1996 Legislative Session: 1st Session, 36th 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)

TUESDAY, JULY 9, 1996

Afternoon

Volume 1, Number 13

[ Page 235 ]

The House met at 2:07 p.m.

Hon. G. Clark: Today we have some special guests in the members' gallery. His Excellency Anthony Goodenough is the newly appointed High Commissioner to Canada for the United Kingdom. The High Commissioner is visiting from Ottawa with his wife, Veronica Goodenough. They are accompanied, of course, by Brian Austin, the consul general of the United Kingdom in Vancouver. We had the privilege of having lunch with the Speaker and the House Leaders from both parties. I know that our relations continue to be very strong with the United Kingdom. I'd ask all members of the House to give them a very warm welcome to our Pacific province and to this House here today.

B. Penner: It is indeed my pleasure today to introduce to the House a person who's no stranger here but who perhaps is a stranger to sitting on the government side: Alec Macdonald, QC, who was the Attorney General for British Columbia from 1972 to 1975. In addition, he was a political science instructor at Simon Fraser University from the late 1980s until the present. In fact, a number of members of this House have had the distinct benefit and privilege of having him as their instructor, myself included. I would ask the House to please make Alec Macdonald welcome.

Hon. S. Hammell: Birgit Nielsen, a teacher who lives in Delta but is a member of greater Green Timbers, is in the gallery. She is here marking literature exams of our young people. Would the House please make her welcome.

G. Brewin: In the gallery today are two young people studying in Victoria. The first is Kimiko Hashizume, who is a Japanese exchange student. With her is Samba Diop, who is a PhD medical anthropology student from Mali, in West Africa. Would the House please make them both very welcome.

Hon. J. Cashore: Visiting in the gallery today are two very special friends, accompanied by my wife, Sharon. The friends are Beverly Redding and Dr. Ralph Redding. Ralph and I went to school together in L.A. -- that's Lethbridge, Alberta -- back in the ancient days of the fifties and the forties. Ralph, I should point out, is a year younger than me, and he's retired. But I'm here because I still have a lot to do. They are here from New Bern, North Carolina. Would the House please make them welcome.

R. Thorpe: It gives me great pleasure to introduce my very good friend from Summerland, Harry McWatters. Harry is a proud owner and partner of Sumac Ridge Estate Winery. On Thursday they will be celebrating their fifteenth anniversary. In addition, Harry has been a tireless worker on behalf of the entire British Columbia grape and wine industry. Tomorrow he will be named agricultural marketer of the year for North America, only the second time a Canadian has received that award in 77 years. Please welcome Harry McWatters to the House.

G. Wilson: Hon. Speaker, in the House today from Prince George is Mr. André Sharf. With him are some friends from Baltimore, Maryland, who are here to see how British Columbians allow democracy to proceed: Mr. David Gossard, Trish Gossard and Julie Gossard. Would the House please make our friends welcome.

G. Abbott: I'm very pleased to introduce some friends who are here in the gallery today. They're from Sicamous, my hometown. Sgt. Doug Haworth, in addition to being the sergeant in Sicamous, is also a hockey coach extraordinaire. He's here with his wife, Charmaine, and their children Darren and Kyle. I'd like the House to please make them welcome.

J. Doyle: Mr. Speaker, today from my hometown of Golden I have three very special guests and constituents: my good wife, Judy, and our two boys, Adam and William. Will the House make them welcome.

Ministerial Statement

DEATH OF PROVINCIAL

EMERGENCY PROGRAM VOLUNTEERS

Hon. U. Dosanjh: Hon. Speaker, I rise today on a very sad note. On Sunday, July 7, three volunteers of the provincial emergency program -- Richard Ayotte, Bill Bing and Richard Dendys -- died when their plane crashed while assisting in a search for a Piper Cherokee aircraft in the Nelson-Cranbrook area. The aircraft was successfully located; two of the three persons in that aircraft survived.

The provincial emergency program is the agency within the provincial government responsible for coordinating preparedness and response to civil disasters and emergencies. Under this program thousands of British Columbians volunteer their time each year for search and rescue and other activities. This tragic event underscores just how dangerous this public service can be. I ask the House to join me in expressing my sincere condolences to the families of Mr. Ayotte, Mr. Bing and Mr. Dendys.

G. Plant: This tragic event is a sad reminder to all of us that the beauty of this province is sometimes a wild and terrible beauty. I have long admired the bravery and the ability of those who volunteer their time for search and rescue activities across British Columbia. On behalf of the opposition, I, too, want to express my condolences to the families of Mr. Ayotte, Mr. Bing and Mr. Dendys.

J. Weisgerber: I request leave to respond to the ministerial statement.

Leave granted.

J. Weisgerber: I too want to join in paying tribute to the people of this province who perform the kind of volunteer activity that was the underlying event leading up to this tragedy. People around this rugged province, with wild terrain, often go out and risk their own lives in searching for others who are lost. It's important for us to recognize the contribution that these people make to our province, and to visitors and residents alike, and I certainly want to join the Attorney General and others in paying tribute to those folks who lost their lives so tragically.

[2:15]

G. Wilson: I seek leave to respond to the ministerial statement.

Leave granted.

[ Page 236 ]

G. Wilson: On behalf of the members of the Progressive Democratic Alliance, I also pass on condolences to the families and, in support of a unanimous message, would support the Speaker passing on our regrets to the families.

The Speaker: The Chair will undertake to do such a thing. I would ask the Attorney General if he would kindly deposit the particulars with the Table.

I believe there is a motion of privilege, is it, member for Delta South?

F. Gingell: Yes.

The Speaker: Pursuant to standing order 26, the member wishes to raise a matter of privilege. I would ask the House to please give its full attention to the comment. Pursuant again to the standing order, the member is allowed to make a brief statement outlining the case, and I would ask him to please do so.

Point of Privilege

F. Gingell: While points of privilege should be as brief as possible, I'm sure the Speaker will allow me the opportunity to lay out the grounds upon which a prima facie case can be made. I will be as brief as possible, given the complexity of the issues and the importance of the matter.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, the NDP have continually and without interruption claimed that they balanced the budget for 1995-96 and that with the 1996-97 budget, they had provided the province with a second consecutive balanced budget. From the recent admissions of the Premier and the Minister of Finance, it is now clear that these comments were false and misleading. They have thereby acted in breach of privilege -- or, more accurately, in contempt of this House.

I believe there is a prima facie case that a number of NDP MLAs, the former Minister of Finance and the present Minister of Finance have deliberately and wilfully misled this assembly. I have attached, Mr. Speaker, for your examination the comments of a variety of NDP MLAs, from the former Premier to a number of backbenchers. These Hansard transcripts reveal that, on over 60 separate occasions over the past year, NDP MLAs stood in this assembly and stated that the NDP had balanced the budget -- over 60 times.

These NDP MLAs did not say they will balance the budget; they did not say they would work to balance the budget; they did not say they will try to balance the budget. They said they did balance the budget; they said they had balanced the budget. They hadn't and they didn't.

Mr. Speaker, you will receive arguments from across the government side, I am sure, that the NDP MLAs simply didn't know that the budget wasn't going to be balanced until the Finance minister mentioned it casually to a journalist.

The Speaker: Member for Delta South, excuse me. I have a point of order, I believe, from the Government House Leader.

Hon. J. MacPhail: Hon. Speaker, I fully recognize the right of the hon. member to make a prima facie case. But there are rulings before you of previous Speakers of this House that clearly distinguish between argument and making a prima facie case. In fact, I think a record has been set by the statement that this hon. member has made. He's clearly into argument. I suggest that he table the documents he says he has and that we just get on with your examining whether they have a prima facie case.

The Speaker: I am going to entertain very briefly a counterpoint from the Opposition House Leader, but I am not about to entertain an elaborate procedural debate. So these will be the only two submissions.

G. Farrell-Collins: I just ask the Government House Leader to turn her attention, and perhaps her head, to the minister sitting beside her, for in 1988 the minister from Esquimalt made a 15-to-20-minute presentation in this House on a point of privilege which was nowhere near as lacking in argumentation or as outlined as the one by the member for Delta South. In addition, perhaps the Speaker and the Government House Leader could look at the 1991 presentation of the former member for New Westminster, challenging the former Premier on a prima facie case of privilege.

The Speaker: Thank you, members. I remind everybody that I am indeed familiar with precedents, including the 1993 one. I'm going to allow the member for Delta South to continue until such time as I am persuaded that he is no longer giving me the kind of evidence we need to make the adjudication regarding a prima facie case. However, at the point where we move into the realm of argument rather than of building the case for us to consider, then I will cut it off. Please continue, member for Delta South.

F. Gingell: I'm sure that the NDP MLAs simply didn't know that the budget wasn't going to be balanced until the Finance minister mentioned it casually to a journalist, just over a week ago, on Friday, June 28, 1996. I submit that these MLAs knew, or they ought to have known, that there was no balanced budget, and that their systematic and deliberate lies constitute contempt for this chamber.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, the 1995-96 fiscal year ended on March 31, 1996. Yet in April of this year the former Minister of Finance stood up in this assembly and said that the 1995-96 budget was in fact a surplus budget, and she then proceeded to introduce what she called the second consecutive balanced budget. I attach excerpts from the former minister's comments for your reference. These comments came after the fiscal year had ended. These comments came, I submit, after she received, or ought to have received, advice that forest revenues were down and that the budget was in fact in a deficit situation.

The NDP would have us believe that they didn't know their budget wasn't balanced until three months after the year had ended. This simply stretches this government's credibility to the snapping point. I believe there is ample evidence to show that the government keeps timely information about forest revenue receipts and forecasts. I submit that the Finance minister knew, or ought to have known, that the budget was not balanced and that she showed contempt for this House by deliberately misleading this House and the people of British Columbia.

The Speaker: Member, given that you have now stated what I think is the primary contention of your privilege motion, would you take your seat, please. I think I have heard enough. Again, working on the basis of precedent, the submission you make will also be a written statement to the

[ Page 237 ]

Chair, which will then be adjudicated and evaluated in some depth. I think I have indeed heard sufficient, and I would therefore ask the member to move whatever appropriate motion.

Interjection.

The Speaker: You cannot speak, member, to debate that ruling with me.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member, as I say, it seems to be the argument for a prima facie case that you have given.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Will you just table that motion, please, member. Thank you. The member tables a motion of privilege.

As is in keeping with the practice and the custom of this chamber, the Chair will reserve judgment until such time as we can review the case thoroughly and look at established precedents for doing so.

Hon. J. MacPhail: Hon. Speaker, I know you will be receiving the question of prima facie.... I would just reserve the comment that where the hon. member spilled over into argument, there be ample opportunity for us to address that -- provided, of course, that you rule to proceed, and we expect fully that there is no prima facie case presented at all.

Oral Questions

BUDGET ESTIMATES

AND POTENTIAL FOR LAWSUITS

G. Plant: My question is for the Attorney General. In the famous case of Keen Industries v. the B.C. Railway Company, a contractor successfully sued a Crown corporation for civil fraud. The contractor relied on the railway's estimates of quantities in the construction documents in preparing its bid. The railway was guilty of civil fraud because the railway did not honestly believe in its estimates.

We know now that the government knew that their forest revenue estimates were inflated. No one knowing all of the facts could have believed them to be true. My question for the Attorney General, the law officer of the Crown, is this: has his advice been sought as to whether any action might lie against the government in respect of the preparation of the budget estimates, and if so, what advice has he given?

Hon. U. Dosanjh: I'll take the question on notice and read up on the law that my friend alludes to.

The Speaker: Given that the question was taken on notice, there can be no supplemental. If this is a new question, please proceed.

G. Plant: My question is again for the Attorney General. These false revenue forecasts were made on the eve of an election in which the NDP told the people of British Columbia that it had balanced the budget, and that it had balanced it twice. British Columbians relied on this assurance in electing this government. The law is clear that a representation made recklessly, careless whether it be true or false, will found an action for civil fraud. My question is this: has the Attorney General made any inquiries in respect of this matter, and if so, what has he learned?

Hon. U. Dosanjh: Hon. Speaker, I took the previous question on notice. No, I have made no such inquiries.

PARTICIPATION OF PREMIER'S

DEPUTY MINISTER IN ELECTION CAMPAIGN

M. de Jong: Hon. Speaker, I heard the Minister of Education making comments. I hope he wasn't offering legal opinions, because he's not supposed to do that.

British Columbians continue to ask how the Finance ministry could adjust forestry revenue projections upward at a time when all of the indicators were moving in the opposite direction. The answer they're coming to focus on lies in the actions of Mr. Gunton, whose message on behalf of the Premier appears to have been: "Regardless of what the facts are, we're going to use figures that show a balanced budget. Come hell or high water, we're going to show a balanced budget, and we'll make up the figures to do that if we have to."

That's bad enough. But yesterday the Premier indicated and excused Mr. Gunton's involvement in the NDP campaign on the basis that he had taken a leave of absence. That's different from what we heard in May, when we were told that Mr. Gunton would only be campaigning after hours and on the weekends. My question to the Premier is very straightforward: was Mr. Gunton on a leave of absence, or was he not on a leave of absence and being paid by the people of British Columbia, to campaign on behalf of the NDP?

Hon. G. Clark: Actually, I want to refer, first of all, to a forecast. I was just looking at documentation here, and I noticed that when the Leader of the Opposition was mayor of Vancouver, he forecast 2,000 housing units a year. [Laughter.] Yet seven years later, only 1,000 units are built. I wonder whether our learned friend has asked for an inquiry into that forecasting error, hon. Speaker.

G. Plant: The people don't think it's a joke.

Hon. G. Clark: Yes, I know. A thousand units built when the promise was 14,000 isn't a joke, hon. member -- and that's the point.

The question from the member....

G. Farrell-Collins: Are you asking or are you answering?

Hon. G. Clark: This was question period the last time I looked. I will answer the member's question.

Mr. Gunton was not on a leave of absence. He worked from time to time on his own time, whether it was volunteer time for the government....

Interjections.

Hon. G. Clark: The last time I looked, it was a free country. We have individuals.... I noticed some former deputy ministers of previous administrations working on their own time for members of the Liberal Party, and I commend them for that, hon. Speaker.

[2:30]

[ Page 238 ]

M. de Jong: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I'm tempted to suggest that the Premier wants to have his cupcake and eat it too.

Mr. Gunton earns $120,000 as a senior civil servant. He gets that money to work for the people of British Columbia, not for the NDP. We already know that prior to and during the campaign, Mr. Gunton was making inquiries of the Finance ministry to obtain corporate tax information for partisan use by the Premier and the NDP campaign team. Maybe the Premier can explain this to the House and to the people of British Columbia: how much time did Mr. Gunton spend on the NDP campaign? Is he prepared to order his deputy to repay the people of British Columbia the in excess of $2,500 per week he was paid to do the people's business instead of the NDP's business?

Hon. G. Clark: Mr. Gunton was, and is, a deputy minister of this government. There was a transition team put in place for whoever became the leader of the NDP and therefore the Premier of the province. It consisted of seven deputy ministers. They worked on that transition entirely appropriately. Mr. Gunton held the position of Deputy Minister of Environment right through until recently, when he became a deputy minister in the Premier's Office.

STUDENT SUMMER EMPLOYMENT

C. Hansen: My question is to the Premier. In the budget speech we listened to a few days ago, there's an admission that a program called Opportunities '96, where there were supposed to be 3,500 jobs, has in fact only resulted in about 200 summer jobs for students.

There are statistics that have come out just in the last few days that show that instead of more jobs for students in this province, there were in fact 5,000 fewer jobs in June of this year compared to last year. We are now at a point where one in every five young British Columbians is unemployed this summer. Will the Premier apologize to the students of B.C. for raising their expectations for summer jobs, with no intention of delivering on these false promises?

Hon. G. Clark: It's hard for the opposition to look for negativity, but look at these numbers: 40 percent of all new jobs in Canada in the last 12 months were created right here in British Columbia. There was an increase in housing starts, in May over May, of 32.9 percent: record housing starts. Retail sales were up 4.5 percent -- the highest in Canada -- and 35,000 new residents a year moved to the lower mainland because of our quality of life and because of the record of this administration in promoting our quality of life in this region. We are doing well. We are doing better than anywhere else in Canada. The people know it; everybody knows it, except for the opposition members.

We have a challenge with youth unemployment -- I took the Ministry of Youth. We announced six programs, and four of them are exceeding the targets we laid out for them. Two of them are not as successful. The one the member refers to has no government subsidy. Where there's a subsidy to the private sector they've done very well; where there's not been a subsidy they have not done well. As a matter of fact, today I talked to representatives of the Business Council about working on Opportunities '96, because business has a role to play in providing opportunities and jobs for young people.

They have some corporate responsibility, and we want to work with them, as government, to try to create jobs in B.C.

C. Hansen: Quite frankly, thousands of students in this province are not going to be going back to school this fall. They can't afford it, because they can't get summer jobs, and they really couldn't care less about that kind of political rhetoric.

My supplemental is to the minister responsible for consumer services. Promises were made by this government for summer jobs under something called Guarantee for Youth. Given that that guarantee is not worth the paper it's written on and is only a program of deceptive advertising, will the minister responsible advise the youth of B.C. if there is any action they can take under the Consumer Protection Act when consumers are deliberately misled by phony guarantees? My question is to the Attorney General.

Hon. G. Clark: Firstly, unlike the opposition party that promised deep cuts to post-secondary education, which would result in huge tuition fee increases, we have increased funding for post-secondary institutions more than any other province in Canada. Secondly, we have frozen tuition fees. That's not rhetoric; that's action. We've frozen them for two years so that young people can get to university. Thirdly, the Guarantee for Youth is the largest, most comprehensive youth employment program in the history of British Columbia -- some $12 million. Combined with Youth Works and the new B.C.

Benefits initiative, we are doing more to create jobs and training for young people. Yes, we need to do more. But at least we're doing more, not less, like members opposite campaigned on.

The Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Quilchena on another supplemental?

C. Hansen: Yes, hon. Speaker. We know what the summer jobs program is. It's advertising, and nothing more.

To the Premier: if this summer jobs program is so successful, why is it that the unemployment rate for young British Columbians is up 3.2 percent? Why is it that there are 5,000 fewer jobs for students this summer, when there are in fact 20,000 additional students in this province? Frozen tuition rates don't help. Jobs are what will help students go back to school. It's a little late now to start the consultation with the private sector. What action will the Premier take to ensure that there are additional jobs available to the students this summer?

Hon. G. Clark: The answer is obvious to everybody except the opposition. It's your federal Liberal counterparts who are cutting funding for post-secondary institutions.

Interjections.

Hon. G. Clark: That's exactly right.

Interjections.

Hon. G. Clark: A Liberal's a Liberal, hon. Speaker, and I can hear them howling. But listen to this: every single major summer job program by the federal government has been cut in British Columbia. They have cut funding to post-secondary institutions. We know that's why they campaign on the same side, in favour of cuts.

Interjections.

Hon. G. Clark: Hon. Speaker, unfortunately, I'm finding myself raising my voice, which I had not intended to do. The facts are clear....

[ Page 239 ]

Interjections.

Hon. G. Clark: Let's see if they agree with these facts, Mr. Speaker. Would the opposition agree that hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts from the federal government for post-secondary institutions have taken place? The answer is yes. Would they agree that every summer job program from the federal government that used to exist has been cut in this province? Yes. Would they agree that the kinds of programs that we used to have in unemployment insurance for young people have been cut?

We're doing our part; they're not doing their part. Those members should support this administration, which has the most aggressive employment program for young people in the history of this province. They should get on board.

REVENUE FORECASTS FOR 1996-97 BUDGET

B. Penner: There are a number of questionable revenue projections contained in this year's new budget. The Finance minister appears to be counting on $214 million in revenue from B.C. Hydro; that would amount to a 70 percent increase from last year. That's without a rate increase, and at the same time that B.C. energy exports are dropping by almost half. I'm sure that the Finance minister has heard something about the $100 million problem at the W.A.C. Bennett Dam. How can the Minister of Finance continue to project a balanced budget when all of the facts point to a deficit?

Hon. A. Petter: The opposition continues to prove the point I have been making, which is that forecasting is an inexact science that looks forward. Changes take place, in that we have to adjust as we go along. The forecasts for this year's budget were determined by the previous Minister of Finance. They were introduced with this budget by me, satisfied that they still stood. We will continue to review them and make adjustments throughout the year. Perhaps the member, as a new member, isn't aware that this is an ongoing process. All governments go through this.

As forecasts change, revenues go up, revenues go down; expenses go up, expenses go down. The challenge of a government is to manage within those changes in order to achieve their objectives, and that's exactly what we intend to do.

Tabling Documents

Hon. J. Cashore: Hon. Speaker, I have the honour to present the annual reports of the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs for the years ending 1994 and 1995. I also have the honour to present the annual report of the British Columbia Treaty Commission for the year 1995-96.

Hon. U. Dosanjh: I have several reports to table: the B.C. liquor distribution branch annual report, 1994-95; the twenty-fourth annual report of the Criminal Injury Compensation Act of British Columbia, January 1 to December 31, 1995; the British Columbia Police Commission annual report, 1994-95; the Attorney General's annual report, 1994-95; the Legal Services Society annual report, 1994-95; and the office of the public trustee's year-end review, 1994-95.

The Speaker: Hon. members, I also have the honour to table the following documents: the annual report of the British Columbia Legislative Library for the year 1995; the third annual report of the information and privacy commissioner, covering the period April 1, 1995, to March 31, 1996; and the first annual report of the child, youth and family advocate, for the year 1995.

Petitions

J. Dalton: I have two petitions to present on behalf of constituents -- perhaps a little more timely than the Attorney General's reports.

The first petition requests this House to reinstate the previous regulations governing the adoption of infants and children. The second petition requests this House to amend all child-related legislation and charters to affirm the primacy of parental authority.

G. Abbott: I am pleased to table a petition in the House today from 38 of my constituents in the village of Chase. It reads:

"We the undersigned, being owners and residents of creekside properties and properties in subdivisions at risk of damage from flash flooding or high water, respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly in the province of British Columbia and the hon. Minister of Environment, Mr. Paul Ramsey, reactivate the B.C. riverbank protection assistance program."

This was dated at Chase on June 30, 1996.

Orders of the Day

Hon. J. MacPhail: I call budget debate.

Budget Debate

(continued)

[2:45]

J. Doyle: I am pleased today to rise and speak on the budget debate. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate you, as the member for Nanaimo, on your election as Speaker of this House. Congratulations also to the Deputy Speaker, the member for Victoria-Hillside, on the privileged position she has in this House.

I have been very honoured to represent Columbia River-Revelstoke since 1991. I'm very honoured once again to have been re-selected and re-elected to represent the people of Columbia River-Revelstoke. Earlier I introduced my family, who are here today in the galleries with us. All spouses and children of people in the chamber pay a big price, mostly in the absence of their spouse or family member who is on the people's business many, many times.

I would also like to thank our Premier for selecting me as one of the parliamentary secretaries. I am pleased and honoured to work with the Deputy Premier, the member from Prince Rupert, in that capacity.

On a personal note, I would like to mention a good friend of mine, Ken Petty, who lives in Golden. Ken is only 53 years of age, a former alderman who has worked hard for his community in many, many capacities. Ken, at the present time, is being thoroughly tested by a cancer. I admire your fight, and my prayers are with you at this time.

The constituency of Columbia River-Revelstoke is one of the largest in the province. We have five municipal governments, four school boards, six regional directors and four hospital boards. It takes four and a half hours by automobile to travel from one side of that riding to the other. It is also one of the most beautiful areas in the province.

I would like to spend some time looking back over the last four and a half years that I've been honoured to represent

[ Page 240 ]

that constituency in this Legislature. For instance, $15 million from the infrastructure program was announced by the Harcourt government at that time, in conjunction with the federal government. It was spent in the riding that I represent on many infrastructure projects, and it created lots of jobs and strengthened the economy and the infrastructure in the communities.

I'd like to spend some time travelling throughout the riding, starting in Revelstoke, which is one of the two cities in my riding. One of the first tests I had when I was elected four years ago was that Revelstoke had for many years watched the timber that grew in its back yard leaving that community to go to other parts of that province. One of the items I heard loud and clear when I was elected the MLA was that people in Revelstoke were fed up that the only time the timber stopped in Revelstoke was at the traffic light, on its way out of town to be processed somewhere else.

During the public hearings that we as government initiated into any transfer of tree farm licences, I was very pleased and proud to work as the MLA on behalf of the city of Revelstoke to make sure that that did not continue to happen. I was instrumental in working with the then Minister of Forests and the government to see that Revelstoke had the second community forest setup in the province of British Columbia. That has been a very profitable venture for the city of Revelstoke, in conjunction with the private sector.

I'd also like to mention that at that time the forestry critic on the Liberal side said: "Let's quit fooling around and transfer that timber out of town." I think it was to another community in my riding. But Revelstoke deserved its fair chance at processing jobs in Revelstoke.

I'm also very pleased to work with Revelstoke toward getting a community skills centre established. That is being built as we speak. Also, Revelstoke, which is a community of between 7,000 and 8,000 people, is one of the smallest communities to have a B.C. Transit system. That was set up in the last four years, and it's working very well to serve that community.

During the election in '91, I was approached by the parent-teacher advisory group in Revelstoke to see if I could assist them with improvements to the oldest school in Revelstoke, Mount Begbie Elementary. I was very pleased, of course, to have been elected and to have worked with the then Minister of Education to see if we could get improvements made to that school. That has happened, to the tune of $1.6 million, and the people in Revelstoke feel very good that the money has been found, at a time of tight money.

In Golden, which is my hometown, I have worked, and our government has worked, for the stabilization of the major employer -- the forest industry. New ownership took over that major employer in the last few months, which is the backbone of that town, and hopefully we will see stabilization for the workers and for the community.

Recently I was very pleased and honoured to have made an announcement on a small business wood sale for laid-off workers from a mill that had to close down, 20 miles west of Golden. There are going to be 63 jobs created out of that small business wood sale, and that will help to diversify the forest sector in the community of Golden.

Another item that is ongoing at this time, which I worked on in the last Legislature, is major improvement on the Trans-Canada Highway in Golden. That's to the tune of $4 million, and that work is ongoing as we speak.

The ski hill in Golden is one of the best in the province, the Whitetooth ski hill. I was instrumental in getting over $100,000 to assist them in enlarging and in making that a better hill for the many users, including my two little boys up in the galleries.

Golden also has a very fine 18-hole golf course, and I worked with the then Premier, Mr. Harcourt, to get moneys to pave the golf course road, which will make it better for local people and for the many people who visit Golden.

I also worked with the private sector -- in this case CP Rail -- and was instrumental in working with them to get $100,000 toward a large facility so the senior citizens in Golden could have a place to meet in. I'd like at this time to thank CP Rail for the moneys that they forwarded to the community of Golden to assist the seniors and our community.

In the last four years we have opened a new courthouse and a college facility in Golden. At this time I'd also like to make note of the former MLA, Duane Crandall, who also worked on that project at the time. So I was pleased to see them come to a conclusion in the last four years.

Golden is a community that doesn't have alternative energy. We don't have natural gas. Yet many of our valleys were dammed so other people could have cheap electricity. The government initiated an energy study for the whole Columbia Valley, and hopefully, out of that, Golden will possibly get a liquefied natural gas system in town to help with the cost of running your business, running your home, and also assist with air quality problems we sometimes have in the wintertime.

[W. Hartley in the chair.]

The small community of Field in Yoho National Park -- a community of about 110 homes and a small amount of commercial, but 38 miles east of Golden.... For many, many years they've had to produce their electricity by diesel generator. This is very, very expensive and, of course, not exactly the best thing for the environment anywhere -- including in a national park. At the present time final negotiations are ongoing to build a hydro line into Field. This is at a cost of roughly $3 million, and I'm pleased to have worked.... As part of the infrastructure moneys that I mentioned earlier, the community of Field will have the same access to hydro as most if not all areas in the province.

I also worked in the last year to make sure that Field would have the RCMP station; there was talk of that being closed. It is very important to the community of Field -- which is on the Trans-Canada Highway and is very busy in the summer and very trying in the winter, due to the lots of snow that we have -- to keep that police station open.

Also, there are moneys in the Ministry of Education's budget to build, in conjunction with community and other private sector developments, a new elementary school in Field.

The Windermere Valley and the Columbia Valley. I worked with the Ministry of Highways and we got a new $2 million bridge, which is very important for the community of Athalmer. Of course, it's the major road into the Panorama ski hill, which is a very, very big part of the economy in the Windermere Valley, and many people travel from Alberta, from other areas throughout British Columbia and from areas in the United States to spend their money at that facility.

We opened a new intermediate care facility in the community of Invermere, too -- $1.6 million. The community also raised $600,000. I commend the community, because they put their money where their mouth was in raising money for that

[ Page 241 ]

very-much-needed facility. I'm also working at the present time to get more money for additional beds for that facility as they're needed.

We opened a new high school with the then Minister of Education, Art Charbonneau. I was pleased to have him in for the opening of that new high school -- a $15 million project.

Continuing in the Windermere Valley, in the community of Radium -- one of the smaller municipalities in the province -- again, we have been able to retain the RCMP station in that community. It's a very, very busy place, especially in the summer months.

Another very important thing I've listened to the people in my constituency say.... There's a proposed complex to be built out in the Jumbo Pass, close to Invermere-Windermere. The people in the Columbia Valley and many other areas have said to me they do not want to see that project go ahead. I have listened to them and brought their concerns to the Premier and other ministers in this government.

The small community of Canal Flats -- just over 300 homes -- is mostly dependent on the forest sector. I've worked with them on improvements to their arena, and at this time -- this summer, as we're speaking -- there are major works going on in that community in the paving of roads.

Kimberley is one of the oldest cities and one of the oldest areas in my riding. It was founded about a hundred years ago. Actually, this year they're celebrating their 100th anniversary as a community. I was instrumental, first of all, in having the B.C. cabinet, about three or four years ago, have their first-ever meeting in the city of Kimberley.

To me, it was very, very important, if I was down here advocating on behalf of the city of Kimberley, for the cabinet to see that Kimberley, despite the fact that they have an employer presently -- the Sullivan mine -- that will be closing down in four years, is going to be there for the long term as a viable and healthy community. So I had the cabinet meet there. I'd like to thank the cabinet ministers who are in government today and the Premier at that time for taking me up on having that meeting in Kimberley.

I will be very, very pleased later on this month to participate in the major opening of a new dam and water system in the community of Kimberley. This is a total of $8 million -- very, very important as Kimberley turns from being a company town, if you want to call it that, to being more diversified in their economy. I'm pleased to have participated in bringing, out of that $8 million, $5 million to the city of Kimberley.

In 1983 Kimberley had a post-secondary education facility. It was closed down by the government of the day. If anybody in Kimberley wished a post-secondary education, they had to travel down to Cranbrook, which is 30 kilometres south. First of all, that hurt the dignity of the people in Kimberley in that they did not have that access to post-secondary education in Kimberley anymore. That's one of the first things I took up when I came down here in 1991 as the MLA for Columbia River-Revelstoke.

I was pleased, about a month ago, to participate in the grand opening of the new skills training centre in the community of Kimberley. It gives those people their pride back. Access to post-secondary education is right there at home, no matter what your age or your needs are, in that training facility.

A major road north of Kimberley, from Kimberley up to Wasa -- it's about 25 kilometres -- was always a problem for local people to travel and for the many, many tourists that come to Kimberley to ski or to golf on one of the finest golf courses in all of British Columbia, the Trickle Creek Golf Resort. We repaved that road to the tune of $3 million.

In another part of Kimberley -- it's part of the municipality but separated by about five or six kilometres -- is the community of Marysville. We did a major revitalisation throughout Marysville. The provincial government forwarded $700,000 to make that possible. We're working to assist Kimberley to diversify further. The McKim theatre is in the middle school in Kimberley and has had assistance from various government ministries to the tune of about $300,000 in order to get that beautiful old theatre revitalised to hold many functions.

I'm pleased to have worked in the old parliament and to continue to work in this parliament as an MLA and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Investment. We will work toward a fruitful result in placing a silicon plant in the city of Kimberley or around about the area. That would be 96 direct, good-paying jobs for the community of Kimberley as we look toward the mine closing down in the next four years.

I mentioned earlier that Kimberley is celebrating their 100th anniversary this year.

[3:00]

I would like to expand on the Kootenay-Columbia Basin area. I am very, very proud of what we have done in the past four years and of the forest renewal that we in this government initiated. It was announced in this building about three years ago. The chairman and chief executive officer of one of the major forest companies in the province commended our Premier -- Mr. Harcourt at that time -- and the government for having the foresight to look at something like forest renewal. So many of our communities and so much of our province depend on a healthy forest.

Four hundred million dollars per year is collected in additional stumpage from that publicly owned wood, and that is going to be plowed back into the forest to keep it healthy.

Of course, we must remember that the Liberal opposition voted against this very worthwhile project. Whatever their reason, they can answer for that. It's something that I think we're all very, very proud of now. It's up and running. Already some money has been invested, and I look forward to further investment out of that $400 million per year in the area that I represent.

There's something else I'm very pleased about that we as government have said. I mentioned publicly owned wood in our province. We are saying to anyone who wants access to that publicly owned wood that access would be tied to jobs. That's what it's all about. That wood belongs to all of us. If you want access to it, the person or the company that produces the most jobs will get the most access. We've watched in the province....

Of course, we do need wood mills to make 2-by-4s and other things, but it has broken my heart -- as an MLA over the last four years travelling in value-added, all-party legislative committees -- to see the amount of wood that leaves the area that I represent. It leaves the Nelson forest district and goes down to New Westminister, or worse still, leaves the province to have value added to it elsewhere. That is something that we in this government are saying we will not stand for. So if you want access to that wood, you produce the jobs.

I am very, very pleased also to have participated, with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Forests at that time, the member for Nelson-Creston, in the first value-added wood conference in the community of Creston. The second value-added wood conference was held in my riding, in the city of Revelstoke, last year. The third value-added conference

[ Page 242 ]

will be held in the member for Kootenay's riding, in Cranbrook, later this fall. We are saying to the people out there: "You can add value to the wood, and that will add jobs, and that will keep our communities healthy."

Another thing we're working on is that we looked into cleaning up our environment and getting the last squeal out of all that wood and waste that's left on the floor of the forest -- getting into cogeneration. I was very pleased that there was reference made yesterday by the member for Kootenay to the fact that we are looking. An announcement has been made that a cogeneration plant will be built at Skookumchuck, which will collect a lot of that waste and take care of the concerns that were raised -- especially of smaller mills, where they don't know what to do with that waste as we phase out the burners which are harmful to the environment.

Something that disturbs me is all the discussion we heard during the election and leading up to it about the minimum wage. I am very proud of the fact that British Columbia has the highest minimum wage in all of Canada. Nothing bothers me more than the fact that many people who work, let's say, in the restaurant business -- work in a restaurant -- can't afford to eat a meal in that same restaurant. The minimum wage has to be kept on track with the cost of inflation. I'm proud that it's $7 an hour. The opposition over there would like to freeze it.

Some Hon. Members: Shame!

J. Doyle: Yeah. I say to the opposition, Mr. Speaker, that if they feel that $7 an hour is just fine and they'd like to freeze it, I've got something to offer them. If they feel it's adequate -- the minimum wage at $7 -- I say to them: why don't they try living on it for a while? I figured out that an MLA in this House gets gross pay of $962 a week, roughly. Yet somebody working on minimum wage gets $280 a week, at 40 hours a week.

An Hon. Member: Give some of your pay away.

J. Doyle: So I would say to those many members over there, including the one who's speaking, that they should try living for at least three months or maybe a year on the minimum wage and just see how good it is. Of course, there won't be any of the benefits that they get as MLAs to do with health care, extended medical, all their items. There's none of that in the minimum wage. But that's just fine with them. Try living on it for a while. Try to say you put your money where your mouth is. From the 33 MLAs in the official opposition, I feel that would save us $1.5 million a year -- maybe that's all they're worth.

It also would help the Finance minister, to get more money into his coffers to balance the budget. So there you are, members across the floor.

Another item we hear a lot about across the floor is the fixed wage, as they call it, or the fair wage. Of course, the opposition are really opposed to those unions and those fixed wages and fair wages. I would like to say to them: do you think it's the people on the $7 an hour who buy the houses, the cars, travel and go out for meals with their family? It sure is not. It's those people who are on that fixed wage or fair wage, or the families that have a union wage in their home. That's the people who keep our economy going.

Now and then I go up to Banff with my family, which is 80 miles east of my community -- a beautiful area. But I will bet you that the people who work in those many businesses don't own homes in Banff. They can't even afford to dream about owning a home. Yet the people who live in the communities we represent and who earn a decent wage, they can buy homes. That's what keeps our economy viable. So I say to the opposition: I feel you're very wrong. I don't know who you think will keep your communities viable, if you feel that the minimum wage is too high or that we should not have people earning a decent union wage.

I'm also very proud of the fact that we, in the four years in government, have increased moneys every year -- at least to the cost of inflation -- towards education, K to 12. Also, we know that the official opposition totally forgot post-secondary education. They were very embarrassed when we reminded them of that; they totally forgot about it. But we didn't; we froze post-secondary education. Rich people out there can always afford to send their children and youth to post-secondary education out there. But poor family members or average working families sometimes cannot afford it.

So we froze -- and I'm proud to be part of the government for just that reason alone, plus many dozens of other reasons -- post-secondary education tuition fees.

Health care. I'm also very, very pleased that we have the best health care in all of Canada. That's one-tier health care, not two-tier like the opposition talked about. Nothing made me feel better on election night than to see that the would-be Health minister from Kamloops did not win a seat in this Legislature.

The Liberals speak about health care; they're all over the map on health care. It was funny to hear one of the members of the Liberal opposition speaking the other day about a waiting list for heart transplants. That is something we're all concerned about. But I would say that none of those people over there will need a heart transplant, because they don't have a heart. We as government are doing our best, and we have shortened the waiting lists for medical procedures in the province. We have done our best despite the massive cutbacks from Ottawa, to the tune of $435 million this year and over $800 million next year. Yet they don't say a word about that: that's okay.

Another thing I'm very, very proud of as the MLA from the Kootenays is the Columbia Basin Trust. When we were in opposition, before the election of '91, we said that we would take care of the rape that happened 30 or 35 years ago when our valleys were flooded. We lost timber; we lost communities; people lost their homes. That was a terrible thing that happened. We said we would do something during the last term of government, and we did. We promised to deliver on the Columbia Basin Trust; we did. Again, the official opposition is all over the map. They have four or five different ways of spending that money.

I'm very pleased that the people in the Columbia Basin area elected four New Democratic MLAs -- continued to do that -- based on good delivery of the Columbia Basin Trust.

I am proud of the fact that we in British Columbia have the strongest economy and the lowest debt per capita of all the provinces in Canada.

In the throne speech some weeks ago, mention was made by the Lieutenant-Governor, delivering the speech on behalf of the government, of the fact that the government would look into the Workers Compensation Board and that a royal commission will be set up. I am very pleased about that because the WCB, by and large, is not working now. I think we would all agree on that. This is good news for injured workers, for each and every British Columbian -- this royal commission that will be held to look into the Workers Compensation Board.

Another item that was promised in that throne speech was a Crown corporations committee, chaired by a member of

[ Page 243 ]

the opposition. There's no doubt, we all know, that Crown corporations must be accountable to the government and to the taxpayer. That's very, very important. This is a very timely and worthwhile committee, and I wish it the best as it goes about its deliberations.

Mr. Speaker, I've had discussions with our Premier. As we know, some weeks ago he was off at a Premiers' conference, letting people know that British Columbia is there. It's not part of the colonies anymore. We're here; we're the fastest-growing province in all of Canada. Something that I spoke to the Premier about, which I mentioned earlier, was in reference to the infrastructure program we've had over the last four years. It worked well in my constituency and in our province. For a future infrastructure program, what I would like to see....

I think it was the Mulroney government that talked about it some years ago but, of course, didn't deliver. There are some Mulroney Tories over on the other side of the floor, now disguising themselves as Liberals, the party of convenience. But I would like to see a future infrastructure program when it is set up, all being well, look at our highways system.

Nothing needs more attention than the Trans-Canada Highway in areas close to Golden, such as the Kicking Horse canyon -- areas that I share with the hon. member for Shuswap -- or Three Valley Gap just west of Revelstoke -- and further four-laning of the highways in general, but most of all our Trans-Canada Highway that serves us all from coast to coast. So I would like the federal government in Ottawa to stop off-loading for a little while and send some money back to British Columbia instead of just a one-way road as we've had now for many, many years.

Mr. Speaker, I've been very pleased to have had the opportunity to speak today in this debate.

Hon. J. MacPhail: I am going to be very brief today. I have thoroughly enjoyed the inaugural speeches from both sides of the chamber. They have been informative and, I must say, with the greatest of respect to the classes of '86 and '91, the class of '96 is exemplary in its skill and diversity with which we enter this House.

I am very pleased that amongst us on both sides of the chamber today there are more women, more people of colour and more people with diverse backgrounds than has ever existed in this chamber before, and that's wonderful news for all of British Columbia. I must say, hon. Speaker, that the range of people who sit in your chair -- from the short to the tall -- is a wonderful example of the diversity of this chamber as well.

I am very pleased to rise today and to fully support one of the best budgets ever introduced in this chamber, in the history of this chamber. In this budget we've got tax cuts for B.C. families and small business. Small business has been asking for tax cuts for ages and ages, and this government has delivered on those tax cuts.

Unlike other promises made by various political parties, we delivered a very realistic tax cut for working and middle-class families in this province, one that will make a difference to their spending and their ability to raise their family, and one that makes it absolutely, eminently reasonable that we have a balanced budget for '96-97. That's good news for British Columbians.

[3:15]

There are other issues that we have made about good government that are very sensitive for some people in this chamber. We are taking on a comprehensive review of all government programs. Now, that's hard work. Everyone in this Legislature knows how hard that is, because the services delivered to British Columbians by public employees are, by and large, essential, necessary and affordable, and they make our communities better -- something the opposition party has never understood about the public service. All they do is attack, attack, attack the people who work each and every day on behalf of British Columbians. And I say shame on them.

However, there is always room for improvement. We know that. Those of us who have good, solid experience in governing know that each and every day we can examine our own horse... house....

Interjections.

Hon. J. MacPhail: And our horse -- and keep our house in order and make sure that we are efficient and effective, and that we deliver our services in a fair way throughout the province. Our government has made a commitment to do that review quickly, and to implement what we find in that review.

Just a couple of other things. I think my colleagues on this side of the House have made these points very effectively, and I am very impressed with all of the speeches made by my government colleagues. But we are protecting health care and education, and Budget '96 is all about protecting health care and education.

I must tell you that it would be a sorry day in British Columbia if the Liberal Party were elected. It would be a sorry day for health care and education, because you know what they promised in terms of protecting health care and education? They promised $1.4 billion in cuts -- for protecting health care and education. Call me crazy, but I don't know how you do that. I have no idea, but you know what? That's not surprising, because this is the same party that forgot about post-secondary education in their economic plan. "Oops! Oops! Post-secondary education. We're sorry, we forgot about it. But trust us.

We plan on doing something about post-secondary education. We're not sure what it is; it's got something to do with K to 12. But trust us. We forgot; we're sorry."

But what's $1.4 billion in a budget? It's nothing to them, and everything to us on this side of the chamber. We believe in post-secondary education regardless of your source of income or your family background. We protected education. For the very first time in British Columbia's history, any student who meets the academic mark will have access to post-secondary education, and tuition fees are frozen. That's the best news for young people in this province that you could ever imagine.

Also in this budget: jobs -- a top priority, not like the other side that brings doom and gloom. No matter who they talk to, they bring doom and gloom to the well-being of the economy of this province. Shame on them! This is the best economy in North America, and what do they say? "Eeeuww! It's just terrible! And you know what? We may not be able to bring a better economic stance to this province." If they were in charge, that's true; it would be a disaster. Thank God a New Democrat government was elected.

Anyway, I'm going to be brief in my inaugural speech, and I'm going to try to be non-partisan as well. I really must say that in my constituency, where I've had my home for a dozen years, every day I grow to love my neighbours more and more, because Vancouver-Hastings becomes more diverse as the population expands. People from all over the world come and live in Vancouver-Hastings. It's wonderful. There are working families, middle-class families. There are people who live at the poverty line, and there are single moms

[ Page 244 ]

and students. There's a high proportion of aboriginal families living in my constituency. I would argue that it's one of the most diverse and wonderful constituencies in the entire province, if not in Canada -- if not in North America. I miss the former member for Okanagan-Boundary, who used to extol the virtues of our province throughout the continent. So it's in his honour that I do that.

It's a very wonderful constituency, and you know what? Our government delivered for each and every one of my constituents, and that makes me very proud. I campaigned on the record of the government under former Premier Harcourt, and I campaigned on the basis of the wonderful initiatives that our government, under our new Premier, Glen Clark, put forward. My constituents said yes to an NDP government.

But do you know what happened? Something strange happened: on May 28 the candidates for the Liberal Party took on a big transformation. All of a sudden they became the defenders of British Columbia. Prior to May 28, it was: "Cut, cut, cut for middle-class and working families, and give it away to the corporations and the banks." That's what it was pre-May 28. I haven't heard any of that stuff. What I'm hearing from the opposition now is: "Spend, spend, spend." It's a transformation.

It must be a religious transformation or something, because never once did any one of those opposition MLAs defend their own constituents in terms of protecting health care, education and our economy, and of creating jobs. All they did was follow the leader, who was in the back pocket of the corporations and the banks. That's all they did.

Anyway, do you know what, hon. Speaker? I welcome the transformation.

I look forward to working with every member in this chamber to make sure that education is protected, that health care is protected, that our economy grows stronger every day, that jobs are our number one priority and that we all work together to make sure that the Liberals in Ottawa treat British Columbians fairly and without discrimination, whether it be social program funding, whether it be the protection of our fishing industry, whether it be the protection of our environment or whether it be fairness and equity in matters of the distribution of powers.

I look forward to the transformation continuing for the opposition members to join us in defending British Columbia against the Ottawa Liberals. That's the best news for my constituents that they could possibly hear.

I know there are many, many more people that want to make their initial comments, and I want to sit down and welcome their comments. I must say, over and above everything, that I really, really am pleased about the transformation that occurred post-May 28 upon the election of a New Democratic government.

Deputy Speaker: I thank the Minister of Health and now recognize the member for Surrey-Cloverdale.

B. McKinnon: Thank you, hon. Speaker. First of all, I was going to congratulate you on your new appointment, but if you'll just pass that on to the hon. member for Nanaimo, I know he will fulfil his position with integrity.

I would like to congratulate all the MLAs on their victories in the recent election. I look forward to working with each and every one of you. I know we will have some lively debates in this House in the next few years.

Coming into this House for the first time fills one with awe and reinforces my feelings of privilege in representing the people of Surrey-Cloverdale. They have given me the privilege of representing them here in Victoria. I will work very hard on their behalf, and I intend to vigorously pursue the interests of my constituents and the people of this province.

My riding of Surrey-Cloverdale is predominantly small business and farming. We are also experiencing tremendous growth in all areas of this riding. We offer a community lifestyle to which families are increasingly attracted.

You could say, Mr. Speaker, that Cloverdale is where Surrey was born. Cloverdale was the original seat of the municipal government and remained so until well past the middle of this century. We are also home to the world famous Cloverdale Rodeo, second only to the Calgary Stampede. Cowboys come from all over the United States and Canada to take part and compete in this rodeo. We are also home to the Cloverdale Raceway, one of Canada's premier standardbred racing tracks.

The people who live in this riding are of a true multicultural mix. We have many ethnic groups, each bringing its own uniqueness and richness to our community.

A majority of the farmland in our constituency is below sea level, with two rivers that also run through this farmland. In order to control the flooding of our farmland, we have a series of dikes, which are controlled and operated by three diking districts. The diking commissioners are all local constituents. Its operation is a fine example of democracy in action.

Farming is very prevalent in my constituency. Most of the farms are about the size of 20 acres, and most of the farming is mixed vegetables and fruit. The lower mainland is well known for being the blueberry capital of North America.

It's not always easy to mix farming with increased urbanization. This creates a challenge for reasonable and sensible planning. When people complain about the smell of manure when it's spread on the fields in spring, the farmer reminds us it is the sweet smell of money. That is not to say that we do not have the occasional serious problem. When farming becomes high-tech, it can go beyond what many of us would accept as a reasonable compromise. I refer specifically to the composting operation of Money's Mushrooms in my riding. I accept that they represent a valuable industry, but continued composting within the urban area has simply become so intolerable that government action is mandatory.

Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to know where to begin to tell you what this government's broken promises are doing to my constituency, which has been neglected for so long. I will begin by refreshing the memory of this House and will start at a time when this government was first elected.

One of the first things this government did when they came to power was close the B.C. Transportation Museum and sell many of the priceless vehicles that represented part of our heritage. We were just beginning to put together a combined transportation museum, which would have included a rail museum, a flight museum and eventually the Surrey Museum, all in one location. This unique museum was poised to become a major attraction, which not only would have become self-sufficient if properly run but would have generated untold income to the people of this constituency.

If the closure of the museum was truly directed to saving money for the taxpayers of this province and was part of a coherent economic plan, then perhaps I would not complain. Of course, we all know that there was no coherent plan, and this government went on to waste taxpayers' money on an unbelievable scale.

[ Page 245 ]

[3:30]

It depresses me when I reflect upon the management of this government over the past five years. I can only hope that they have learned some hard lessons and will embark upon a plan of action that rewards the individual with less government interference and lower taxes, because this downward spiral of tax and spend is a recipe for disaster.

In my constituency right now we are trying to figure out how we can expect our children to compete in today's society if we are not prepared to give them the tools they need. We have the Surrey school district, in the fastest-growing area in this province, that still remains seventy-fifth out of 75 in student funding. It is time for this government to put the students first and give our children the education they deserve. In my constituency alone, this government has backed away from their commitment to build the Cloverdale technical university.

This technical university is badly needed in the lower Fraser Valley. Not only would it benefit our students but it would also bring life back into the economy of this riding. The spinoffs that would be created by this university would create many jobs -- permanent jobs -- that are badly needed. They have backed away from building the Clayton secondary school. Lord Tweedsmuir School in Cloverdale is overextended in portables. Where are we going to put the students? Is this government planning to have two-storey portables to solve our problems? We need this school, as we need the Fraser Heights elementary school.

Our population demands it. If we don't begin building the schools we need now, we will never catch up with the backlog, and that means that our students are going to suffer.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

This government is not fulfilling the basic needs of this province. They are also holding back on building a 55-bed extension to Zion Park Manor extended care, a facility that is very much needed with this aging population.

This government has given its reason for placing all of these projects on hold as the sorry state of the economy. But the sorry state of the economy is a direct result of their mismanagement. One day the budget has a surplus, and the next day it has a large deficit. My constituents do a much better job at managing their finances than this government does.

We have such compelling projects as putting a traffic light at the intersection of 168th Avenue and Highway 10, which is a provincial highway. It has bumper-to-bumper traffic, but it has not even been considered at any time in this government's budget. This intersection clearly represents a danger to the motoring public. There have been many serious accidents at this intersection. Now is the time for this government to take action. Or do we have to wait until someone is killed before any action is taken? Who will take the responsibility then? The provincial highways in my riding are in such terrible shape because they have been continually neglected over the years.

Even with all our problems and needs, Surrey-Cloverdale is a wonderful place to live and bring up one's family. Surrey is a beautiful city of parks, and my constituency is proud of these many beautiful parks. Surrey Bend was just acquired by the city of Surrey with the help of this government. I applaud the government for their financial assistance so that this highly sensitive area was not destroyed for the sake of industry.

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that I have told you more than you ever wanted to know about my constituency, but I am committed to representing my constituents to the best of my ability, and to reflecting their needs and concerns. I hope this government will begin to really listen to the people of this province, not just when it suits them and not just in their own ridings. I hope they will begin to deal with the real issues and concerns with fairness and integrity. It's not really much to ask of anyone.

K. Krueger: Mr. Speaker, as many of my colleagues have said, it is indeed an honour and a privilege to stand in this beautiful room to represent our constituents. Of course, my constituents are in the beautiful riding of Kamloops-North Thompson. Most people in this room have visited Kamloops, I would conjecture. You know how warm Kamloops is in the summer: if you see a Kamloops coyote chasing a Kamloops rabbit on a July day, they're probably both walking. It's a hot place. It's a place that's supposed to have a cancer clinic right now, but it doesn't. But before we get into that sort of thing, I should continue my congratulations.

I would like to congratulate all the MLAs of this Legislature who, like every member of the B.C. Liberal Party who was elected, ran on a platform of truth -- a platform of who we are, what we've done and what we intend to do -- and ran with the intention to come here to work. That's why I'm here, and that's why the people of Kamloops-North Thompson sent me here: to work. I miss my family, and my family misses me. I didn't really want to live apart from them, but they agreed to this sacrifice because it's a job that needs to be done.

There is much work to be done, and we in the B.C. Liberal Party know how to do it. We laid out the plan to the electorate of British Columbia as to how we would do that, and more of them voted for our plan than for any other plan that was offered. We had a plan, and we still do, to eliminate deficits forthwith and cut debt and taxes while fully funding -- and, indeed, increasing funding for -- the things that are the most important to British Columbians: public health care, public education and public safety. We showed how we could do it; our plan was audited. The people of British Columbia believe in it, they believe in us, and we're still here to work to those goals.

It's possible to do these things. We can show the government how to provide good management in British Columbia and get things done. I'd be the last to ever say that the New Democratic Party does not have good ideas, because they do have some good ideas. I worked for the Insurance Corporation of B.C. for 21 years. I think ICBC is a good idea. I don't think some of the things that were done to it recently were good ideas, but we'll talk about that a bit later.

The traffic safety initiatives that the government announced some time ago are good ideas, but nothing much has happened. Why is that? As always, the NDP have some good ideas, but they are terrible at implementation and management and terrible at delivery of results.

Rather than cause another election imminently, which would be easy for us.... We will have many opportunities. You're never going to last five years, as a number of the members opposite have optimistically said. Rather than imminently bringing on that election, we want to work. We will try to work with you, and that's what we talk about in our caucus meetings: how to provide good government to British Columbia.

What sort of work am I talking about? What sort of work needs to be done? You've heard a lot about it from a number of our colleagues on both sides of the House. One of the things I hope people have been listening to, and I'm not confident they are....

[ Page 246 ]

I see a cabinet minister opposite talking to his colleague, who is also a cabinet minister. I seldom see cabinet ministers paying any attention to anything that's being said over here, and most notably.... Pardon me, Mr. Speaker. You've admonished us not to use names and I don't always remember where these people are from, but the pixie who spoke a little while ago....

Interjections.

K. Krueger: I'll withdraw that.

The Speaker: The member for Cowichan-Ladysmith on a point of order.

J. Pullinger: That reference is derogatory and completely unacceptable to this House, and I would ask that member to withdraw it and apologize to the minister to whom it's directed.

K. Krueger: I withdraw the remark, and if it was offensive, I apologize.

The Speaker: Thank you, member. Proceed.

K. Krueger: The member for Vancouver-Hastings seldom pays attention, and often turns around and speaks to other people in the House. I would like to know that the government is listening to us, because we were sent here to represent our constituents. The government has made a major point of saying that it wants to hear from the people, that it's listening to the people. We represent more of the people than the NDP does, and we would like them to listen to us.

One of the issues from my constituency that I'd like to see worked on is known as the Blue River bug-kill. There's a major amount of dead standing timber north of Blue River. Estimates are that it is between 50 and 60 miles wide and is 150 to 160 miles long. This timber has been killed by bugs, and it needs to be harvested. When it isn't harvested, it gets drier and drier. It's a forest fire hazard, and one day it's liable to burn, and the jobs that could have flowed from that timber will be gone. People are very concerned about that, but people can't get permits to work in the forests in the Blue River area.

The Forest Practices Code is so complex and convoluted and requires so much administration that people in forestry say that you have to be a paralegal working for Forestry to even know how to interpret it. They're frightened of interpreting and administering it. It's very difficult for the people within forestry, let alone the small operators who would like to work in those areas.

There is a group of people in a little community called Vavenby in my constituency, and those people have sent me a petition saying that they're on welfare because they're not allowed to work in the bush. They can't manoeuvre around the Forest Practices Code. They need help getting by the horrendous bureaucracy imposed on them by the NDP.

The Forest Practices Code has not generated much employment in our constituency, although our constituency, like many others that have been discussed in this House in the last two weeks, sends a great deal of wealth down to Victoria. We've heard from the member for Peace River North, the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and our own member for Prince George-Omineca, and we've heard from the member for Columbia River-Revelstoke just this afternoon, all with the same complaint: that the wealth is drawn out of our constituencies and brought down here, and then disappears and doesn't come back.

People have to come to Victoria, cap in hand, to try to get a program, to try to get a little bit of infrastructure, to try to get something done locally. Our platform dealt with the forest renewal plan and making it work -- making sure that local people had the opportunity to decide how that money would be spent to generate jobs in their own constituencies. We'd like to see that happen. It could happen. Things could be made to work a whole lot more efficiently.

There are hourly equipment operators throughout my constituency -- people who used to be employed during the summer in building and upgrading secondary roads. Since the NDP came to power, those people haven't had any work, and they're losing their equipment and their businesses. They don't have the income they used to have, and they are ending up on welfare. I want to work on that problem.

The people of Clearwater, and indeed the North Thompson Valley, were promised a health care facility by the NDP MLA who preceded me as representative of this constituency and by Mr. Ramsey when he was Health minister.

Interjections.

K. Krueger: Again, I'm sorry. The then Minister of Health promised a multilevel health care facility, but the people didn't get it. All they've seen so far is their project on the frozen list, and that's not a very comforting thing when you've got people farmed out all around the province in extended-care facilities. The closest place to Clearwater for people to go for those types of facilities is Kamloops -- an hour and a half away in good weather -- and many of them are farmed out further than that. Those people are hurting because this project is frozen, and they suspect it's going to be cancelled.

It was something that was faithfully promised to them. Indeed, many of them voted for the NDP; that was one of the few areas of my constituency where the NDP won, because they believed that promise.

An Hon. Member: Bad mistake.

K. Krueger: That's right. It was a bad mistake.

The ambulance service in Barrière and Clearwater has been cut back and cut back to the point that if the present plan is fully implemented, you will not find a full-time ambulance attendant along those highways between Kamloops and Prince George in a short time. This is of grave concern to those people. They are wonderful people. They go out at all hours of the night and day to rescue people who end up in the ditches along their highways -- people who are just passing through. They raise their own money to provide emergency equipment to go out and help the travellers who are passing through.

It is wrong that they are denied ambulance attendants. They are continually cut back in their operating capital.

The Barrière health centre operates from month to month without knowing whether it will have operating funds, because of the inefficiencies and chaos brought on by the NDP's regionalization experiment.

[3:45]

Kamloops was promised a psychiatric clinic. Of course, we were also promised a cancer clinic before the last election, and we didn't get that. Now we wonder about the fate of the psychiatric clinic. It doesn't appear to be on either list. Is there

[ Page 247 ]

a third list? It's not on the frozen list; it's not on the go-ahead list. Is there a third list? Is it the list of projects that "we don't quite dare announce that we've frozen or that we're going to cancel, because we've already dashed the hopes of the people of Kamloops once, and heavens, we may never, ever elect another MLA in Kamloops if we do it again"? Where is the Kamloops psychiatric unit? Why isn't it on the lists? I need to have answers for that. That's some of the work that I want to do.

Youth unemployment, which we've talked about in this House the last two weeks, is a major problem. I see people over on the other side of the House laughing and giggling and talking to each other when we need answers to that very serious question: what are the students going to do -- the students who don't have any jobs this summer and who desperately need employment?

Interjection.

K. Krueger: I notice that the member for Yale-Lillooet is heckling away. I appreciate that I've obviously made an impact on him, such that he's breaking the House rules and heckling someone in his inaugural speech. I thank him for that honour.

Regional unemployment is a big problem throughout the Thompson-Okanagan area, and that's a problem that I want to work on. The Employment Standards Act is a big problem. The fact that it has made young workers unattractive to employers is one of the reasons that young people are unemployed all across this great province of ours. It costs too much, and it's too difficult to employ them. It no longer makes sense to a lot of small business men.

They are telling me -- whether it's Subway sandwich shops, restaurants or the hospitality industry in all kinds of areas -- that it's just not worth their while to bring in students. They're looking for mature workers now and employing them for longer hours. This leaves young people shut out of the kind of employment that used to get them started in their careers and turn them into productive citizens in society.

The Employment Standards Act is also a severe problem to the trucking industry and a whole lot of people who harvest our resources, because of the issues it creates that never existed before, when people were able to form relationships with their employees that made sense for the particular industry they operated in. I say, as the member for Peace River North said, it is wrong that people from the interior continually send the wealth of their area to Victoria and end up with this kind of treatment.

Another example is the condition of our highways. The pavement on Highway 5 has been in such shameful condition that the potholes along the shoulder unite to form a trench in many places. Passing lanes are almost non-existent between Kamloops and Clearwater. It's a major arterial highway. Traffic to Alberta backs up. Impatient people accumulate behind commercial and recreational vehicle traffic. Accidents ensue. People die because of the way the interior is neglected by the NDP government. This is a serious, serious matter.

I have a letter from the people who live along the Dunn Lake Road, pleading with the Ministry of Highways for -- you know what? -- not some multimillion-dollar bridge or project, but for a few more guardrails along their road. These people were travelling home during an evening recently and found a vehicle hung up on the guardrail, just barely teetering, still on the road. They realized what a tremendous hazard the short guardrail was, so they wrote for some more. They got an answer from the ministry that said: "We have very little money, and the money we have is allocated on lists. We'll put your request on a list." But the gist was that it's pretty far down the list.

Meantime, they know that over $1.2 billion has been spent on the Island Highway. They also know that a great deal of their resources have been sent to Vancouver Island. Where's the fairness in that? Other roads, secondary roads, all through my constituency have been going to pot for lack of maintenance. The wealth is hauled away, and the scraps are left.

School district amalgamation has proceeded very unfairly in the North Thompson Valley. There was a lack of a genuine consultative process. There was a lack of respect for the good people who were serving in the school district there. They are grievously offended, especially because of the changes that the government has brought about in other amalgamation processes. I want to know why they've been abused in the way that they have.

That's just some of the small picture from my constituency. There's the bigger picture as well, the things that plague all British Columbians: the boondoggle that is the regionalization of health care, the problems with the Motor Carrier Commission, the mess that is the Workers Compensation Board, the problem that people are taxed to the hilt -- and the government has nonetheless gone deeper and deeper in debt; more debt accumulated in a single term than all previous governments of British Columbia combined -- and the regulations under which the people struggle in trying to run their businesses and create jobs, and the ridiculous moves that are made, such as the ICBC premium freeze.

What was the reason for that? In the interior, people were experiencing reductions in ICBC premiums because their driving records are so much better than Vancouver's. Vancouver was experiencing increases because its driving record is so horrendous.

An Hon. Member: Those are my constituents you're talking about.

K. Krueger: I appreciate that there are members on both sides of this House who represent the people of Vancouver. But I think everyone can agree that it's fair that people pay their own way, pay their own freight. It should not be the case that a single broker in Kamloops collects more in premiums than is required to pay all the claims arising out of the entire region around Kamloops and that all the rest gets siphoned down to pay for accidents in Vancouver.

This clueless interference in the rating structure at ICBC is going to create chaos, as ICBC's reserves are eroded and as ICBC is plunged into debt. It is proof once again that the NDP cannot manage a peanut stand. People anticipate it may be that the NDP wishes to create a problem for ICBC as a pretext to impose no-fault. It is my considered opinion that an imposition of no-fault coverage by the NDP government on the people of British Columbia will result in another WCB-style mess. It will be another major welfare-type scheme, a boondoggle.

People who cause accidents will not have the penalties that they presently have, will not have the negative effects on their lives. It will cause worse driving, it will ultimately cause premiums to go up, and it will be another blow to the law-abiding, well-behaving, taxpaying citizens of British Columbia that you all ought to be working to support.

[ Page 248 ]

We could write a book on ICBC and the ways that the NDP has damaged it. The NDP, with its affirmative action-style hiring, brought in a person from Calgary to run the public affairs and road safety division. They couldn't find a suitable woman in British Columbia, apparently, so brought in a person from Calgary.

She made a decision to eliminate a program that had been in place at ICBC for many years, whereby children were taught from elementary school on up to wear their seatbelts, to not get in the car with a driver who'd been drinking, and to obey the rules of the road. Her rationale was that elementary school children don't drive. That was a very destructive, ill-advised decision that we will pay the penalty on for many years down the road. When a longstanding manager at ICBC who had championed that program tried to stand up for it, she was fired.

I worked long enough in the public service to see the mandarins empire-building and to know that a weak, non-management-oriented NDP government is a great danger to any type of public service management, to any Crown corporation. We've seen that at B.C. Hydro, haven't we? If B.C. Hydro had the expertise to market worldwide and generate revenue, that revenue should have been used to subsidize the electricity rates that all British Columbians pay. It should not have been channelled into the pockets of tax-avoiding friends and insiders of the NDP. But that's where it went.

The harder people try, the more this government trips them up. The harder they work, the more taxes the government takes from them. And those whose lives are the least stressful and the easiest are those who just kick back, relax and live off the system. So yes, there's a lot to work on. How will we do it? Will we work from a constituency focus or a big-picture focus? Where do we start? It's like the chap who was asked how to get to Tipperary, and he puzzled for a while and said: "If I was going to Tipperary I wouldn't start from here."

If we had our druthers, obviously we'd be sitting on that side of the House, because we could and would implement our plan -- the plan we promised, the plan that more British Columbians voted for than any other plan. We would do it quickly, and we would do it well. But we're willing to work with the NDP and bring about good government.

I've been in management for a long time: half my working life has been in union leadership positions, half in management. We understand over here that when people can't do the job they're supposed to do, it may be a performance problem or it may be a conduct problem. If it's a performance problem, you work with them and try and demonstrate to them how to do the job properly. But if it's a conduct problem, that's another situation.

But we are willing, I and my B.C. Liberal Party colleagues, to work with the NDP, to try to teach them how to do a better job in managing British Columbia. It seems as though they have good intent, but they have very different outcomes from what they should. And I see them laughing again.

But think about Matthew Vaudreuil, and think about the 19 other little children after him who were murdered by people because of a system that didn't look after them. These are outcomes, these are results of a system that's badly managed and badly flawed.

Think of the rapid elimination of the middle class, as people have been taxed more and more heavily and have gone more and more to two-income households, and they still can't keep up. Every year they have a little less in their pockets; every year it's harder to get by. Think of the disruptions of business because of the Employment Standards Act changes.

We're not at all sure that it's just a performance problem. We see a lot of indication that it's a conduct problem. The way good managers deal with conduct problems is called progressive discipline. You whack them once. If they do it again, you whack them again. Eventually you turf them right out.

And you know, we've tried. We've tried to talk about ethical government, about doing things right. We tried, in the vote on interim supply, to bring your attention to your mismanagement. We tried when we voted on the amendment to the budget yesterday. But you're not listening. You're not convincing us that you intend to change and deal with what appears to be a conduct problem.

I can tell you that everywhere I went during the election, I met cynical people who said things like: "All politicians are liars. Why should we believe anyone? All we ever get is more of the same." I heard that a lot. I know it isn't true, because I'm working with 32 other people over here and none of us are liars. All of us intend to do all the things that we said we would do.

But I understand the public cynicism. It's especially understandable when one looks at the events of the last couple of weeks and considers what was said in the throne speech and in the budget speech and what had to be admitted three days after the throne speech was read. It's a reprehensible thing; it's a real problem. If the conduct problem persists, we're going to have to turf this government out of office. We hope it's just a performance problem. We hope to be able to teach you how to do this job a whole lot better.

[4:00]

Hon. P. Ramsey: It's a pleasure to rise and speak in favour of the very excellent budget that my colleague the Minister of Finance has tabled in this House.

But before addressing the budget, I just want to address a couple of other things. First of all, congratulations to you, hon. Speaker, on your selection to carry out that very hard task of ensuring that what the members of this Legislature say we want in terms of decorum and order actually happens. It is a difficult task. I want to offer you my sincere congratulations, because I think that taking on that job requires a couple of qualities that you have demonstrated over the time that I've known you.

First, it clearly requires a real love of this place, of the work that it does and of the way this place works, both during that loud debate -- some might even say raucous -- as government does its job of presenting legislation and budgets that it intends to carry out, and as the opposition does its job of opposing and stating its reasons for opposing. I know, hon. Speaker, that as a member of this chamber you have relished that debate and engaged in it from both sides of this House with pleasure.

I think it also requires a real respect for the common desire of all members in the House to represent their constituents and to do the business of the people of the province, and, where it is possible, to come to agreement jointly and, where it's not, to carry it out nonetheless. I know that in your time in this House you have respected that common desire that we all have.

After listening to some of the initial speeches from both sides of the House, I want to echo my colleague the Minister of Health's comments on the high quality of the speeches and

[ Page 249 ]

also on the very clear grounding in the interests and needs of people's constituents that I hear reflected in members' initial speeches. I think that is what brought us all here.

In beginning this session, I want to thank a couple of people regarding the election that returned me as the member for Prince George North. I'm going to start in perhaps an unusual place. I want to thank my opponents who ran against me in Prince George North. It may be a strange place to start, but clearly choice is the essence of democracy, and to have enough belief in how democracy works to stand as a candidate for public office is a really hard task in the 1990s.

Those of us who have been elected or re-elected recognize, perhaps better than anyone, the strain it puts on one's family, personal life and professional life when one puts oneself forward. So I thank those who dedicated their time and talents to contesting the election of 1996 in Prince George North.

I must, obviously, thank those who worked hard on my successful campaign. Nobody gets elected to this place by themselves. We are here as representatives of parties with particular platforms, and obviously we attracted those who believe in those platforms and in our abilities as candidates to present those platforms in this place. It requires endless hours, time, money and energy to run successful campaigns, and I thank them.

Finally, of course, and most importantly, a thank-you to the voters of Prince George North for giving me the opportunity to represent them for a second term. I must say that as an immigrant to this country and to this province, I feel very keenly the honour of being selected to sit in this place and carry out the business of the people of British Columbia. I will do my best to represent those who have expressed their confidence in me.

There's one other introductory item that I want to comment on. It occurred to me as I was driving to the polls on election day. My wife and I were going off to vote. I was pretty sure how I was going to vote, and I thought I knew how she was going to vote as well. But what impressed me was that people in Prince George, like people throughout the province, were going about the business of selecting a government with no more fuss or bother than if they were going down to the corner store to pick up a loaf of bread and a gallon of milk.

I couldn't help but contrast that to what we see through the media every day of our lives: what happens in other countries as people face bullets, face threats or face what they feel is almost certain electoral fraud as they attempt to carry out fledgling democracies and choose a government in their country. I couldn't help but reflect, as we start this thirty-sixth parliament here in British Columbia, on just how fortunate we are that for us, casting a vote is a dull business.

Now to the budget. I want to commend my colleague the Minister of Finance for bringing down a budget which I think will really help carry on the tradition of building a strong province here, creating this most prosperous province in Canada with the best job creation rate in the country and the lowest per capita debt. This budget will carry on that excellent progress we have made over the last four years.

I must say, listening to the members opposite as they present their views on the budget, that I'm not sure they got elected in the same province that I did. During the campaign in Prince George, an

article appeared in the paper which said we had the lowest unemployment in Prince George in a decade. That's the sort of record that we have as government. Job creation is unparalleled to any province in this country.

I read the paper this morning, before I came into this chamber. The brand-new Vancouver International Airport has barely opened, and it's bursting at the seams. Rather than looking at a declining immigration rate in this province, they're now forecasting 37,000 new British Columbians each and every year into the future, well into the twenty-first century. That's the sort of prosperity this province has.

This is a budget that looks forward to preserving and enhancing that prosperity. It's one that does what we said it would do in the election: it offers tax relief to middle-income families in this province, not to the big corporations, and tax relief to the small businesses. And boy, my community and, I think, other communities need that relief: a 10 percent break in income tax, a two-year tax holiday for qualified small businesses. They're the ones that are going to help create the next tens and twenties of thousands of jobs that we are going to need in this province.

Budgets are about choices, and this budget makes the right ones for middle-class working families in Prince George and throughout this province. I want to emphasize three things in my comments here this afternoon. I want to start with education. I was thinking back, as I listened to some of the initial speeches of members, to my first speech in this chamber some four years ago. I spoke of education. It's my background; I spent 20 years as an instructor and administrator in colleges and universities.

I believe firmly that public education is one of the most important services that a government can offer, because it opens those doors to full participation in society, not only economically -- though I think that must be the focus -- but also socially, culturally and politically. We cannot have an informed electorate without a strong education system.

Standing here today, talking about the fifth budget that this government has presented, I can't help but reflect upon what I said in that first speech and what I see now. Then we had in this province a record in education that was at best spotty. Over the past five years we have added tens of thousands of new students to our public education system, and the budget that has been tabled in this Legislature and that we're debating provides full funding for every one of those students -- not only that but for those with special needs, and there are many.

For ESL students -- and, Lord knows, ESL is a major problem in some schools -- we need to make sure that training is available. Every one of them will be fully funded. For aboriginal students who are looking to drag themselves up to the education they need to make prosperous lives for themselves and their communities, and who require some special assistance, every one is funded. For special education, for students who are suffering with a physical or mental handicap or a disability, every one is funded, so that we can help people achieve their full potential.

That's the record of this government; that's the record of this budget. I say to the opposition: you ought to stand with us and support this budget and its commitment to education, to public education, in British Columbia.

Not only that, but five years ago we didn't have a school meals program, and kids went to school hungry. We didn't have an inner city schools program that recognized that poverty and violence have an impact on students as they try to learn and receive an education. If you're hungry, you can't learn. If you're feeling threatened, school doesn't mean a damn. In Prince George now and throughout the province, those services are available, and they are preserved in this budget that we're debating here today.

[ Page 250 ]

I know that there are those who would seek to dismantle public education; they want to break it up. I heard some of it during the election. I heard proposals for voucher systems; I heard proposals for charter systems; I heard proposals all over the place. What they all meant was that they want to turn their backs on a universal public education system and turn it over to the special interests. In this budget, we on this side of the House have said a clear and loud no.

Our vision is of an inclusive public education system which meets the needs of our changing society, whether it's enhanced language opportunities to learn Punjabi, Mandarin or Japanese, or the ability to start an apprenticeship program in high school before you even get out of school. That's the sort of movement we need to preserve a strong education system, not walk away from it.

I mentioned that I spent a large part of my life teaching and working in colleges and universities. Five years ago participation rates in colleges and universities in this province ranked ninth or tenth out of the provinces in the country. It was abysmal. Thousands were turned away every fall at the doors of colleges or universities because they simply couldn't get in. Over the last five years, 20,000 new spaces have been created, and now what we used to call the fall follies are over.

When I ran for election in 1991, on leave as an instructor from the College of New Caledonia, that college turned away 600 students from its doors. They were qualified, eager students, willing to learn and better themselves and their community, and they couldn't get in. Well, that is over. We opened the University of Northern British Columbia in Prince George, the first university to be opened in this country in 25 years. We built the first community learning centre, which the Open Learning Agency opened, outside the lower mainland in Prince George and made workplace training a reality for those who required it.

It was the first community in British Columbia to have a training centre. Now we're expanding the opportunities at the College of New Caledonia and making sure that apprenticeship and career training also advances in the north. And guess what: instead of having the lowest participation rates in the country and instead of the north having the lowest participation rates in British Columbia, now participation rates in the north are at or above provincial averages. We continue to rise and are now in the middle of the pack as far as the Canadian participation rates go, not trailing them. That's where we've come to.

[4:15]

This budget preserves that record, in the face of a federal cut to post-secondary education that could have meant 8 percent reductions in classes at every college and university, and 20 to 30 percent tuition increases. That was the Liberals in Ottawa, so what can you say about the Liberals in British Columbia?

Well, they too proposed some cuts in the post-secondary education budget. It took a little while to find it, but it was there. They proudly tabled this economic plan, and when we looked at it, when those of us who are concerned about education took a hard look at it, we saw the reality of it. It meant bad news for college and university students across this province. It meant that they would be faced with the kinds of tuition increases that are happening in Alberta and in Ontario -- 25 and 30 percent. It meant that the long lines of the 1980s would return to the college and university steps in September, and the people of British Columbia said no to that vision of post-secondary education.

Our budget freezes tuition fees -- and I'm amazed to hear people say that's the wrong approach -- for two years. I've heard people on the opposition benches say this is an irrelevancy. Tuition doesn't count; that's not important. Well, that's not what I hear from students; that's not what I hear from middle-income parents. Particularly for somebody who's going to university or college for the first time, that seems like an insurmountable barrier -- and adding 25 or 30 percent on top of it would be intolerable.

This year, for the first time in my memory, with the accretion of some 7,000 new spaces in colleges and universities, no qualified student in the province who wants a post-secondary education is going to be turned away at the door. That's what this budget delivers on for the people of British Columbia.

I want to say that this progress has not come about quickly. It was part of the initiative of former Premier Harcourt, who made education and training a real priority for his government, and it's a priority that has been carried on by our current Premier, who has made himself the first Minister Responsible for Youth in the history of British Columbia. That's how important we believe it is to make sure that those opportunities are available not only for the wealthy, who can afford a post-secondary education regardless of what it costs, but for everyone.

Interjection.

Hon. P. Ramsey: Hon. Speaker, the member opposite says I've been reading their policy book. I think it may have been the other way around. They may have been looking at our record, stealing a few planks from what we have delivered to the people of British Columbia and saying: "That sounds good. Maybe we can pretend we're in favour of post-secondary." You know, they might have gotten away with it if they hadn't delivered that economic plan with as many holes in it as your average piece of Swiss cheese.

Hon. J. Cashore: They left post-secondary out.

Hon. P. Ramsey: They left it out, my colleague says. How true. Fortunately, the people of the province said: "We're not going to be left out; we're going to vote for a government that's committed to post-secondary education and give the Clark government a second term."

I also want to talk about what I think is one of the other most important services that government offers, and that's health. Universal and accessible medicare coverage is part of our Canadian identity, and we very much value a health system that doesn't distinguish between people and that says it doesn't matter who you are or what the size of your bank account is, you have access to quality health care.

It was a big issue in the last campaign, and people are concerned that they feel Canadian medicare slipping away. They have good reason to be concerned. There is a $200 million cut in federal Liberal transfers to this province for health this fiscal year, and another $175 million federal Liberal cut to health transfers will be coming to British Columbia next year. When voters hear that, and when they hear the opposition campaign during the election of slashing government spending by $3 billion with no indication at all about how health is sheltered from it, it doesn't add up. They are concerned, and they should be concerned.

They are concerned when they hear candidates from the Liberal and Reform parties talking about user fees, the need for more private, for-profit health services and the advantages of a two-tier health system, because they know what that means. All they need to do is look across the border, where

[ Page 251 ]

health insurance will cost a family of four $700 or $800 a month for a service that won't cover all their needs. They know that under that supposedly wonderful two-tier system there are 50 million Americans with no health insurance at all, and they know that there are people masquerading as Liberals who would advocate that policy for this province and for this country.

Who suffers under such a system? I assure you it is not the wealthy. The middle class in America are scared. They may have health insurance, but 25 percent of all Americans say the number one fear they have is ill health. Why would people want to bring that level of fear and uncertainty to this province? On the contrary, this budget delivers on our commitment to health care, providing not a cut as we are seeing in other provinces, but a 2.5 percent increase in health funding so that we can continue to provide new services, continue to work on preventing ill health, and continue to work in concert with doctors and hospitals to reduce wait-lists across this province.

I have heard my colleague from Peace River North commenting on services in Prince George. We simply must respond. I am proud of the record on health care in Prince George. People on health care right now have services they did not have five years ago. When they require it, 2,000 of them now receive an MRI scan in Prince George every year. That's 2,000 people who formerly had to travel to Vancouver. When they are preparing for a transplant operation or recovering from it, they receive that service at the transplant clinic in Prince George. They don't have to travel to Vancouver for it.

Interjection.

Hon. P. Ramsey: It opened in 1993, actually. I think I remember who was Health minister at the time.

When they do have to travel, they have the first travel assistance program that any government in this province has ever brought forward for those of us who live in the northern half of the province.

Wait-lists at Prince George Regional Hospital are shorter, there are on-site oncology services, there is a new psychiatric ward, and there are more specialists practising in Prince George now than there were four years ago. That's the record of health care in Prince George, and it's the same record across this province. It's a record that this budget will continue to push.

I want to end on a non-confrontational note, so maybe we'll talk just a little bit about jobs in forestry. When we talk about job creation, in Prince George that means looking at the forest resource. I want to remind the members opposite of where we are now, compared to where we were four years ago. An inventory of our timber resources had not been done in ten to 20 years; now a timber supply review is virtually completed. We're finally getting an accurate view of what our timber resources are. There was no link between holding a timber licence and a company's requirement to keep a mill open and a community running; now there is.

Then, there was great concern -- I heard it from my constituents -- about whether we were handling our forests in a sustainable manner, both for harvesting timber and in a manner respectful of all values in the forest -- for fish, for wildlife and for recreation. Now we have a Forest Practices Code that is recognized as among the best in the world. I heard some of the members opposite, as I heard them during the campaign, speaking against it.

I have asked them to consider the alternative to it and to consider what happens to our forest industry when the environmental boycott, because of the lack of a sustainable management plan, happens to our forest industry. We need that code both to preserve our forest industry and, I submit, to make sure it's sustainable not just for ourselves but for our children and for their children.

Finally, I want to speak of Forest Renewal B.C., which will repair some of the damage of the past and create the jobs that we require in the future. This budget and this government are committed to doing that in Prince George and are saying there are immense opportunities here. I invite the members opposite to come to Prince George to tour some of the plants that are making not just 2-by-4s but arrow shafts, stair treads -- a variety of consumer goods that add value and those jobs for British Columbians.

I must say, the one hopeful note from seeing a few more members on the Liberal side of the House is that finally we have some people on that side of the House who come from areas of the province where they actually know what harvesting timber looks like. I think the total AACs of all the ridings of all the Liberals in the last government was maybe ten. Now we have some people here who do understand the needs of the forest industry.

I hope that -- instead of, as the last opposition did, opposing the Forest Practices Code, Forest Renewal B.C. and all the initiatives of this government to make sure it is a sustainable forest industry for the future -- they will join with this government, build the forest industry for the future, and add thousands and thousands of new jobs by saying to those who would harvest our timber: "You owe it to the people of this province to create jobs and build stable communities for the right to access this public resource."

It is with pleasure that I rise to defend and speak in favour of the budget that has been presented here. It is a budget that says this government is on the side of the communities of Prince George and the north. This is a budget on the side of middle-class working families in this province. It preserves health and education and builds the prosperity that we already have in British Columbia.

G. Brewin: It is truly a pleasure to rise once again in this House to address the House and to talk about the first budget of the New Democratic Party government's second term. It is indeed a pleasure. It is also no easier to do it the second time than it is the first time -- to stand and speak. So it's quite fun to discover all of that, too.

Before we get into all the wonderful things in that budget, I would like to offer a few words of thanks to some folks, to add my personal congratulations to some other people and to offer a wee bit of praise.

First, may I say a warm and heartfelt thanks to the voters of my terrific constituency of Victoria-Beacon Hill, in which you are all now working and some of you, I know, are actually living. I know you're enjoying this fabulous community that exists as your capital city. It was the voters of Beacon Hill, if I may be so teasing, who were indeed very wise and very sensible and very perspicacious to send me back here. I am, of course, teasing and am most humbled by their continued support, faith and confidence in me.

I will always do my very best, as I have in representing them on city council and as their mayor, to continue to listen, to be there for them and to respond to their concerns to the very best of my ability.

I also want to say thanks -- as all of us, I'm sure, would do in our own areas -- to the campaign teams we all had. I was really fortunate to have put together quite an incredible one. I've been in a number of campaigns. I hadn't quite seen

[ Page 252 ]

the like of this one in some time. It was enormously keen. There were a lot of people, and it was well organized, very focused and, surprisingly, very good-humoured. That isn't always the case in election campaigns. Anyway, it made for a dynamite combination, and it was quite an exciting period of time.

The election has brought us here: 75 women and men. You may be interested to know that this is the largest contingent of women in any House in, I gather, all of Canada at this present time, and I think we are all to be congratulated for that. It's also a very special group that we're part of. I don't mean that to be in any sense elitist, but it seems to me that since Confederation there have been no more than about 800 people who have done this job. So as the kids put it, it is truly an awesome experience to be part of all this and to hear the echoes from the past as we stand here and create our own echoes for the future.

I also offer congratulations to my colleagues who were here in '86, to my colleagues and my cohorts from the '91 group -- you might say it is a graduating or returning group -- and a very special welcome to all the newcomers. There's such an interesting and diverse group on both sides of the House. I welcome all of you here and certainly look forward to the discussions around what on earth we've all got ourselves into, why we're here and what we're all about.

[4:30]

Now we begin our work. As we begin our work, I start off by offering congratulations to our new Speaker, the member for Nanaimo. The member brings to his new task a lively interest in politics and language and in giving good advice. I'm sure the rulings will always be fair and reasoned and -- I suspect and we all hope -- short.

May I also say thank you to the House for the honour you have bestowed upon me to be your Deputy Speaker. I am delighted to accept the challenge to do this. I know it's going to be lots of fun keeping all you lot in line. We've already seen what fun that's going to be. I had a certain amount of experience doing that in presiding over Victoria city council for five years, and you might just ask my four grown kids what they think about all that. Anyway, I wish us all good luck.

Let me say just a few words about Victoria-Beacon Hill as we move into the budget and talk about making right choices. Victoria-Beacon Hill, as many of you who have been here for a while have now observed, is quite an incredible centre. It is geographically the smallest riding in British Columbia. It doesn't take that long to walk across it. It is the most southerly on Vancouver Island. It has the benefit of, on one side of it, the Pacific Ocean -- or the strait of Juan de Fuca -- and across there the Olympic Mountains, which we like to claim as ours. Of course, the centrepiece of it is Beacon Hill Park itself.

A fabulous park, it is there as a result of the foresight of our many previous forefathers -- before Confederation, in fact -- who determined that this piece of our community should be preserved as a park forever. I think that's to their credit.

[W. Hartley in the chair.]

My riding is not as ethnically diverse as many others in this province, but it is nonetheless a delightful mix of seniors, traditional and non-traditional families, all income levels, a large working-poor population, many strong neighbourhoods, a vibrant and tenacious commercial downtown, a harbour with enormous potential, a proud and determined heritage community that is reflected in our buildings here and a very flourishing tourism industry. Arts and culture abound. Sports facilities and sports activities go on here apace daily and weekly.

We have the largest contingent of volunteers, as the Commonwealth Games in 1994 demonstrated: 14,000 people participated. We are indeed a proud community, and I am very proud to represent it. I think all of B.C. can be proud that it is the capital city of this great province.

I said earlier that we would talk about the new budget and about making right choices. I think that one of the things that has occurred, as the voters talked to us about how to make those right choices and what kinds of right choices we should be making.... I believe most firmly that the current budget that has been introduced does just that. It responds strongly and positively to the desires and concerns that we listened to in the last election from our community, from the people of Victoria-Beacon Hill and from the people across this province.

Budgets are about dollars and cents, and I think this one is particularly about common sense, about organizing our money, our programs and our priorities in a way tha