow, and he has the best interests of his constituents at heart when he comes here every day. I'm quite genuine when I say this, and I know that my sincerity is renowned.

Nothing? I get nothing from that? An eyebrow from the former Minister of Health.

Interjection.

J. Horgan: I was talking about my sincerity being renowned.

An Hon. Member: It is.

J. Horgan: There you go.

Interjection.

J. Horgan: You paused for a moment. I'll take a breath and get a drink. Maybe you could heckle me for a minute.

Interjections.

[ Page 286 ]

J. Horgan: Thank you very much. There's no applause because there's rapt attention.

Again, people in the gallery, I really apologize for being interesting. I know that's not what you came in here for.

In any event, I am sincere when I say I have been listening to many of the new members, and of course, most of them are on this side. I've been listening to new members, and I do want to apologize to the member for Surrey-Panorama.

I only make reference to your speech because it did make reference to everyone fleeing the province in B.C.

Deputy Speaker: Through the Chair, Member.

J. Horgan: If you look at the population stats in the 1990s…. Again, don't take what public affairs sends you. Go to B.C. Stats and take a look. In 1998 there was a downturn, and the reason for that was that there was a recession. There was a recession here in British Columbia. Now, of course, it was caused because Glen Clark flew to China and said, "I want commodity prices to go into the tank," and it happens — just like that. That's the power of social democracy, according to the people on that side of the House.

Copper prices. I was talking to the Minister of State for Mining about this just a few moments ago, or earlier in the day. Copper prices in 1998, at the point where net migration took a hit, were 68 cents a pound — 68 cents a pound for copper in 1998.

Why would you explore? Why would you go looking if it's worth 68 cents a pound? It's $3 a pound right now, and these guys complain that commodity prices are in the tank. Give me a break.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: One moment, Member. One moment.

I'd like to remind all members that if they want to make comments, they have to be in their own seats — all members.

J. Horgan: Somebody's sitting in the wrong place. Must be me.

Back to the sincerity. I do believe that new members have come here with the best of intentions. This is an honourable job. I do have respect for those on the other side of the House.

[1545]

I understand that there are challenges in government. I worked in government. Not everything is easy. I get that. We get that on this side of the House, but what troubles me in these difficult times is this notion, as I said earlier, that only they have the answers. They have the keys to the kingdom. They are the only ones that can solve today's problems.

We heard from the Premier and we heard from the Minister of Finance that the single most important thing we could do is to tax consumers again — $1.9 billion. I've got my colleagues here, and I'll ask those on the other side. If this is the single most important thing we could do — and I've heard it a dozen times if I've heard it once — why didn't we talk about that in October, when the Premier commandeered the airwaves? He went to the public broadcasters, to the private broadcasters and said: "I must have air time to tell you about reducing ferry fares for a month in December."

Why didn't he say at that time: "The HST is our salvation"? As the editorial comments today, why didn't he explain the problem to the public? We're not stupid. The public isn't stupid. They don't like being taken for fools, however.

It's beyond credibility — as the editorial suggests, as my constituents have suggested — to say to the public after an election, when you've not talked about raising taxes by $1.9 billion and transferring those savings back to your financial supporters in the forest sector, which hasn't cut down a tree in my constituency in 24 months as a result of that Liberal government's forestry policies…. It's just inconceivable that nobody knew that the single most important thing we could do is to harmonize our taxes.

People shake their heads, and they say: "What's wrong with you people?" If that's the solution, why wouldn't you talk about it at the one time the public is focused on what goes on in this place — during an election campaign? Why wouldn't you go to the people and say: "We have a significant revenue challenge, and the solution is harmonizing the provincial sales tax with the federal GST"? That would be the truthful, responsible and reasonable thing to do.

I believe and I'm confident that British Columbians, if given the opportunity to weigh the issues, as they should and do during an election campaign, may well have passed judgment in favour of a harmonized sales tax. But when you tell them after the election, when you've announced a $2.8 billion deficit....

The Premier lost sleep over this. This was the big deal back in January — sleepless nights. I can see him pacing back and forth, back and forth in his home in Point Grey: "What am I going to do? A deficit. What could be worse than that?"

A deficit six times the one you promised. That's what could be worse than that, and that's what this government has delivered with this budget.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

J. Horgan: Am I done? How could that be possible? Thank you very much, hon. Speaker. I'm here all week.

Hon. G. Abbott: I want to thank the member for Juan de Fuca for warming up the crowd for me today here. I

[ Page 287 ]

have never seen 30 minutes pass more quickly than just occurred there. It's a challenge yet a delight to follow the member for Juan de Fuca.

I want to begin today by thanking my constituents for the opportunity to be a part of this assembly again. That is much appreciated. These are extraordinarily difficult times, extraordinarily challenging times, and I am very appreciative of the electors of Shuswap for again expressing confidence in me and allowing me the honour of being their representative in this chamber.

I also want to begin today by saying to a couple of very important people to me.... Actually, I have many important people. My wife is very important to me. My family is very important to me. I also wanted to thank my constituency assistants up in Salmon Arm, who have worked extraordinarily hard for me now for, probably, going on six or seven years.

They've done a great job up there. During my period as Health Minister, I know they carried an extraordinary load as constituency assistants, as I was often very, very busy with the challenges that go with that very difficult job. I know that all members of the Legislature appreciate their constituency assistants, but I especially wanted to thank Roxena Goodine and Holly Cowan for the great job they do for me up in Salmon Arm.

[1550]

I also today want to thank the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance has, at any given moment, an extraordinarily difficult job, but I must say that in the past year his job has been a very, very tough one. I want to thank him for the grace with which he conducts himself through these trying times.

He has been the brunt of much criticism. I would say that that criticism has ranged from inappropriate to at times shameful, but he has borne it, I think, with grace and with dignity, and I'm appreciative of that. He's had a tough job as the government has struggled to respond to what are unprecedented international economic conditions.

The opposition has said many things in the debate, and I won't respond to them all. Obviously, time wouldn't permit that. Most frequently, though, I have heard that somehow the Minister of Finance should have known in advance of all the fiscal challenges that B.C. has faced in the past year, especially in the months since the February budget.

I've heard that over and over again — that somehow he should have known prospectively, in advance, of the challenges that British Columbia would face after the delivery of the budget in February.

I would suggest that much of that criticism from the opposition members qualifies them for what has become a very large club in British Columbia, in Canada and in the world, and that is the retrospective crystal-ball club. That is people who can look into a crystal ball retrospectively and who can, based on that 20-20 hindsight, accurately predict the past. That's a talent, and I know the member for Juan de Fuca is proudly among the best of those retrospective crystal-ball club members.

There is also a smaller club in the world of economics these days, and certainly this is the age of the economist. It certainly isn't the age of the politician or the political scientists. This is the age of the economist. There's a smaller club, which I call the prospective crystal-ball club. That is people who prospectively, looking forward, look into their crystal ball and give some prediction about the future.

There is a third club, and this club is very, very small. It may not even have any members here in British Columbia or in Canada or in the western world. I call that the accurate prospective crystal-ball club. That is people who have looked out one month, two months, three months, four months, six months and accurately assessed where our province, our nation and the western world would be in relation to the economy. So that accurate prospective crystal-ball club is a very, very small club, indeed.

The recession that we have faced, beginning approximately in September of '08 and certainly extending through until today, has not been a made-in-B.C. recession. This is a recession that was international in character, and I'll talk a little bit more about that in a moment.

It is not, unlike the 1990s and particularly 1996, a made-in-B.C. recession. It is an international recession. I remember very clearly that even a year ago one of the major topics of conversation at that time was where we would find the human resources — and I was particularly concerned about health human resources — to meet the demands of a growing economy.

[1555]

That discussion came to a very rapid end, I must say, as a consequence first of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown in the United States. That appeared to be the triggering event for this episodic recession that we are in. It was the collapse of Lehman Brothers followed by the collapse of a number of other major financial institutions in the United States. It was followed by a crisis among banks not only in the United States but in many European jurisdictions as well.

Banks in Canada actually fared fairly well, but that was unusual. It was an international banking crisis, and it had a profound effect on economies in every jurisdiction across the world. Of course, the huge challenges that the banks faced produced a credit crisis which, in turn, produced many of the economic challenges that we live with today.

British Columbia is not alone in these challenges. There is not a jurisdiction in the western world, and perhaps not a jurisdiction in the entire world, that has not faced the economic challenges that started in the United States but that have visited every corner of the world, including Europe and Asia. Even places one would

[ Page 288 ]

think relatively remote from the U.S. sub-prime mortgage meltdown, like Iceland, suffered absolutely catastrophic economic consequences as a result of it. No one has been immune.

Interjection.

Hon. G. Abbott: I'm sorry, I'm concentrating on my speaking rather than my listening now, but no one has been immune from the impact of the recession of the past now going on 12 months. No one has been immune from it, and British Columbia has not been immune from it.

We know we're in a recession, but you would find a pretty small number of economists who were able to accurately assess the degree of impact, the depth of the recession or the length of the recession. Those are all challenging questions, which again, it seems to me, people have been somehow expecting an omniscient Finance Minister to know all these things when there was no one else on the face of the earth who was able to answer successfully and prospectively all of those three questions.

I think, in fact, the question might be framed this way. What's the shortest list in the world? Well, it's the list of economists who accurately predicted this recession, who accurately assessed the depth of it and who accurately assessed the length of it. There is no economist that I'm aware of that was able to accurately predict this. Yet somehow, members of the opposition continuously suggest that our Minister of Finance should somehow be able to magically know all of that.

There's a wonderful quote here. It's Bentley's second law of economics. Bentley's second law of economics is: "The only thing more dangerous than an economist is an amateur economist." Certainly this is the age of the amat