2010 Legislative Session: Second Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 11, Number 5

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements

Rattenbury Rally

K. Conroy

G. Hogg

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Canadian Agricultural Safety Week

J. Slater

Paper salmon art project in Skeena River area

D. Donaldson

Art events in Burnaby-Lougheed area

H. Bloy

Literacy initiatives in Campbell River

C. Trevena

Paralympic Games torchbearers in Comox Valley

D. McRae

CRD purchase of southern Vancouver Island lands

J. Horgan

Oral Questions

Air quality tests in Prince George

C. James

Hon. B. Penner

R. Fleming

Gasification plant proposal and air quality in Kamloops

S. Simpson

Hon. B. Penner

N. Macdonald

Funding for Terrace Anti-Poverty Group Society

R. Austin

Hon. R. Coleman

Funding for Salmo Community Resource Society

M. Mungall

Hon. R. Coleman

Funding for victim statement translation services

L. Krog

Hon. K. Heed

Emergency services in Lytton

H. Lali

Hon. K. Falcon

Petitions

S. Fraser

G. Gentner

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate (continued)

N. Simons

Hon. M. Polak

R. Austin

R. Cantelon

R. Chouhan

D. Hayer

M. Farnworth

Hon. B. Bennett

S. Hammell

J. McIntyre

[ Page 3335 ]

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 2010

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. M. de Jong: He possesses far more information about most of us than we would care to acknowledge. He has served the public of British Columbia in a variety of capacities with great distinction. He has been, is and will always remain a great friend of the people who occupy this chamber. I hope all members will welcome Mr. H.A.D. Oliver.

Hon. M. Polak: In British Columbia we're very proud of the fact that we have the longest life expectancy for men in the entire world. Today I want to honour….

Interjection.

Hon. M. Polak: Yes, that's good news.

Today I want to honour someone who is contributing to that statistic, a man that is a hero of mine. Today my father Peter Inkman turns 81, and I wanted to say: "Happy birthday, Dad."

Hon. I. Black: I ask the House to please join me in welcoming Somenath — or Shom, as he's known — Sen, our new assistant deputy minister of the Asia-Pacific investment and trade division in Vancouver. He has enormous international experience that is going to serve the people of British Columbia really, really well.

Most recently, he was with Kraft Foods as vice-president of strategy and business development in the Asia-Pacific, based in Singapore since 2005. While with Kraft, Shom led strategy and business development efforts in Asia for the world's second-largest food company.

He's got extensive experience on a global basis in a variety of businesses. He holds a master's degree from Harvard University, and he started right here in British Columbia, getting his bachelor of commerce degree from the University of B.C. in 1984.

Please join me in welcoming Shom to the House and welcoming him back home.

S. Fraser: A good friend is visiting in the gallery today from Errington, British Columbia, in my constituency. Would the House please make Leanne Salter feel very, very welcome.

Hon. B. Bennett: There are four senior members of the Union of B.C. Municipalities here in the precincts today for meetings. I'd like to introduce them. Mary Sjostrom is the mayor of Quesnel. Barb Steele is a councillor in Surrey. Harry Nyce is the president of UBCM, and Robert Hobson is the past president of UBCM. Please help me make them welcome.

Hon. I. Chong: I would like to ask the House to help welcome a constituent of mine, Brian DeClare, who is proudly celebrating his Canadian citizenship today as well. Joining Brian in the galleries are his parents, Peter and Anita Elphick; friends Anthony Abbott, Garrett Lambert, Steve Baillie and Gregory Nuke. Would the House please make them all very welcome.

Hon. S. Thomson: Today in the gallery are five representatives from the B.C. Fruit Growers Association: Joe Sardinha, their president; Mr. Kirpal Boparai, their vice-president; Fred Steele, a member of their executive; Peter Simonsen, a member of their executive; and Glen Lucas, their general manager.

I'd like the House to make them welcome. They represent the growers that produce the great apples, cherries and soft fruits from the Okanagan, and they're here today to meet with me and other members to talk about the current challenges facing the tree fruit industry.

[1340]

D. Hayer: I also want to welcome Barb Steele, councillor of the city of Surrey. She's actually a constituent of mine. She works very hard at always giving us good advice, and she's helping all the constituents out in Surrey and the Surrey residents. Please would the House make her very welcome.

H. Bloy: I'd like to introduce the future of British Columbia today. There's a young student from my riding, Keats Morton, who's in the House, and we had lunch today. I think our future is very bright. He's accompanied by his mom, Bridgette O'Sullivan, and would the House please make them welcome.

J. Horgan: Joining us later in the precincts is the chief of the Pacheedaht First Nation from Port Renfrew, Chief Marvin McClurg. I'm hopeful that the minister and others in the House will make him very, very welcome.

Mr. Speaker: Minister of Health.

Hon. K. Falcon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm not used to you favouring me before all others. I appreciate that indeed.

Today in the gallery we are joined by a student, Poonam Sethi. Poonam is a University of Washington

[ Page 3336 ]

student who is doing her four-week rotation in pharmacy here in British Columbia as part of the many foreign students that are attracted to British Columbia and, in this case, the health system, to learn about our pharmaceutical services division and the work that we do. I would like the House to please welcome Poonam.

L. Reid: Mr. Speaker, on your behalf I would like to take this opportunity to welcome the public servants seated in the gallery.

They are participating in a full-day parliamentary procedure workshop offered by the Legislative Assembly. The workshop provides a firsthand opportunity for the public service to gain a greater understanding of the relationship between the work of their ministries and how their work affects this Legislature. Would the House please make them welcome.

In addition, I have some guests in the gallery today. I have Mairi and John MacDonald visiting from Saltspring Island and their children Iain and Alison, and friends of mine visiting from Lake Country, British Columbia, Grace MacIver and her daughter Cate. I would ask the House to please make them welcome.

Statements

rattenbury rally

K. Conroy: I would like to take the opportunity to thank the member for Surrey-Panorama for organizing the Rattenbury Rally this afternoon and thank the Speaker for his assistance in presiding over the rally. Also, I'd like to thank the member, because she gave us a real opportunity to see what it's like to experience negotiating through the chamber and through these halls in a wheelchair. It was a daunting experience, and it also gave us a good understanding of what the Paralympics participants are going through. So it was great.

I'd like to congratulate the members of the silver-winning team, and they would be the members for Surrey–White Rock, Kamloops–North Thompson and the Cariboo-Chilcotin. The members of the opposition take great pride in being the gold medal–winning team. That would be my colleagues from Cowichan Valley and Alberni–Pacific Rim. I think we only won because I was able to point out that there are two accessible washrooms for females in this building.

Mr. Speaker: Does the member for Surrey–White Rock wish to respond?

G. Hogg: Reluctant as I am to respond, I understand there is some testing that will take place subsequent to this, just to make sure. However, they've also had…. I've talked to a couple of timekeepers, and there is some debate as to who in fact did win. I understand that our first-place finisher was some five and a half minutes ahead of any of theirs. So I'm not sure how that occurred, but it was certainly, as has been pointed out, a very educational process wheeling our way through.

As I came down the hallway in the main portion of the building, somebody walked out of a doorway and walked right into me and wasn't aware and was very apologetic at that point, obviously. But being aware of that and being able to negotiate and see that a very small incline is actually very difficult and challenging to work with….

[1345]

It was very kind of the judges to give the opposition the opportunity to claim that they won a gold…. I want to thank the judges for doing that, because we are a very altruistic group and want to extend to them the chance to have some victories, and we appreciate that. But most importantly, I think, was the collegiality and that we all had a chance to learn and understand a little bit about what it was like to be in a wheelchair. Thank you very much for that opportunity.

Mr. Speaker: You have something else to say too?

G. Hogg: Well, thank you, hon. Speaker. As you pointed out to me, and as so many did point out, the media was also invited to this event. But apparently they had a very difficult time finding the front of the building and the way to get there and the accesses that were there for it.

We hope that we can actually allow this to be an educative process for the members of the media, as well, to be involved in and understand some of the challenges faced by those people who travel in wheelchairs and, hopefully, that they can also portray some of those challenges to the public at large as we do host the most accessible Paralympics in the history of the Paralympics here in British Columbia, something we should be very proud of and something they should be conveying to the people of this province.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

CANADIAN AGRICULTURAL SAFETY WEEK

J. Slater: I am pleased to announce that March 14 marks the launch of the Canadian Agricultural Safety Week. The week-long campaign encourages safe farm practices and runs from March 14 to March 20.

Thanks to the Canadian Agricultural Safety Association, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture and the federal government, Canadians will be made aware of the importance of safe farm practices.

[ Page 3337 ]

I'd like to also recognize the Farm and Ranch Safety and Health Association for the important work they do here in B.C. to develop and provide health and safety services for the agriculture industry. The FARSHA team includes members who are fluent in languages such as Punjabi, Spanish and Vietnamese to enhance the effectiveness of training and compliance.

Agriculture is so important in the Boundary-Similkameen area. Most farms are family-owned, and when an injury occurs to the operator, it can be devastating for the workers and the families who rely on farming for their entire income, as well as personal challenges that arise.

This marks the year of the Canadian agriculture safety campaign with a theme of "Plan, farm and safety." Each year in Canada an average of 115 people are killed, while at least 1,500 people are hospitalized from farm-related incidents, according to the Canadian agriculture injury program. The province recognizes that B.C. farmworkers, like all workers, make a difference in our communities, and they deserve safe work practices.

Whether or not you are working in the agriculture industry, our lives are enriched by the hard work and the efforts of farmers who have enabled us to have a wealth of food choices that exist for British Columbians. The province has improved on a number of farm safety policies in recent years to ensure worker safety and protection of employment standards.

Next week let's continue in this positive direction and bring awareness to the Canadian agriculture safety campaign.

PAPER SALMON ART PROJECT

IN SKEENA RIVER AREA

D. Donaldson: There's an incredible phenomenon happening in the northwest right now, a positive story that I'm sure the members would like to hear about. There's a type of salmon in the Skeena River returning at unheard-of levels. Almost every fish that left the Hazeltons is coming back.

What makes it even more special is that these are paper salmon decorated by students in the K-to-12 system from the headwaters of the Skeena to its mouth near Prince Rupert. It's part of a project by the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition and the Misty Rivers Arts Council. They distributed 10,000 paper salmon cutouts to pretty well every student in the Nass, Stikine and Skeena watersheds. Students decorated them, and Ali Howard — the courageous woman who swam the length of the Skeena this past summer, raising awareness about threats to the watershed — has been collecting them as she tours the schools.

So far, more than 6,000 colourful paper salmon have returned, with more arriving every day. They will be built into a large papier-mâché salmon — a number of them. You can even watch these being built at the Misty Rivers Arts Council gallery in Hazelton, says volunteer Rene Chandler, or you can even lend a hand.

[1350]

These salmon will be presented en masse in a grand opening event in June. Each of the larger salmon will be offered to communities in the area for a permanent installation. Skeena Watershed executive director Shannon McPhail is visiting municipal councils to partner on this great project.

It's about tourism possibilities, it's about a community art project that connects people in the watersheds, but mostly it's about conservation of our wild salmon in the Skeena, Nass and Stikine — raising awareness around threats, like about proposed coalbed methane drilling in the sacred headwaters or the potential spills associated with oil supertanker traffic as part of the Enbridge pipeline project. It's about people taking control over what is happening in their own back yard, and I commend them for it.

ART EVENTS IN BURNABY-LOUGHEED AREA

H. Bloy: Last weekend I had the pleasure of attending two art events in my community of Burnaby-Lougheed. As government liaison to the Korean community, I had the opportunity to meet Tristin Lee, an up-and-coming lawyer in Vancouver, and her mother, Theresa Nam Ye Lee, an incredible painter.

Theresa's life story is a special one, as she's been able to live her dream of becoming a successful artist. Raised and educated in Korea, she moved with her husband and three young children to Canada. She worked in the family business, raised her children, attended Capilano College and Emily Carr to pursue her passion for the arts. Theresa Lee loves her new home in British Columbia and is thankful for the opportunities it has provided her and her family. Last Friday she had another great art showing of her semi-abstract style that she has become so well known for.

Last Saturday I attended the first-ever L'Arche art show and fundraiser. L'Arche is an organization that assists adults with developmental disabilities with a variety of programs that support people in realizing their full potential. The fundraiser was extremely successful, with hundreds of people attending.

I wanted to thank the executive director, Denise Haskett; Sig Stark, director of the fund development; and Deidre Lane, president of L'Arche Foundation of Greater Vancouver; plus all the volunteers who worked so hard to make it a success. I met Jose Suganob, an artist with disabilities, and was pleased to purchase a painting of his, helping to support the worthy cause of L'Arche.

It was an encouraging weekend to hear so many wonderful stories from our local artists and to have the ability to enjoy their artwork.

[ Page 3338 ]

LITERACY INITIATIVES

IN CAMPBELL RIVER

C. Trevena: The world is full of words. It's something most of us don't even notice — words on billboards, on benches, on packages, on papers, even in the most picture-oriented magazines. Most of us don't think about the barrage of words which surround our daily lives, and some of us revel in them.

I've got to say I'm one of the revelling sort. If somebody shakes a Scrabble bag in my direction, I'm there for a game. I was eager to participate ten or so days ago in what's now becoming an annual event in Campbell River, the Scrabble for Literacy Tournament, organized by the Campbell River Community Literacy Association.

Beginners through to expert players had the joy of spending much of the day at Timberline High School playing scrabble. We played three games in all. In fact, it was a double fundraiser, with the Grandmothers to Grandmothers, who raise funds for the Stephen Lewis Foundation also participating by providing fabulous homemade soups and sandwiches as fine brain food at lunch time.

It was over lunch that some of the reality of literacy problems in Campbell River were explained for those participating in the day, the difficulty that people have in navigating the world of words — people who miss school because they were on the fishboats, people whose family life never involved the written word, people who slipped through the cracks at school.

The world demands that we be literate using bank machines and taking medication, and using computers, phones, and other devices to access the Internet. I applaud Campbell River for the work it's doing to improve literacy from everyone, from Family Literacy Day through to supports of students and on to adult assistance. And while not everyone will become an omnivorous reader or an eight-letter Scrabbler, everyone in our society should have access to literacy.

PARALYMPIC GAMES TORCHBEARERS

IN COMOX VALLEY

D. McRae: I'd like to speak about two individuals from the Comox Valley who have been chosen to carry the 2010 Paralympic torch.

[1355]

Jim Milina was the B.C. freestyle skiing champion in 1981, at the age of 17. His goal was to compete for Canada in the 1988 Olympics, but he was injured during a demonstration of his sport, which left him a quadriplegic and confined him to a wheelchair.

Jim was fortunate enough to meet Rick Hansen at the G.F. Strong Rehab Centre and was inspired by him. In 2002 he became the first quadriplegic to climb Mount Kilimanjaro, and he used this experience to inspire others. He is the chairperson of the Comox Valley Rick Hansen Wheels in Motion event and a national ambassador for the organization.

He has worked hard to further spinal cord research and improve the quality of life for people who suffer from this injury. I am sure Jim's wife, Corrine, and his son and daughter are proud of Jim's efforts to make a difference in the lives of people with spinal cord injuries. I know the Comox Valley is.

The second torchbearer is Tim Krutzmann. Tim has been a high school teacher at G.P. Vanier since 1992. In 1999 he helped organize a leadership conference and invited Betty Fox to be the keynote speaker. She agreed to come if the school would organize a Terry Fox Run. Of course they did.

The first run was a great success, and it has become an annual September tradition at Vanier. For the past 11 years Tim Krutzmann and his leadership 11-12 class have organized one of the largest school Terry Fox runs in the province. Over 11,000 students have run over the years, and the school has raised over $55,000 for the Terry Fox Foundation.

Tim has done more to raise both awareness and money for cancer research than anyone I know. I am sure his wife, Heidi, and his daughters, Kailena and Thea, agree that he deserves to carry the Paralympic torch. The students he has touched would agree with this too.

I ask this assembly to recognize these two Paralympic torchbearers from the Comox Valley.

CRD PURCHASE OF SOUTHERN

VANCOUVER ISLAND LANDS

J. Horgan: I rise today to pay tribute to the people of the capital regional district who for the past three years have been working to raise awareness about the importance of former forest lands west of Sooke in my constituency of Juan de Fuca.

For over a thousand days individuals like free radicals Vicky Husband and Terry Alcock and organizations like the Jordan River Steering Committee, the Dogwood Initiative, the Sea to Sea Greenbelt and the Surfrider Foundation have worked tirelessly to protect the most important lands in the region from development.

Visionary leaders like Chief Gordon Planes of the T'Sou-ke Nation have advocated to have some of these lands put aside for treaty settlements with the three local First Nations.

Week after week, month after month, year after year, diverse groups of individuals and organizations worked relentlessly to pursue a common purpose, protecting some very special places. Last week, as these lands were about to go on the open market, the capital regional district made a bold and decisive move and offered to purchase 2,300 hectares of land from Western Forest Products.

[ Page 3339 ]

The property includes the Jordan River surf beach and four kilometres of waterfront from the mouth of the river to Sandcut Creek as well as parcels around the world-famous Sooke Potholes. I want to thank the CRD for making these lands available to the public to enjoy for generations.

While many have worked behind the scenes on this file, I would like to acknowledge three people without whose support this would not have been possible: Oak Bay Mayor Chris Causton, the chair of the CRD parks committee; Victoria councillor Geoff Young, the CRD chair; and lastly and absolutely most importantly, my friend Mike Hicks, the electoral representative for the Juan de Fuca area.

I said to Mike this morning that he's taken on rock star proportions in our region, and that's well deserved. His commitment and candour and his dedication to the people that we both have the honour to represent is heartening to watch.

While I'm delighted by this positive turn of events, there's much more work to do, starting with First Nations land settlements. As for the money, the Land Conservancy is assisting the CRD in deferring costs. I encourage the public and all members of this House to find some money to donate to the TLC. Once we secure this land, there's going to be one heck of a beach party. If the Minister of Finance ponies up, he's welcome to come.

Oral Questions

AIR QUALITY TESTS IN PRINCE GEORGE

C. James: The people of Prince George want to know why they were kept in the dark about toxic levels of formaldehyde in their air, 20 times above the provincial standard. At every level the people of Prince George were failed. A ministry official has now confirmed that the findings were not retested because of budget cost pressures.

My question is to the Minister of Environment. Why did the B.C. Liberals put the people of Prince George at risk?

Hon. B. Penner: It's unfortunate that the opposition continues to mislead British Columbians about what took place in Prince George. It is absolutely untrue and unfair for the opposition leader to accuse Ministry of Environment staff of withholding information when it was publicly distributed to the media a year ago.

[1400]

Now, maybe I need to buy a new edition of Oxford's dictionary, because to me, secrecy does not include distributing that information publicly, particularly to members of the public and the local city council during last year's provincial election campaign. That's what took place at a regular meeting of the PGAIR round table on April 28, 2009.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

C. James: I would like to remind the minister that the ministry staff aren't the problem. The B.C. Liberals are the problem when it comes to keeping quiet.

The original air quality tests were taken in playgrounds and parks. They found dangerous levels of a toxic chemical in the air. They should have triggered immediate action when they got that information, but instead, the B.C. Liberals kept quiet for almost two years.

The people of Prince George — in fact, the people of British Columbia — need to know that their government will take these issues seriously, that they'll take action to protect the health of the people of this province.

My question again is to the Minister of the Environment. Why did the B.C. Liberals fail to do that?

Hon. B. Penner: It's apparent that the opposition leader can't move off her written script when confronted with the facts. The truth of the situation is that this information was made publicly available if you include reading the local newspaper — like in May of 2009 the Prince George Free Press reported on elevated levels of formaldehyde in preliminary results. The Ministry of Environment went back, reanalyzed that information and presented a final report in December 2009 to the P.G. round table.

We have the funding. I have asked my staff, and they're preparing to do additional testing. But just yesterday on CBC radio, the medical health officer for Northern Health Authority, when asked point blank, "Do you have concerns about people's health as a result of these tests?" his answer was: "No." That's from the chief medical health officer for the Northern Health Authority.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplemental.

C. James: The minister said it all: "We're thinking of doing tests." Two years too late for the people of Prince George, who wanted the testing done right away. They're finally having a public meeting in Prince George to get the information on the tests. Well, I lived in Prince George, and I know how seriously the people of that community take their air quality.

The B.C. Centre for Disease Control says that Prince George has one of B.C.'s worst-polluted airsheds. If

[ Page 3340 ]

there's any community in B.C. that deserves the best air quality monitoring and reporting practices available, it's Prince George.

Again, my question is to the minister on behalf of the people of Prince George and the people of British Columbia. His own officials have said that they didn't retest because of budget pressures. How does he explain that neglect to the people of Prince George?

Hon. B. Penner: The B.C. government is concerned about air quality in Prince George. That's why since 2001 our government has added three air-monitoring stations to the Prince George Airport. The local MLAs for that area have been effective in bringing their message forward to government, and that's why in the last five years our government has spent an extra $550,000 on improved and increased air monitoring and air planning for the Prince George airshed.

[1405]

While clearly we want to do more work, and we are doing more work, air quality has generally been improving in the Prince George area since 1998. That's borne out by the regular testing that the Ministry of Environment has been conducting for more than a decade.

R. Fleming: The people of Prince George didn't know about this incident. The two Prince George MLAs admitted that they didn't know about this incident until last week. The fact of the matter is that the people of Prince George are never going to know how long and what level their exposure to formaldehyde was in this case.

Right now we need to know how decisions were made in Prince George — decisions to not retest the results, decisions to withhold these results from the public, decisions not to issue an air advisory of any kind.

We don't have those answers right now. The question for the minister here today is: will he order an independent investigation to determine how this was allowed to happen and if it's happening still, and make recommendations to ensure that it never happens again?

Hon. B. Penner: As you heard, the member started his question based on a fundamentally flawed premise because he can't move off his prepared, written script. The fact of the matter is that this information was made public last year.

Now, the NDP opposition didn't pay attention, but it was in the Prince George Free Press in May of 2009. How did it get in there? There was a media release put out by the PGAIR round table, on which the Ministry of Environment has two seats. So does the city of Prince George, and so does the people's action committee for clean air in Prince George, represented by Dave Fuller.

They were presented with that information on a preliminary basis in April of 2009. But even earlier, in the fall of 2008, the Ministry of Environment shared the raw data from those analyses and those tests with people of the PGAIR board in the fall of 2008. So it's pretty clear that if there's somebody who isn't paying attention here, it's the members of the opposition.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

R. Fleming: My question to the minister has to do with this. When ministry officials were first questioned as to why there was no retesting done until he ordered it last week when he was in damage control, why there was no retesting done for 18 months, the ministry officials told the public that there was no money in the budget to do that.

Those are the kinds of risks that have been taken. Since 2008 the B.C. Liberals have slashed the Ministry of Environment's air quality budget by 30 percent, and the budget tabled last week does it again.

Given what's happened in Prince George, what assurances can this minister give this House, give the people of British Columbia, that budget cuts won't put other communities' airshed monitoring programs at risk?

Hon. B. Penner: Once again, the member starts his question with a fundamentally flawed basis and presumption. In fact, in 2001 when our government took office, there were 65 air monitoring stations around British Columbia. Today there are 75. Of those ten additional air monitoring stations around the province of British Columbia, three were put in Prince George, three additional.

We have spent an extra $550,000 just in the Prince George airshed alone in the last five years, on air quality monitoring and planning. Air quality is gradually improving in Prince George, and we're committed to do more.

[1410]

GASIFICATION PLANT PROPOSAL

AND AIR QUALITY IN KAMLOOPS

S. Simpson: The question in Prince George is why the minister did absolutely nothing for 18 months after he learned of this problem and ignored it until he got embarrassed into doing something a week ago.

The people of Prince George aren't alone in their concerns about the performance of this minister. A gasification plant that will burn over 2½ million creosote railway ties over the next decade is planned and moving ahead in Kamloops. This is regardless of a unanimous opposition by the mayor and council and more than 800 people rallying at the office of the MLA for Kamloops–North Thompson.

What has the minister done about this? The minister has ignored the people of Kamloops and has ignored

[ Page 3341 ]

their concerns for over a year. This is a controversial issue. There's been no leadership from this minister to try to bring a resolution. Instead, the minister issues a permit without an environmental assessment and calls the people of Kamloops emotional because they're concerned about air quality.

Tomorrow night the Kamloops Chamber of Commerce is holding a forum on this issue of this plant. Will the minister finally talk to the people of Kamloops? Will he go to Kamloops tomorrow, and will he talk to the people at this forum?

Hon. B. Penner: Interesting questions, coming from a party that didn't lift a finger to fight the SE2 power plant proposal.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. B. Penner: When myself, the Attorney General and the member for Abbotsford South were down in Washington State fighting that proposal which would have amounted to 330,000 cars' worth of pollution for Fraser Valley residents, the NDP was nowhere to be seen.

Now, the member who just asked the question betrayed a certain amount of ignorance — at which I'm surprised, after the number of years he was the opposition critic for Environment — when he said the minister issued an air emissions permit. If he had been paying attention in the four years that he was the Environment critic, he would know that those decisions are made by professional public servants that work for the Ministry of Environment.

In the case of Kamloops, those people that made the decision actually live in Kamloops, their children live in Kamloops, and their children breathe the air. Why would they make that decision? Well, because they're trained professionals. One is a chemical engineer with 14 years' experience. Another is an air quality meteorologist. They looked at the data and concluded that with respect to the proposal for Kamloops, the emissions would amount to that of a single wood-burning stove.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: If the minister believes any of the stuff the public affairs bureau has written for him, does he have the courage to go to Kamloops tomorrow night and talk to the people of Kamloops about this?

For 18 months in Prince George, 20 times the allowable formaldehyde levels were ignored by this minister, when he should have taken action. For almost a year in Kamloops the city council and citizens were stonewalled by this minister on their concerns about air quality. Sadly, the Liberal MLAs from Prince George and Kamloops did nothing to stand up for their communities.

We know there's a lack of courage. The question now is: is there negligence, and is there incompetence? Will the minister stand up for these communities and stand up for air quality once?

Hon. B. Penner: Over the last number of years our government spent more than $20 million on air quality improvements, and that's a record that our government is proud of.

[1415]

Now, as the former Environment critic hyperventilates and flusters, he betrays his ignorance and lack of understanding when he suggests politicians should be the ones issuing technical permits.

In my case, I just have a bachelor of arts degree in economics and political science and a law degree. But I would rather put the trust of these decisions in the hands of people who are chemical engineers, air quality meteorologists, master's degrees in meteorology and a bachelor of science in chemistry with 25 years of experience.

Those are the people in the Ministry of Environment who made the decision for the air emissions permit in Kamloops. Would you rather put your judgment in place of theirs?

N. Macdonald: The minister is a politician — it's true — and he has a clear responsibility to do his job as minister. The people of Kamloops are meeting. They're going to be talking on this issue. Does the minister have the guts to go to Kamloops and speak to the people directly? That's his job. Is he going to do it?

Hon. B. Penner: I think it's appropriate that the people who make these decisions engage with the community and explain them, and that's what our staff in Kamloops have done. They are professional public servants. They have tremendous expertise. They live there. Their children live there. They breathe the air there, and they made the decision to issue the permit.

For the benefit of the members who perhaps don't understand the law in British Columbia, it is the law that decisions about air emission permits are not made by the 79 or 85 people sitting in this chamber but by professional public servants. That is the law of British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

N. Macdonald: The minister is publicly responsible for his ministry. This is a minister who stands in Victoria and calls the people of Kamloops emotional. My question: is the minister going to go to that meeting, that chamber of commerce meeting in Kamloops, and explain to them why he describes them as emotional? Or

[ Page 3342 ]

is he going to go and do his job and explain to the people of Kamloops why he is pushing this through the way he is? Does he have the guts to go to Kamloops…

Mr. Speaker: Member.

N. Macdonald: …meet with the people of Kamloops and explain his decision?

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, I allowed it the first time, but be very careful with your language, please.

Hon. B. Penner: I'm having a hard time giving a basic law 101 class to the opposition, but I'll try again.

Under the Environmental Management Act, decisions about air emissions permitting are left to the regional managers of the Ministry of the Environment.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Sit down, please.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. B. Penner: I'm trying to clear the air about how the law works in British Columbia.

Our government can't take credit for the fact that regional managers are entrusted to make these decisions. In fact, it's been the law in British Columbia for decades that decisions around air emissions permitting are made by professional public servants. Kudos to previous governments that put that into legislation. We've kept that in legislation. It's in the Environmental Management Act.

Again, I would rather trust professional public servants who have chemical engineering degrees or professional meteorologists who work in the field than any one of the 85 elected people here.

[1420]

I think we just heard a new NDP policy announcement, which is a rare thing, though we had one yesterday. The NDP has just announced that from hither forth it will be members of this Legislature, if they were to form government, who would issue air emissions permits. That's what I think I'm hearing. That's wrong-headed public policy.

Let's trust professional public servants to make the right decisions — who have the degrees to back it up.

FUNDING FOR

TERRACE ANTI-POVERTY GROUP SOCIETY

R. Austin: For 15 years the Terrace Anti-Poverty Society has delivered services to children, low-income families and disabled residents in my home community. The letter cancelling this organization's gaming grant says: "Priorities for 2009-10 grants will be: programs that support low-income and disabled British Columbians; programs that provide food, shelter and support to at-risk individuals; programs that support community health services." These are all services provided by the Terrace Anti-Poverty Society.

My question is to the Minister of Housing and Social Development. Will he immediately restore funding to the Terrace Anti-Poverty Society?

Hon. R. Coleman: In 2010-11 the grant process…. I would invite the Terrace organization to apply for it under the category "Human and social services" under the particular quarter they're supposed to apply in.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

R. Austin: Poverty has risen substantially in my home community. That's the record of the B.C. Liberals, and yet they treat this with such contempt.

This organization gives free food, clothing and vitamins to children. They are the main rental and tenancy advocates to keep people off the streets, and every Christmas they deliver donated presents to needy children. Yet if this government doesn't reverse their grinch-like policies, the Terrace Anti-Poverty Society may not be around to deliver presents to kids next Christmas.

Again, to the Minister of Housing and Social Development: will he show some heart and restore Terrace Anti-Poverty's gaming grant?

Hon. R. Coleman: I will tell the member that I will look into that particular organization's application for last year.

There are a number of reasons why an organization may or may not qualify for a grant. It could be that their board of directors or their organization haven't met the conditions under the Society Act. It could be that they have money left over from a previous year and haven't used it, and therefore, there are issues in and around that. These things are all actually reviewed by the people with regards to the criteria established.

I'm happy to tell the member that I will look at it immediately after question period and check into that particular organization for you.

FUNDING FOR

SALMO COMMUNITY RESOURCE SOCIETY

M. Mungall: Well, the Salmo Community Resource Society received word this week that their B.C. gaming grant will be cut. This government is saying that their budget supports human and social services, meaning that it supports children and families.

[ Page 3343 ]

That being the case, can the minister explain how cutting funding to the Salmo Community Resource Society's child care program is supportive of families?

Hon. R. Coleman: By the way, you can contact the gaming branch at any given time and ask the status of a grant and what the status is of what the numbers were to determine the amount of money that was given to any organization in British Columbia at any given time. I would invite you to do that.

Quite oftentimes you will find that there's a very good explanation why a number is different from one year to the next, given on what the services or the programs an organization is delivering. They can go, or they can call my office, and my people will be glad to look into any one of the grants.

But I can tell you…. You should understand that these are annual grants. They're given on an annual basis, based on the criteria, based on priorities and based on whether they're actually delivering the services that they say they are — based on the fact that they have the financial reporting to tell us the services that they delivered in the previous year. If they haven't, that can affect their eligibility. There are rigours and standards in place for grant application and approval, and we'll continue to follow those.

[1425]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Mungall: Well, the minister is responsible for this ministry, and so that's exactly why the question is going to him. He's absolutely right. There are criteria for B.C. gaming grants. Right here in a letter I have from his ministry — community education programs such as day cares and preschools are that criteria.

If that's the case, why is Salmo's day care program not being funded? Can the minister explain why Salmo's day care program — it's meeting the criteria — is not receiving its B.C. gaming grant? That's the question.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Coleman: I'm very clear that there's about 50 percent of the funding normally available for those particular types of establishments across B.C. under Gaming this year. That was what we told you last summer. We also told you that we're facing a $1.7 billion deficit, and that's why we've restructured the program in order to actually deliver on behalf of British Columbians.

I'm happy to look into any grant the members want to bring to my attention, but I can tell you this. There is no yearly guarantee on a grant. You meet certain criteria. You compete against other organizations. There are 6,500 grants a year and over 8,000-9,000 people that applied. The reality is that not everybody qualifies on a year-to-year basis because it depends on the program, their reporting, the availability of funds and whether they're meeting the criteria we've set out for their approval.

FUNDING FOR VICTIM STATEMENT

TRANSLATION SERVICES

My question is to the minister responsible. Why were police denied funding for transcription and translation services to pursue evidence in such an obviously serious case?

Hon. K. Heed: I'll take that question on notice and get back to the member.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Fraser-Nicola.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

EMERGENCY SERVICES IN LYTTON

H. Lali: Will the Minister of Health please explain why the B.C. Ambulance Service and also the Interior Health Authority, both of which actually report to him, failed to report to the people of Lytton and area that they would be completely cut off from emergency medical services last week?

Hon. K. Falcon: I assume the member is referring to an incident in which the doctor…. There's one doctor there that works out of St. Bartholomew's clinic, a new clinic we opened a couple of years ago, and they've had difficulty. In fact, for a year and a half they've been trying to recruit to have a second doctor. When that doctor went on their vacation, they were only able to cover three of the four weeks with locum coverage. So there was a week there, admittedly, where there was not locum coverage for the doctor.

Now, with respect to the paramedics…. I think if I understand where the member is going with this question, I would agree that, particularly in the case of rural

[ Page 3344 ]

paramedics, we have a real challenge in our system. It's one of the reasons why I agree with the ambulance paramedics that say the system is broken. We've got to deal with that. We've got to make sure we have a better deal for rural paramedics. That's exactly what we intend to do.

[End of question period.]

S. Fraser: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

S. Fraser: I have a petition presented by the Corcan-Meadowood Residents Association. They're calling for the essential and direct access for their community to Highway 19. It's a bustling and growing community, and I'm pleased to present the petition.

[1430]

G. Gentner: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

G. Gentner: I present a petition signed by residents of North Delta who are against the implementation of the HST — hundreds of signatures.

Orders of the Day

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

For the information of members, it's anticipated that the vote on the budget will take place tomorrow in the afternoon. The Opposition House Leader and I are still in discussions as to the time of that vote.

Budget Debate

(continued)

N. Simons: In conclusion, as I like to start. Yesterday I started with my response to the budget, and today I have the opportunity to continue for a few minutes.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

The concerns that I started to outline yesterday with respect to Budget 2010, the no-name budget…. There are a number of other concerns that I have yet to raise. I think that, obviously, the people of British Columbia see the most egregious ingredient of this budget to be the harmonized sales tax and the implications that that has on families' bottom lines, especially middle-income families who are facing, at the same time, massive increases to a number of fixed costs that they need to try to meet every month.

We've seen a massive increase in medical services plans for average families. The cost they have to bear has gone up approximately…. Well, it's large percentage points. The gas prices, hydro rates — it's quite shocking, actually, when you add up the increased costs that individuals in my community have to pay, including another 7 percent increase in their basic transportation costs because ferry fares have increased over 46 percent in the last four years.

This is just another example that residents in my constituency can point to, to provide evidence that this government doesn't understand the challenges being faced by middle-income and low-income families in this province. My fundamental concern with that is that it's their responsibility to be cognizant of those challenges and those pressures.

In the midst of an economic recession, after the government fails to put anything away for the difficult times, after they soar on benefits from a worldwide economic boom, we find ourselves, within a year of those economic boom times ending, to be without anything left in the cupboard.

Nothing is left in the cupboard for people on disabilities who require extra nutritional support. This government announced, after the budget was announced, that people on disability assistance were no longer going to be eligible for nutritional supplements unless they had two symptoms to qualify.

[1435]

I should point out that those symptoms include rapid weight loss, loss of muscle mass, loss of the function of a vital organ, severe malnutrition. Unless the person has at least two of those symptoms, they will not be eligible for funding to pay for vitamins, to pay for additional fresh fruit and vegetables and other nutritional assistance.

The constituent who contacted me, whose bowel had to be removed due to cancer, was one of those who said that luckily, his doctor was able to identify two — lucky; imagine that — in order to maintain his access to healthy food. Luckily, his doctor told him that he didn't just have the loss of a vital organ, but he had another symptom.

What about all of those individuals in this province who this government has forsaken? What about those individuals whose health will decline, whose use of the acute care hospital system will increase? If this government were to recognize the importance of prevention, they would not cancel nutritional supplements for people with disabilities. I don't know if there's a more obvious example of a government being penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Similarly, in the Ministry of Children and Family Development when a social worker knocks on a door to determine the safety and well-being of a child, they have certain tools available for them to assist the family. Those may be counselling for children who witness violence, counselling to repair a parent-and-teen conflict.

[ Page 3345 ]

It may be to assist a parent in accessing tools to manage their anger. But the social worker goes into a house now with fewer of those tools available, and the ramification of this — and I speak as a social worker — is that you have nothing to offer them.

You have nothing to offer them. You don't even bother to open a file. A few weeks later you'll get another call, and things have gone awry. The violence may have escalated a little more. The child may be suffering a little more in school. It's yet another example of how, in order to maintain healthy families…. The result of maintaining and promoting the strength of families is less reliance — in this case, not on the health care system but on the criminal justice system — on all the various systems that are in place that catch people when it's too late.

I have been told by social workers in this province that the result of cuts to programs, front-line programs…. We cannot separate the front-line community service programs from the work of the front-line social worker. The front-line social worker, without any tools on their belt, can do little more than counsel the family to call again when things get worse. Now, any social worker in this province — every social worker in this province — wishes that they had the tools necessary to assist families rather than only one tool available when things have gone too bad, and that being removal.

The most expensive element of the child welfare system is the foster parenting system. Yet if we rely more heavily on that, we take valuable resources away from the preventative side. I say this as a criticism, as a member of the opposition, but I also say it as a suggestion that government really pay more attention to the obvious, clear benefits of preventative programs, whether that be programs that are in school that have been cut, programs in the community that have been cut, services from within government that have been cut.

[1440]

It's not a good idea to wait until situations get so bad that the most expensive opportunity to get involved is all that's left. Unfortunately, in this economic time we've seen a dramatic increase in the number of people on welfare. Now, instead of addressing that issue, government has just said: "There's not enough money to address that increase, so we'll just cut from everyone else." As I mentioned earlier, cuts to nutrition programs are just one of those cuts.

Now, I understand that there's no bottomless pit of money and that money doesn't grow on trees. But as I mentioned once before, if it's not the moral imperative of government to assist families, individuals with disabilities or vulnerable children through difficult times, there is an economic benefit that you can hang your hat on.

You can make the case for effective preventative programs in social services and in health. We see the benefits with reduced reliance on the courts, on the lawyers and on the judges. We see benefits from decreased reliance on the police, on the ambulance services, on the critical outreach. We see social workers being provided the tools necessary to maintain and improve the conditions of the families who they visit.

It is a question of priorities. My sincere hope is that careful consideration will be paid to the vulnerable in this community, in our communities across the province, if not for the benefit of the people and because of the ethical correctness of doing that, then for the economic reasons. We have more for services when we're wise with the money that we have.

I see in the Ministry of Children and Families now a continued transformative change process that not everyone has figured out yet but which has been described as a complete change to the way the ministry conducts its business. Now, even in the best of times constant change…. Justice Hughes referred to the buffeting change. It's not a question about whether it's good change or bad change. Change without resources leaves elements of programs to suffer.

We've had investigations. Justice Gove looked at the child welfare system when I was a child welfare worker. Justice Hughes looked at the child welfare system after the child from Port Alberni died when placed in her uncle's home. Both judges talked about the need for social workers to have adequate resources. Both judges talked about the need for continuity within the ministry. They both talked about the need to ensure that any change comes with adequate resources to implement those changes.

I've spoken to social workers across this province, my former colleagues, for whom I have great respect. They are worried about the state of affairs in the ministry. They're worried about the burnout factor, which is accelerated when job satisfaction is such that you go home at night and you just worry that the decisions you made may not be supported, may turn out to be not perfect.

We rely on the judgment of individuals going into homes that has potentially serious ramifications on that family. That social worker needs to be in a space where they can make objective, rational, good decisions supported by their employer, supported by the resources available to them.

[1445]

Now they go in with feelings of dread, because regardless of the situation you're going to find, you will have very few options of programs and services that might be able to assist them. My concern about Budget 2010 is that the choices this government has made do not reflect this and are not in the best interests of the public of this province. Whether it be the cuts to the social programs that exist or the cuts to the resource industry programs, perhaps my constituents are right that this budget has essentially ignored rural British Columbia.

I represent a riding, Powell River–Sunshine Coast, which is a bit of a hybrid between rural and urban. We have Gibsons and Sechelt and Powell River, and we

[ Page 3346 ]

have vast amounts of wilderness up to the Bute Inlet. Compliance and enforcement of environmental regulations in my constituency are not currently meeting the test of the people. I am pleased that I'll have an opportunity to raise this with the Minister of Environment.

There are serious concerns with the construction work that was completed for the Toba Montrose private power company. Citizens are working hard to ensure that their access to the Crown lands that they've enjoyed for generations will be maintained. They're currently under threat. This is something that would be directly impacted by more cuts to the Ministry of Environment. The assessment process needs to be looked at to examine why the public was left in the dark about the closure of their recreational values and access to the recreation.

In short, to conclude, Budget 2010 was either underwhelming or disappointing, depending on your perspective. On behalf of the children and families that need help, I hope that some improvements can be made.

Hon. M. Polak: It is indeed an honour to stand in support of Budget 2010. Also, I hope that I will have the opportunity to break down some of the myths that seem to keep cropping up from the opposition side of the House.

It never ceases to amaze me that when we come to budget debate, all the opposition can do is point fingers at where they don't think the current government budget meets the test that they would put forward. Nevertheless, they had ten years in government, and the record is clear. After ten years in government there were still more kids in care, more kids living on welfare and more kids living in poverty than there are today. In ten years they could not get those numbers down.

Certainly, we've all felt the impacts of the current economic climate. It's in our work every day in our ridings. It's in our work in our ministries. We are challenged every day in our communities to try and help those communities through these times so that they can come out the other side more positive and with more opportunities in front of them. Because of that, we've made some important decisions to protect those priority items that we know are going to benefit children, benefit families, benefit the economy of British Columbia.

Let's talk about one of the first myths that we keep hearing in this Legislature. We hear the myth about cuts to health care. Outrageous — $2 billion going to health care. I'll tell you right now that if $2 billion was put into my bank account, I wouldn't think that was a cut. Yes, there are challenges facing our health care system, as there are with any health care system in the western world. But $2 billion in no way amounts to a cut.

[1450]

What it reflects, though, is again a harkening back to that record of ten years in government where there was no discipline in spending. Of course, there wouldn't be discipline in spending if you really thought that $2 billion of an increase was a cut. Gives us a bit of an insight.

We can talk about sports and arts. This year we're going to invest another $60 million in sports and arts. I'm told by members of the arts community that the time that this B.C. Liberal government has been in place has been one in which they have seen unprecedented investment in their sector.

Certainly, challenges in the current time, but we'd put our record on spending in the arts and culture and on sports up against theirs any day of the week. Again, another myth, because when you look at the facts and you look at the numbers, it is our story on the budget that bears out. Theirs doesn't get supported by the numbers.

Let's take a look at child care. We've heard today that there are cuts to child care, that there are cuts to supports for parents who need child care. Nothing could be further from the truth. Not only do we continue to support the child care operating fund at the same rate in spite of our financial challenges this year, but in fact, we're going to add an additional $26 million over three years to child care subsidies. Again, the opposition calls that a cut. Well, a $26 million increase is not a cut.

We're going to see investments in innovative clean energy. We're going to see investments in projects that will advance us as a green energy powerhouse. We're protecting education in a way that has never happened before, and I say that with some experience. I was a school trustee for almost ten years.

This is another area of myth that I think is important to address, and to do so I want to go back with another little bit of history, because I think it is important to compare when we talk about records. If the opposition wants to cast aspersions on our budget, then I think it behooves us to tell the public a little bit about what it was like under an NDP government to serve as a school trustee.

Let's talk about the first myth. The first myth that comes out in question period on an almost daily basis and that we've heard here in this budget response is that funding to education has been cut. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. When we take a look at education, per-pupil funding for students is going to rise to $8,301. That's the highest ever. There is $280 million over three years that's been set aside for full-day kindergarten for five-year-olds and also $22 million in funding to help support the full funding of that. We have seen increases in the education budget every year.

Let's compare that. Well, first of all, the NDP government were the only government that I'm aware of in the history of B.C. who actually cut the education budget in the middle of a year after school boards had been given their grants. It was a 1.5 percent reduction that was announced suddenly in the middle of a year. It was a clawback of money. They said: "We want it back." You

[ Page 3347 ]

know what they called it? They called it an efficiency reduction. My first term on a school board was when we were trying to manage that.

So if you want to talk about cuts to education budgets, there's one that was extremely painful and difficult for boards to manage. Not only that, but in those days you couldn't even count on your budget announcement coming on time. In the entire ten years that the NDP was in government, they didn't once provide the funding announcement for school boards by the statutory date on which they were required to — not once.

We could talk about what happened when they looked at contracts. They like to talk about the importance of contracts, but they only see the importance of contracts from the perspective of their friends in big labour. When it comes to those who actually manage the system, they have no consideration.

They enacted what they called a mid-contract modification. There was no negotiation. There was no public consultation. In fact, there was no publicity around it at all until they announced it and said: "By the way, in spite of the fact that it's the middle of the year, we are now going to change the staffing ratios for specialized classes, and that means you're going to have to hire additional specialist teachers, and gosh, we're sorry it's in the middle of the year, but you're just going to have to swallow that cost." In Surrey that was $1.8 million in the middle of a year.

[1455]

Let's talk about class sizes, because what people need to understand is that under the NDP, class sizes were negotiated. They became a bargaining chip too. What happened was they traded rigidity in a K-to-3 class size in a collective agreement that meant that if one new student came to a school in May, instead of adjusting for the benefit of the child and having that student enter the class perhaps with extra supports — no. The collective agreement they unilaterally signed with the BCTF required that the entire school be reorganized in order to meet their rigid class-size regulations. That is not putting children at the centre.

Finally, I want to address their record in terms of capital construction, because as I'm about to lay out for you, we've seen unprecedented investment by this government in capital construction in schools.

During the tenure of the NDP they enacted what they called a capital freeze — a capital freeze that resulted not just in new projects not going forward. In the case of schools, there were projects where diggers were in the ground, where construction was beginning, and construction was halted. Queen Elizabeth Secondary — prime example. In the middle of constructing their addition to their building, the capital freeze came in place. Construction was halted. At the time Surrey was left with enough students in portables to form the tenth-largest school district in the province. It was shameful.

When they finally decided to end the capital freeze, do you think….

Interjections.

Hon. M. Polak: It's still miles less than when you guys were in. No question.

When they finally decided to lift the capital freeze, do you think they listened to districts about where schools ought to be built? Do you think they listened to what the districts had planned for their capital program? No. The very first announcement was a list of schools that were entirely in NDP ridings, and they were in places where districts didn't even want schools built.

Take a look. It's in the record. You can take a look at the background. It's all there in black and white. It's part of the history that the NDP wants to run away from, because if you listen to the budget debate, you're not going to hear new ideas. You're not going to hear solutions.

You simply are going to hear them build up a smokescreen through which they hope to convince the public that somehow they would be able to manage the kind of economic downturn that we have faced and come out of it with a strong economy. There is no question that their record shows that they are completely incapable of doing it.

I want to talk a little bit about the Ministry of Children and Family Development, because this is another area where the opposition members want to construct a myth. They want to construct a myth that services are being reduced for children and families in this province, and it's absolutely not the case.

Let's look at what's happened over the last number of years. For programs like supported child development, since 2005 alone that budget has gone up by 52 percent. [Applause.] Yeah, it's worth applauding.

Another significant increase: since 2001 this government has more than doubled the funding that we're providing to children and youth with special needs. Across this government this year we will spend about a billion dollars on child care, early childhood development and children and youth with special needs — an unprecedented investment by this government to show where our priorities are. That didn't happen when the NDP were in government.

We've not only seen a refocus in our attention to supporting families with out-of-care options, but we've tripled the number of aboriginal children being served through aboriginal agencies. We've increased the number of child protection social workers, and we've doubled the number of front-line mental health workers. That's action that is there to support families when they are most in need.

Why is it that we've been able to maintain those investments at a time when our revenues are plummeting, when governments around the world are having huge

[ Page 3348 ]

challenges in supporting their social infrastructure? It's because we've started out with a plan, and despite the economic climate, we've been able to remain committed to that plan.

It takes us back to another myth. The NDP would like us to believe that somehow not only do they have a plan, but they'd actually be able to stick to it. The evidence is quite to the contrary. The entire time that they were in government, they missed every economic target, every budget target that they themselves set in front of them, and that's why we lost our credit rating.

[1500]

In contrast, even after putting forward a difficult budget with a $1.7 billion deficit, nevertheless our credit rating remains intact. It's because those outside agencies know that we can meet our targets, we have met our targets, and we will continue to focus on our plan.

We've worked very hard to create jobs and opportunities for families and individuals. We've cut taxes. We've provided more supports for children so they can be healthier, stronger, safer, better prepared for school. We've invested heavily in building a solid foundation, a solid infrastructure, and that includes hospitals, social housing and transportation.

Together, these investments in people, in key and core services and infrastructure have created stronger, more vital, more caring communities, communities that are resilient and can weather an economic storm such as the one that we're experiencing.

I want to talk a little bit about what's happened in Langley, because Langley is a community that is growing. It is a community that sees contrasts between Langley city, where there is quite a high number of seniors who are residing in that community, and the township, where we're seeing increasing numbers of young families move into the neighbourhood.

What it's meant for us is lots of benefits that go along with growth but also lots of challenges. We've seen the investments to support our community so that we can continue to move forward.

We built and opened a new 20-bed, state-of-the-art pediatric surgical unit at Langley Memorial Hospital, an investment of almost $5 million. We're building the new ten-lane Port Mann bridge. We're upgrading the Highway 1, and that is something that has a profound positive impact on ridings such as mine.

Right now there is no way that you can take transit across that No. 1 corridor because the congestion on the Port Mann Bridge and in the corridor is so severe that we have not had transit across that corridor for the last 20 years. The fact is that when this bridge is built, when that highway is widened, we're now going to give the people of Langley and the rest of the valley the opportunity to be able to participate in public transit, the opportunity to truly have quality of life instead of spending, on average, four hours a day travelling in and out of Vancouver to work. That's an investment that is key to supporting the growth in my community.

In Langley, as I mentioned, we also have a large number of young families who've been moving in, and we have some inner-city schools that are very challenged in terms of children with respect to their readiness to enter kindergarten.

As a result, we've opened a whole list of StrongStart B.C. centres in Langley and in Aldergrove: Nicomekl Elementary, Parkside Elementary, West Langley Elementary, Simonds Elementary, Douglas Park Community School, Langley Meadows Elementary, North Otter Elementary, Wix-Brown Elementary, James Hill Elementary.

This is an accomplishment that just would not have been seen under the previous government, even in a time when they weren't faced with the seismic shift in the economy that we have been.

We've completed seismic upgrades to Peterson Road Elementary, Belmont Elementary, Langley Fine Arts School, Fort Langley Elementary, and we built and opened the new R.C. Garnett Elementary School, which right now is already overflowing with kids.

We've got new neighbourhoods that we're supporting with new investments, and we're going to continue to do that.

I want to speak a little bit about the support that we're providing for seniors in Langley, because in Langley we saw a prime example of how government is able to work together in ways that were never before seen under the opposition government.

We have Langley Lodge in our community. It's a seniors residence, long-term care facility that was looking to expand, looking to renovate their existing tower and build a second tower. In the middle of that process, things got bogged down. There were some bureaucratic misunderstandings. There were some issues that they weren't able to resolve.

As a result of being able to bring together the mayor of the community, B.C. Housing, the Ministry of Health, the Fraser Health Authority, we were able to sit down and work that out together. As a result, they are close to opening this redevelopment, which involves 139 units and amenities. It's a $28 million amount from us in mortgage financing that will be completed very soon, and that was due to the collaborative kind of atmosphere we've been able to build so that we can see projects go forward in difficult economic times.

[1505]

All of these things support my community in a way that never happened under the NDP. It just never happened. If anyone believes that it would somehow magically happen again if they were to take hold of government, that is perhaps the largest myth that is circling out there right now.

I am truly honoured to have the portfolio of Minister of Children and Family Development and Minister

[ Page 3349 ]

Responsible for Child Care. I've said this before, but to clear up any skepticism, I want to reiterate that this is a portfolio that I truly wanted to be a part of and to lead. Eight months later, I can honestly say without hesitation that that decision, that request of mine, was one that I still feel was the right one because this is such an incredible ministry to be a part of.

There is an incredible amount of very positive work within this ministry, and the level of dedication, commitment and professionalism on the part of staff in all parts of the province is, I believe, quite unparalleled. I've had the distinct pleasure, as part of my duties in this ministry, to travel around the province to visit MCFD employees and contracted agency workers who are working with us in the Ministry of Children and Family Development. I am humbled every time I meet them and talk with them. I am amazed at the work that they do.

But I want to address something that the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast talked about with respect to constant change and transformation. One of the most common things that I heard directly from social workers when I travelled the province and when I asked them to tell me what they were concerned about was concern that we would stop with the transformation that we began about two and a half or three years ago.

Their great fear was that…. As we had begun this grass-roots work to develop practice change in a way that meets international research, meets the guidelines and standards that we know are there to provide the best outcomes for children, they were concerned that as a new minister I might back off on that, that I might say: "No, we're going to go in a new direction."

I want to assure everyone out there who works for our ministry, everyone who has been wondering if there's going to be a change in direction…. I will tell them what I told those social workers: there will not be. We are determined to do what we know is best for children, and we are going to move ahead with the training, the support and with the advancement we need to make in order to ensure that not only are we providing the best opportunity for social workers to engage in their efforts but that that is going to result in the best possible outcomes for children and families. No, Madam Speaker, we are not changing direction.

Our ministry is probably best known for our role in child protection, and that's unfortunate, because we all know that whether it comes to health, to education or to social services or the Ministry of Children and Family Development, the best investment that we can make is in prevention and early intervention.

Our ministry represents the whole spectrum of that intervention and prevention effort — from early childhood and infant development programs to child care, fostering, adoption and supports for youth who are transitioning out of care, support for children and youth with special needs or those with mental health challenges, programs aimed at strengthening families, and so much more.

The services the ministry provides really speak increasingly to a holistic relationship that we want to share with those we serve. As opposed to making unilateral decisions which impact children, youth and families, and even service providers, our process is increasingly one of engagement.

As opposed to seeing only the challenges, the deficits in the vulnerable children and families that we serve, we are instead focusing on building their strengths and helping to create independence and resilience.

As opposed to trying to fit aboriginal children, youth and families into the existing child welfare programs and services, we are instead supporting them in creating services of their own design which reflect their culture, traditions, values and practices, and probably most important of all, allow us to recognize the jurisdiction that they rightly hold over their own children.

[1510]

That might not sound like a big deal to us, but if you are in a position where you are a member of an aboriginal community and you hear someone from the non-aboriginal community asking: "Well, are you sure they can look after their own children…?" Madam Speaker, we are sure. We are sure that they can look after their children.

We're sure that their children do better when they look after them, and we are continuing to make the transition for aboriginal children to be served by aboriginal communities and agencies. We are going to continue to support that. We know it's what is best for aboriginal children, and we will continue to make that a top ministry priority.

In spite of a budget that is basically straight-lined, we are certainly experiencing challenges. We've had to make some difficult choices, but our priority, as always, has been to protect critical front-line services. Our budget will see a slight increase this year of about $9.5 million. It amounts to about 0.07 percent, but our budget pressures continue.

Most of the increase that we're seeing is due to funding of about $8.6 million that's going to help us to meet additional demand for child care services, mostly the subsidy for lower- to middle-income children and families. But our budget will remain fairly stable, we're projecting, over the next three years. That means that there is change that we've had to make in how we approach our budget if we are truly going to focus on the priorities that we have in front of us.

We will see, in the area of child and family development, an increase of over half a million dollars to maintain services. In the field of early childhood development, child care and children and youth with special needs, we'll also see an increase of about $10½ million as a result of new funding for child care and additional funding for medical benefits and autism programs.

[ Page 3350 ]

We will see a decrease in executive and support services. Our staff have worked long and hard to find the kinds of efficiencies we need to find in order to redirect those precious resources to those areas that support children and families directly.

In the area of our contracted services, we've seen an upward trend for the last number of years. In 2001 the budget for contracted services was $645 million. I am proud to say that in '09-10 that budget was $831½ million, with more than $100 million of that funding invested in just the past five years. This year we will see that number decline slightly, by a little less than 2 percent, but it still represents a 30 percent increase since 2001 and an 18 percent increase in just the last five years.

We know that there will be funding challenges presented because of this reduction, but this goes back to my earlier statement that we're going about things in a different way. As you can see from the list that I've just read out, we've focused our attention on increasing supports for those services that directly impact children and families.

We're reducing the spending in areas where we can manage to find administrative efficiencies and are able to look at how we can align programs better, perhaps using them together, perhaps looking at programs where there's low enrolment, but clearly focusing our attention on direct front-line services for vulnerable children and youth.

One of the reasons we're able to do that is because the Federation of Community Social Services Society of B.C. has worked together closely with us in a time when we were coming to them and telling them that we were going to have to make reductions in the budgets to contracted services. They didn't shy away from that. They sat at the table with us. They helped us develop the principles that we put in place to make those decisions in the region.

I can't say enough about the professionalism that they brought to this role and about the collaborative success that we've had as we've tried to minimize the impacts on any individual agencies. It's been a tremendous growth for all of us to work together in this way, and I am so thankful for their continued work with us.

This year those reductions will be managed through a consultation process with those contracted service providers, and it won't be an across-the-board cut as has happened in the past. Instead, they will be the ones advising us as to the best way to make those decisions.

There's no question that these are difficult times. A $1.7 billion deficit rolls easily off our tongue, and it's simple for us to forget that that is a debt that accrues to the detriment of our children and our grandchildren. It is one that eventually will have to be paid. Now more than ever, we have to make the tough decisions, we have to show strong leadership, and we have to continue to move forward along a path that we know is right.

[1515]

To manage our budget effectively and to continue as much as possible to protect key critical front-line services to vulnerable children, youth and families throughout the province, our ministry provides more than $1 billion annually to programs and services in our communities. Many of those are targeted toward prevention and intervention, toward making children healthier and providing the support necessary to keep families strong and safe.

In fact, 96 percent of our budget goes to those kinds of direct services. Madam Speaker, it is our intention as government to continue to focus on those important areas, and you will see that the changes that we make will back up our commitment to those critical front-line services.

One of our key priorities as a government and as a ministry continues to be our work to support aboriginal people in designing and delivering services that meet the unique needs of aboriginal children, youth and families. We need to build equity in the services.

Increasing aboriginal service design and delivery is a clear priority that was called for by Ted Hughes, by the children's representative and by both provincial and federal Auditors General. It's something that we as a ministry have been working toward for a number of years. It's a process that we know is right and that we are deeply committed to.

This year aboriginal children and families will receive services in excess of $390 million from MCFD — in the '10-11 budget year. That's up about $93 million from 2003. Funding for aboriginal delegated agencies has more than tripled since 2001 to $65 million, as has the number of children and youth cared for by delegated agencies.

As I mentioned, it's widely recognized that we need to build equity in supports for aboriginal children and families, in terms both of their availability of culturally appropriate services and of how they're delivered. Addressing those gaps, placing the delivery of aboriginal children and family services in the hands of aboriginal agencies, is one of our top priorities. It's a cornerstone of our work in the ministry and the basis of our aboriginal approach in Strong, Safe and Supported , our ministry action plan.

Let's not make any mistake about it. We have a long way to go. I still have people who come to me as minister and ask: "Why is it that you're focusing so much attention on such a small group of people? Shouldn't we be paying attention to the mainstream non-aboriginal population?" Madam Speaker, I am sad to remind them that even with all the work that has been done over the years, nevertheless, still 53 percent of the children in care in this province are aboriginal. We believe that's unacceptable.

We've made funding and support for the transfer of aboriginal services a priority for us, and that means you

[ Page 3351 ]

will see movement and reallocation of funding away from mainstream areas that don't have the kinds of pressures that those aboriginal agencies do, but it's the right thing to do.

R. Austin: It's a privilege to rise once again in the House to speak to Budget 2010 of last week. It's an honour as always, and I thank the people of Skeena for giving me that privilege.

Before starting my remarks, I'd also like to acknowledge the work of the people who support me back home. We spend a lot of time away from our constituencies, and we rely a lot on those who work in our offices. So in that regard I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Denis Gagné and Arjunna Miyagawa in my Terrace office for the work they do, and Roberta Walker in Kitimat.

I should mention that in the last few months in Kitimat it has been an incredible challenge in my office as the people of that community start to take into account the shutdown of Eurocan and what that means to the families and to the community of Kitimat.

I'd like to begin by just talking for a few minutes to give a context about the economy in northwest B.C. I think it's important, when you look at the budget, to see what changes the government is proposing and how they will affect, for the better or for the worse, my region. I don't think it's any secret in this House, even to those members on the other side of the House, that the northwest economy is one that has been struggling for a number of years.

[1520]

In fact, it's very clear that even when the rest of the British Columbia economy was doing very well prior to the recession that's taken over around the world, the northwest economy was in a downturn, principally because we have delinked a lot of our resources from the job creation that traditionally fed the northwest economy and supported all of the towns, whether it be Terrace, Kitimat, Prince Rupert or Smithers. A lot of these towns actually came into existence as a result of taking advantage of large public resources that were surrounding them.

We have had presentations recently from the northern development initiative, which came and spoke to members both on the governing side and those of us on the opposition side, showing very clearly that the economy of Skeena and the northwest in general is in very, very tough shape.

That was backed up by a presentation made by Helmut Pastrick, who is a well-known economist. I think it's true to say he's an economist who specializes in analyzing British Columbia's economy, as opposed to many economists who look at Canada as a whole. He did a study that showed that over the last 35 years, in fact, the northwest's economy has been in a slow decline. It has been exacerbated in the last ten years, but certainly it has been one that's been in trouble. I mention that because we need to look at the budget in its context and realize what it does for an economy that's already very shaky.

As I've mentioned, in forestry we have seen in the last nine years every manufacturing facility in my riding shut down. At least, that's the case now with Eurocan going. It's hard to get up here and speak without some recognition of what Eurocan has meant in terms of our local economy. We have seen the mills over the last few years shut down in Terrace, and we've had to make adjustments. But at least there was one big forestry-tied manufacturing facility, and that was Eurocan.

It was a shock to everybody in the riding when West Fraser made that decision to shut it down, because they hadn't even informed the people of Kitimat that it was even on the block. In fact, they had come and had meetings with the district of Kitimat. They were having some disputes around local taxation.

At that time, when they came to speak with the mayor and council, they never even let them know that within a couple of weeks they were coming up with a decision to actually shut down Eurocan, and with it, take away probably at least a thousand jobs that are either directly affected in Eurocan or tied to it. So it's very, very difficult.

I really want to speak for a second around the tie-in between the trees and our manufacturing in Skeena. We know that in 2001 the B.C. Liberals removed appurtenancy. The difficulty around that is that there wasn't really anything that they replaced it with.

So the challenge is…. "Okay," you say to companies, "you have access to these logs. You have access to the forests, which is a public resource. We're no longer going to commit to have manufacturing facilities in the area. Either you can take those logs and manufacture them in another part of British Columbia, or you can take them out of the province and have them used abroad as raw log exports."

But we are still surrounded by trees in Skeena, and by cutting that and not giving access to wood to other forms of manufacturing to replace the mills, we've seen nothing but a massive shutdown. I think that we need to look at changes in forestry that will enable us, once again, to figure out ways in which we can use the resource and find some kind of creative ways to create jobs.

I'll mention one. There's a person in my riding who makes and sells guitar tops and bottoms. This is obviously a very specialized niche market. He sells these guitar tops and bottoms all over the world via the Internet. Now, that's a high-end, value-added business, but even he has trouble getting access to wood. So obviously we have a serious problem within our forestry sector when we live in a town that's surrounded by trees and people who want to start new businesses cannot have that opportunity to do that.

[ Page 3352 ]

It's not just trees that are being delinked from our economy. Let's look at water and the ability for water to generate electricity. I represent, of course, Kitimat, which has the Alcan smelting facility. What we've seen in the last few years is that Alcan made a promise that if they were given a union contract, if they were given the right to do whatever they wanted with that water or that electricity and if they passed an environmental assessment, they would build a new smelter.

People in my district said: "Wait a second here. If we give you all these things, shouldn't we have some kind of commitment in writing that you would actually build a new facility?" The government of the day said: "No, no, no. Don't worry about it. Once they have these things in place, they'll go ahead and build this smelter." Now we see, two years later, after having all these things in place, we don't have any new smelter yet.

[1525]

It's really sad, because Alcan is still building new smelter capacity in other parts of the world, and yet with the cheapest electricity anywhere in the world right there in Kitimat, they have not taken that plunge to actually reinvest and build a new smelter. I'm hoping that in the near future we will see that.

Finally, let me talk about mining. We have seen in the last eight years very, very high commodity prices, and yet not a single new metal mine has opened in British Columbia — not a single new metal mine has opened in British Columbia over the last ten years.

In the 1990s, when copper was 46 cents a pound, we were able to save the Highland copper mine in Logan Lake — when it was 46 cents a pound. Yet now, when copper is at an all-time high, we can't get a new copper mine going.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members. Members.

R. Austin: Obviously, people are a little bit sensitive on the other side, because in spite of high commodity prices, we have not seen this boom in mining that we should have seen.

I'd like to speak about what this does for the people of my riding. This budget mostly is about the HST. It'll be known in the future as the HST budget, because this is a tax shift that will forever change the landscape of British Columbia.

Frankly, a tax shift moving away taxes that have been paid by large corporations and putting them onto consumers is definitely going to hurt the people of my riding because, as I've just mentioned, we don't have a lot of large companies that would take benefit of the savings that they're going to make from the HST.

Instead, what I have in my riding is a bunch of people, most of whom are struggling financially and are now going to be left….

Oh, thank you, hon. Chair. It's nice to see somebody else coming to the front there, but you're going to miss the rest of my speech. I'll send you a copy.

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

This is going to hurt the people of Skeena, the HST. It's also going to hurt all the small businesses in my riding who will now have to find extra money that will be tacked on, especially in the restaurant sector in both my communities. So the HST is definitely not a good thing for the people of Skeena.

But worse than that, the HST, quite aside from the debate about whether it's good or bad or whether it's going to create jobs or lose jobs…. What is so devastating about the HST is that during the election the government of the day actually said they weren't going to bring it in.

If there is ever a time when you want to be open with the people about a major shift in policy, surely it's during that 28-day period when we are having an election and people are actually paying attention to politics and the political issues. That is the time when any government that proposes a huge shift should come forward and say, "This is what we think we're going to do. What do you think about it?" and then have the mandate to actually make that change.

This government did not mention it during the election, and therefore, they have no mandate to actually bring it in.

Interjection.

R. Austin: The Health Minister says that's nonsense. Well, I think actually there are enough people in this province who understand that this HST is being brought in through deception — pure deception.

Interjection.

R. Austin: Oh, it's the best thing. But for the previous eight years….

Hon. Chair, a member from the other side says that this is the best thing that they could do for the economy. I sat on the Finance Committee with that member when other people came and made presentations to the Finance Committee suggesting that this government move the HST, and it was the government members who said, "No, this isn't a good thing for consumers," and didn't do it.

Now we have an HST being brought in even though in eight years they thought it was a bad idea, and I agree. It was a bad idea. It still is a bad idea, and it will hurt consumers.

There are other huge tax increases being brought in here, but of course they're not called tax increases in this

[ Page 3353 ]

budget. What they are, are increases on people who have cars, through ICBC, huge tax increases being brought in that are called hydro rate increases. So everyone here who is on the grid, which of course is the vast majority of British Columbians, is going to see huge increases in their hydro bills year after year after year.

[1530]

How is that fair, and why are we having huge hydro increases? Well, the reason is that we are privatizing our generation system. We are not using our public corporation, B.C. Hydro, to generate new electricity when we should be. Instead, we're giving it to private interests. That's why we're going to be paying so much higher hydro rates.

Now the Olympics are over, and that has been the mainstay of this government's economic policy. That's where we've diverted huge amounts of money for the last few years to build all the facilities, but the Olympics are now over. So now we will see whether there will be an economic recovery and whether it will play out. Quite frankly, I think the budget shows that we're going to have a mostly jobless recovery, which makes the notion of increased revenue as growth returns somewhat dubious.

I'd like to speak for a second about what some economists have said about the economy currently. They say:

"The downside risks of the B.C. economy are serious. The U.S. economy remains very weak, as does central Canada's. The Winter Games are over, and the Olympics in the past have been accompanied by a drop in economic activity. Even though many feel we are in a recovery territory, rising GDP coming out of a recession is typically accompanied by rising unemployment for at least another year. There doesn't seem to be a clear economic development plan to provide jobs for those who lost theirs during the global recession."

I can't agree more. There doesn't seem to be a plan — certainly not in my neck of the woods — to try and create jobs. In fact, as Eurocan shuts down, we're going to see, over the next few months, an actual shift again of people leaving northwest B.C., as they have done for the last ten years.

I'd like to take a moment to talk about aboriginal relations. These are very important in my riding. I have a large number of First Nations bands and, of course, the Nisga'a Nation itself, who have signed a treaty. I want to speak for a second about the new relationship. When I first got elected in 2005, I'm happy to say that the government changed its tune and decided that it would embrace aboriginal leadership and try and form a new relationship.

What we have seen in the last four years, unfortunately, is that that new relationship has kind of gone off the rails. It was a lot of talk, a lot of good intentions, but the reality on the ground is that there hasn't been a lot of movement in terms of fostering better relationships. Most of the leaders that I speak to complain now that they don't really see a lot of action. They only hear nice words.

If you look at the budget for aboriginal relations, you'll see that there is actually going to be a downturn, which suggests that we're going to still be mired in this uncertainty by not having treaties signed. We've seen from the success of the Nisga'a treaty that it is important to actually get ahead and sign these treaties.

I want to speak for a second on this topic from a report that the Auditor General made around aboriginal relations. In his report he states that one of the biggest problems with the new relationship is that it's not defined. This lack of clarity or focus has led to much uncertainty. What we've seen is that as a result of it not being defined, it's been hard to actually do the work to make it a practical piece of policy. He also says that the breakthrough strategy — where the negotiators concentrate on a few tables at the expense of all others — takes away from the negotiation process.

What we're seeing is that there's a lot of frustration on both sides — both the government side and First Nations. So what's happening now is that one-off deals are being made which have a short-term benefit, hopefully, to the aboriginal community and to British Columbians at large. But that short-term benefit takes away the incentive for the actual First Nations band to come together and to actually sign a long-term treaty.

The Auditor General says that while he sees there being some benefit to this policy, it does have a long-term negative impact because we are not going and actually signing full treaties. I would hope that we will see, in the near future, the government actually trying to renegotiate the new relationship and make it a reality.

[1535]

I'd like to also, for a moment, speak about post-secondary funding. I have both Northwest Community College and UNBC in my riding. Both have been very positive additions to my community. Of course, Northwest Community College has been there for over 25 years and UNBC for a much shorter period of time — about nine. These are economic drivers.

When UNBC first came to the city of Prince George…. I travel quite a bit to Prince George as part of my critic portfolio. They recognize in Prince George that UNBC is one of the biggest economic drivers to have come to Prince George in the last 15 years. It is the same, so one would hope, in Terrace, where they have a campus.

What are we seeing in this budget? We're seeing that funding is, for the most part, frozen in the ministry of post-secondary education. But here's the significant thing. There is a 27 percent cut to student aid and a 50 percent cut from the budget that was presented prior to the election.

What does that say about this government's priorities — when you are cutting the ability for people to access post-secondary education? How is that going to help our economy? How is that going to help those students who wish to access the knowledge economy?

[ Page 3354 ]

We're constantly told by this government: "You know what? The economy is changing. We need to educate our people to a higher level because now it's a knowledge economy." Yet we're seeing cut after cut in the ability of people to access post-secondary education. That's not good for the individual students. That's not good for families.

It's certainly not good for the economy of Terrace, where we should be trying to access more people into post-secondary education. As I've mentioned, we have higher levels of unemployment, so if people are unemployed, that's a great opportunity for them to go back to school and get those skills.

I'd like to take a minute to talk, also, about the rural secretariat. The rural secretariat falls within the Ministry of Community and Development. What it is, is an agency within the ministry that tries to help small communities all over rural B.C. to get economic development going.

We've come into contact with them a great deal recently. With Eurocan shutting down in Kitimat, the rural secretariat has been heavily involved with the district of Kitimat and with the city of Terrace council to try and come up with some solutions as to what to do with this mill.

We are seeing their budget going down from $36 million to $3.3 million two years hence. What does that tell you about the priorities of this government when it comes to rural B.C.? There are eight full-time positions funded for people who live all over the province to try and help communities to get economic development going in rural B.C.

We know that there is a great divide in this province between the Lower Mainland, the capital region and rural B.C. We have seen people flocking to the Lower Mainland because there are not enough jobs in rural B.C. So the job of the rural secretariat is to try and address this imbalance and try and get economic development going and help communities who are struggling.

We have one of those positions. Someone works out of Prince Rupert. Will he have his position in the future? Not likely, if the budget is going from $36 million down to $3.3 million.

I'd also like to just mention, going back to the Eurocan shutdown, how disappointed I was that this government put forward $40,000 towards a feasibility study that the district of Kitimat and the workers at Eurocan felt was necessary in order to try and move forward on the Eurocan decision. Fort St. John and MacKenzie got $2 million each when those towns went into crisis. Eurocan represents 40 percent of the industrial workers in the district of Kitimat — 40 percent. Can you imagine a community that loses 40 percent of its industrial tax base overnight?

Yet what did this government give — $40,000? It's a very sad state of affairs when that's all they felt the district of Kitimat was worth, and it sends a signal that they are not willing to help those of us who live in northwest B.C., a part of the province which the other side and this side recognize is a part of the province that has the most dire economy.

Next, I want to spend some considerable time speaking about education. I listened to the words that came out from the Minister of Children and Family Development — who, of course, was a trustee.

[1540]

She actually had the gall to talk about a time in the '90s when money was taken away in the middle of the year from the school districts of British Columbia. This is from a government that actually removed the annual facilities grant one week before children went back to school last year — $110 million that was pulled one week before children went back to school, after most of the money, by the way, had been spent during the summer in fixing up schools. Think of the chaos that caused in the school system last year — absolute chaos.

Also, I want to address this debate that goes back and forth around educational funding. Yes, the government is correct by saying that per-pupil student funding goes up. They're perfectly correct in saying that. But here's the real story. The government changed the funding formula in education when it came to power. We had large envelopes of funding that took care of various aspects of the school system, and we also had per-pupil student funding.

What they did was they made those envelopes smaller and moved the model of school funding almost exclusively — not entirely but almost exclusively — towards per-pupil student funding. What this did was it made it very, very difficult for the school system to have the adequate increases in per-pupil student funding to make up for all the costs that were being put into the system that were previously there. Let me explain for a second.

In Victoria here, the taxes are collected and money is sent directly to the school districts all around the province. School districts don't get to raise their own money or their own taxation. They are entirely reliant upon money that comes from Victoria. The negotiations for teachers' salaries, for CUPE salaries, for whether there's an MSP increase, for hydro rates — those aren't decisions that are made by the school districts around our province. Those decisions are made centrally, either here by the cabinet or they're made by central agencies such as B.C. Hydro.

So what we have seen in the last few years is that the increases to per-pupil student funding, which the government constantly crows on about, have not been great enough to pay for all these increases and these costs that have downloaded to the system. That is why you have school district after school district coming to us, coming to the government and saying: "There is not enough money in this system to actually do the task that you are giving us." We have not a deficit but a shortfall between

[ Page 3355 ]

the funding envelope given to school districts and the task at hand. You know what, hon. Speaker? This isn't a partisan issue.

I have spent so much time in the last few months meeting with school trustees all over this province, trustees who vote for the Liberals, trustees who vote for the NDP, and they have one thing in common. They got in as trustees because they have a passion and an interest in public education. Those trustees are saying uniformly, irrespective of their political beliefs, with one strong voice that there is not enough money in the system. This budget, which brings in an increase of $112 million, does not pay for the deficit or this shortfall in the system.

Where do I get those facts from? Well, the secretary-treasurers association. These are the professional people that actually handle the money of school districts. These are professional civil servants within the school system. They do not get political, obviously, because they work for a government agency that gets all of its money from taxes. Therefore, they can't be political. They usually stay in the background. They usually actually keep their mouths shut. That's what they normally do.

Even they have done an analysis that proves that prior to this budget there was a funding shortfall in excess of $260 million. So the $112 million that comes in operational funding as an increase this year still leaves school districts with a huge deficit.

We are going to see this continue. This debate is going to continue, and more and more school districts are going to be coming forward still having to make cuts in spite of the fact that there is an increase in per-pupil student funding. That is the situation.

I'd also like to mention the annual facilities grant. Okay, it was taken away last September, leaving school districts scrambling all around the province. Now I've been reading in the papers some erroneous reports that it is coming back. It is only partially coming back. It is $110 million that was removed, and $50 million is coming back in this fiscal year, and $60 million is coming in the year out, 2010-2011.

[1545]

School districts that are still struggling to do the maintenance that's required in their school system will be taking operational funds — they have no other choice — out of their school budgets in order to do regular maintenance that's necessary. It hasn't come back; it has only partially come back. We are going to continue to have lots and lots of challenges in our public education system.

I'd like to take a minute just to talk about the Ministry of Energy and Mines, because there is one big project in my area that has been talked about, and that is the northwest transmission line. Last year, when the federal government announced it was going to be giving this province $130 million towards that transmission line, the Finance Minister at the time said: "We have a private partner in place." Our understanding was, okay, the feds are putting in $130 million, there's a private partner in place, and then the province would obviously pay the difference for this.

Now I read in this budget that they're still negotiating to find a private partner. We had one, of course. Before Galore Creek went off the table for a short while, NovaGold was willing to put $158 million towards this power line. But then when Galore Creek had difficulties and economic challenges, they obviously took their $158 million off the table. So the government said: "We're going to find another private partner. But don't worry; it's in hand."

In this budget what we see is there being a verbal commitment to build this line but no money in this year's budget and no money in next year's budget actually assigned to this. My question that I will be asking to this government is if northwest B.C. just needs one big project to get going…. We need one big project to get going. They've had several months since the federal government gave them $130 million.

By the way, that $130 million is contingent upon the provincial government finding that private partner and coming up with a difference. It's not like they forwarded the money, and work can start right away. Work cannot start right away, because that money is contingent.

I'm hoping that by the time this year is over, we will see this government actually find a private partner, announce that publicly and, hopefully, come up with its commitment that it needs, because we need jobs in northwest B.C. We haven't seen one thing to replace all the manufacturing plants that have been shut down under this government.

I will have far more to say when we speak about the HST in the bill that comes forward, but for now I will cede my place.

R. Cantelon: It's a pleasure to represent the Island, and not only because it is indeed one of the most beautiful places in this beautiful province. It's inhabited by a wonderful group of people.

I think people who live on an island — and I know, Madam Speaker, that you, too, live on an island — are a special breed of people. They cherish a little sense of isolation, yet they're welcoming and warming to other people. It gives them a sort of resilience and an optimistic attitude that they can do it on their own if they have to. I think that's what living on the Island breeds in people.

I think the spirit of optimism was never expressed greater, on a broad scale, than in the Olympics we just saw. It was an outpouring of optimism and joy, really, that we saw.

I travelled to the Island to attend tourism events and forestry events to support those industries on the

[ Page 3356 ]

Island, and it was really amazing as hundreds of people walked onto the ferries not just to see the Olympic events or venues but to walk among their fellow British Columbians and share the experience. It was truly an outstanding experience of not the jingoistic nationalism but pride and high fives and enjoying the moment.

One moment that I wasn't there for but it was told to me was an exceptional moment was as the ferry wheeled into the Departure Bay and the big ferry doors swung open and the cold air embraced everybody. They didn't shudder. They stood up and sang O Canada .

I grew up in a much different climate, far, far away on the other side of the mountains. I tell you, the cherry blossoms are a long way from being in bloom back there, but they are here.

[1550]

The people in British Columbia have an optimistic spirit, an optimistic attitude, a positive attitude, and I think they're drawn to the beauty of the country and feel that we can make anything out of this. And they're right. They can. They're very resilient. They're very determined. I think what they expect from us, what we've delivered to them over the past years and what we deliver in this budget meets their expectations.

Their expectations are a stable government, a government that moves ahead with sound fiscal management policies that provide them with the confidence that, yes indeed, this is the place to make a long-term investment. This is the place to raise my family. This is the place to build my future. This budget delivers that. I'll speak further about it, but moves like the HST solidify this as the best place to invest, move to and live in Canada.

We've heard, and we will hear on both sides of this House, broad statements. I won't call them misstatements or otherwise. I'll be careful about the language. But when I hear the member for Surrey-Whalley characterize the health care budget as being slashed again and, of course, the actual fact is that over the next three fiscal years, we're adding $2 billion to the health care budget…. That doesn't mean, with the silver tsunami as it has been called and identified, that it doesn't present us great challenges in facing health care expenses over the next few years.

But up and down the Island…. I mentioned resilience as being one of the characteristics. If it's not working, let's do something different. I think it's evident in what's happened on the Island and the approach they've taken to embrace the opportunities the Olympics have presented to them.

I've been working and have worked for several years with the owner-operators of the Harmac, which unfortunately went bankrupt. But out of bankruptcy is opportunity. Out of this kind of crisis situation, opportunity presents itself. They seized that opportunity. They bought the pulp mill when others said: "Don't go near it. It's a piece of junk. Sell it. Give it away." I was kind of surprised in a way that, although this involved many union people, I was the person in the courthouse three or four times — that there were no members of the opposition there to support their workers. But nevertheless, you can make what comments you wish of that.

And now they've persevered, and they're succeeding. The pulp prices are rising. Their production is at virtually record capacity despite the fact that they're operating at about half the workforce. They're working extremely efficiently, working as a team. They've seized that opportunity, and there's continuing opportunity.

I think this is a bright light, a sign of hope for the forest industry. We need to develop new models and new approaches. We need to make new investments in the forest industry. We need to have newer mills and new approaches to make that investment to make the sawmills hum again — well, to make new sawmills hum again.

I'll comment briefly. This is where the HST is going to be of great significance. At the Nanaimo Forest Products mill, as it's now called, they're going to greatly benefit from the new HST. Many of the inputs that they pay for as inputs to cost of production of pulp currently have PST on them. Under the harmonized sales tax, they'll be able to recoup all of that.

When they sell pulp on the open market, they have to compete internationally with firms from Denmark, Sweden and around the world that have value-added taxes. There are 130 countries that have value-added taxes, and we were at an unfair advantage — not a level playing field — because we had to embed all our costs, from the purchase of tools to supplies. All those incremental costs built up to inflate the costs as they produced pulp. Those will now be wiped clean, and it will make their cost opportunity much better, their profit opportunity much brighter. They'll make more money, employ more people and expand their jobs.

They are also a beneficiary of the climate action initiatives that we're doing. They look to modernize the mill and convert some of the hog fuel into energy and distribute it into Nanaimo. Madam Speaker, as you may know, that's an urgent need on Vancouver Island, where we produce only about one-third of our hydroelectric power. So these cogeneration opportunities are very important to British Columbia and to Vancouver Island particularly.

But that's only one move. As we move further north on Vancouver Island, they're ready to welcome the world with a new expanded runway at Nanaimo Airport. They've reduced the ceiling, if you want, from, I think 600 feet down to 300 feet that they can guide planes to before they land on an expanded runway.

[1555]

They're building a new terminal with new terminal facilities. The new pressures to open the skies up, open up airline connections to different parts of the world, will

[ Page 3357 ]

greatly impact the opportunities, not just for tourism but for business in central Vancouver Island.

It won't benefit just the city of Nanaimo. It will benefit the entire Cowichan Valley, and it will affect Qualicum-Parksville — all of these businesses that need international connections to prosper and to expand their businesses. And there's a wide variety of businesses.

Digital Resources, in Parksville-Qualicum, designs buildings for around the world. It's a little known business, a modest location on a second floor, but if you go into the business, you're immediately lifted by the spirit and youth there. I don't think there's anybody over 40 in the entire building, and they're all busily away at their computers. They design buildings such as the seal structure for — yes — the Superdome and for the new New York Mets stadium in New York. And around the world they basically do the detailed design for all of these buildings. It's an amazing group.

Now, of course, they do nothing but work on computers and buy programs and buy supplies. At the rate they use computers, they go through them. They have to have only the most modern, the strongest, most powerful computers that are made, and they have to buy a lot of them. Here again the HST tax input credit will enable them to buy those computers and make their business more efficient and more profitable.

More profitable means to them that they'll be able to expand their business, hire more people, hire more employees in the city of Parksville and keep these highly trained, highly skilled, educated people in Canada. It will be of great benefit to them.

Further downtown the cruise ship terminal is underway and going to be expanded. I think they're going to be one of the great benefits of this explosion of tourism or awareness of how beautiful British Columbia is.

I have to say that when I came to British Columbia many, many years ago…. I comment that I should have paid more attention to my grade 10 geography. I left Winnipeg, where I was — it was a blowing snowstorm in 30 below — and I landed here. The grass was green, and everybody apologized for how crisp it was, but the grass was green.

I think people will certainly realize th