British Columbia Hansard — Monday, May 26, 2014

20140526am-Hansard-v13n6

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session, 40th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Monday, May 26, 2014 Morning Sitting Volume 13, Number 6

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC Second Session, 40th Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Linda Reid EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council .............................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing ......................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Amrik Virk Minister of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Norm Letnick Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development ........................................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Minister of Education ..................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister Responsible for Core Review .....................................................................Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Environment ..........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Minister of Finance .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations......................................................................................Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health ............................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of International Trade and Minister Responsible for Asia Pacifi c Strategy and Multiculturalism ..................Hon.

Teresa Wat Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ...................................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of State for Tourism and Small Business ....................................................................................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto Minister of Justice ...............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation......................................................................................................Hon. Don McRae Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ................................................................................... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon.

Todd Stone LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ...................................................................................................................................................John Horgan Deputy Speaker .............................................................................................................................................................................Douglas Horne Assistant Deputy Speaker ...............................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ....................................................................................................................................... Marc Dalton Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ................................................................................................................................................... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees .................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................Roderick MacArthur, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary Lenz

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Anton, Hon. Suzanne (BC Liberal) .............................. Vancouver-Fraserview Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal).....................................................................Penticton Austin, Robin (NDP) ................................................................................ Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP) ....................................................................Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ............................................... Cariboo-Chilcotin Bennett, Hon.

Bill (BC Liberal) ...................................................Kootenay East Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) ................................................... Peace River South Bing, Dr. Doug (BC Liberal) ................................ Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Valemount Cadieux, Hon. Stephanie (BC Liberal) ................................Surrey-Cloverdale Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .................................Vancouver–West End Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................

Burnaby-Edmonds Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) ........................................ Westside-Kelowna Coleman, Hon. Rich (BC Liberal) ...........................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .............................................................. Kootenay West Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ..................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Dalton, Marc (BC Liberal) ............................................. Maple Ridge–Mission Darcy, Judy (NDP) ..................................................................New Westminster de Jong, Hon.

Michael, QC (BC Liberal) .............................. Abbotsford West Dix, Adrian (NDP)............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ......................................................................... Stikine Eby, David (NDP) ..........................................................Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP) ................................................... Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ............................................................ Port Coquitlam Fassbender, Hon.

Peter (BC Liberal) ................................... Surrey-Fleetwood Fleming, Rob (NDP) .......................................................... Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) .......................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Scott (NDP) ............................................................Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) .............................................

Abbotsford-Mission Hamilton, Scott (BC Liberal) ...........................................................Delta North Hammell, Sue (NDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Heyman, George (NDP) .................................................... Vancouver-Fairview Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ............................................... Surrey–White Rock Holman, Gary (NDP) .......................................Saanich North and the Islands Horgan, John (NDP) .......................................................................

Juan de Fuca Horne, Douglas (BC Liberal) ..............................Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ....................................................Surrey-Panorama Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, Carole (NDP) .........................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................Esquimalt–Royal Roads Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) .............................................................

Nanaimo Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ........................................................................ Shuswap Lake, Hon. Dr. Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .........................................Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Letnick, Hon.

Norm (BC Liberal) ..............................Kelowna–Lake Country Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McRae, Hon. Don (BC Liberal) .................................................. Comox Valley Martin, John (BC Liberal) ..................................................................Chilliwack Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ..................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Hon.

Coralee (BC Liberal) .............................................Cariboo North Pimm, Pat (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River North Plecas, Darryl (BC Liberal) ....................................................Abbotsford South Polak, Hon. Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon.

Linda (BC Liberal) ..................................................Richmond East Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ........................................ Port Moody–Coquitlam Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ........................................................................North Coast Robinson, Selina (NDP) .............................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Routley, Bill (NDP) .................................................................. Cowichan Valley Routley, Doug (NDP) ............................................Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, Hon.

John (BC Liberal) ................................................ Nechako Lakes Shin, Jane Jae Kyung (NDP) ...............................................Burnaby-Lougheed Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Shane (NDP) ..................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal) ........................................ Parksville-Qualicum Stilwell, Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) ........................................ Vancouver-Langara Stone, Hon. Todd (BC Liberal) .........................

Kamloops–South Th ompson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal) ..................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal) ...........................................Vancouver–False Creek Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal) ..................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ............................................................Fraser-Nicola Th omson, Hon. Steve (BC Liberal) .......................................Kelowna-Mission Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ..........................

North Vancouver–Seymour Th roness, Laurie (BC Liberal).................................................Chilliwack-Hope Trevena, Claire (NDP) .................................................................... North Island Virk, Hon. Amrik (BC Liberal) ............................................. Surrey-Tynehead Wat, Hon. Teresa (BC Liberal) .............................................. Richmond Centre Weaver, Dr. Andrew (Ind.) .......................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wilkinson, Hon. Andrew (BC Liberal) ........................ Vancouver-Quilchena Y amamoto, Hon.

Naomi (BC Liberal) ................ North Vancouver–Lonsdale Y ap, John (BC Liberal) ......................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission ......................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South ............................................................................Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West ...................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Alberni–Pacifi c Rim ..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Boundary-Similkameen ................................................................ Linda Larson Burnaby–Deer Lake ................................................................... Kathy Corrigan Burnaby-Edmonds ..........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .............................................................Jane Jae Kyung Shin Burnaby North .............................................................................. Richard T.

Lee Cariboo-Chilcotin ........................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North .................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ......................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Hope ....................................................................... Laurie Th roness Columbia River–Revelstoke .................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley...........................................................................Hon.

Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .....................................................Douglas Horne Coquitlam-Maillardville........................................................... Selina Robinson Cowichan Valley ................................................................................

Bill Routley Delta North ..................................................................................Scott Hamilton Delta South...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola....................................................................................

Jackie Tegart Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ..................................................Hon. Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country ..................................................... Hon. Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon. Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon.

Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................ Dr. Doug Bing Nanaimo ........................................................................... Leonard Eugene Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan .........................................................

Doug Routley Nechako Lakes ........................................................................ Hon. John Rustad Nelson-Creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall New Westminster ............................................................................... Judy Darcy North Coast......................................................................................Jennifer Rice North Island .................................................................................. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................Hon.

Naomi Y amamoto North Vancouver–Seymour ..................................................Jane Th ornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...................................................... Dr. Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum .................................................................Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................

Pat Pimm Peace River South ............................................................................Mike Bernier Penticton............................................................................................ Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam ..........................................................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam ................................................................Linda Reimer Powell River–Sunshine Coast ................................................. Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie .............................................................

Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ................................................... Hon. Shirley Bond Richmond Centre ......................................................................Hon. Teresa Wat Richmond East ..........................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ..............................................................................John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands .................................................... Gary Holman Saanich South ................................................................................

Lana Popham Shuswap ................................................................................................Greg Kyllo Skeena .............................................................................................. Robin Austin Stikine ....................................................................................... Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Fleetwood ........................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ................................................................................. Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................................... Marvin Hunt Surrey-Tynehead ......................................................................Hon. Amrik Virk Surrey-Whalley..............................................................................

Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ....................................................................... Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Fairview ..................................................................George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek ................................................................... Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview ......................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Vancouver-Hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara .................................................................Dr. Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .........................................

Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey .........................................................................David Eby Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................ Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Vancouver–West End ...............................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill .......................................................................Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.........................................................................Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................. Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ..........................................................Jordan Sturdy Westside-Kelowna ................................................................

Hon. Christy Clark Party Standings: BC Liberal 49; New Democratic 34; Independent 2

CONTENTS Monday, May 26, 2014 Morning Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members ..................................................................................................................................................... 4089 Orders of the Day Private Members' Statements ................................................................................................................................................. 4089 Safeguarding young people's future G. Heyman J. Sturdy AAA J. Yap M. Elmore Th e private sector H. Bains M. Hunt Beef D. Barnett N.

Simons Private Members' Motions ..................................................................................................................................................... 4096 Motion 20 — Co-governance of public education system R. Fleming J. Th ornthwaite S. Robinson L. Reimer K. Corrigan S. Gibson N. Macdonald S. Hamilton C. James M. Dalton B. Ralston

MONDAY , MAY 26, 2014 Th e House met at 10:02 a.m. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers. Introductions by Members J. Sturdy: My new CA, Nicola Bentley, is in the House today. Please have the House make her welcome. Orders of the Day Private Members' Statements SAFEGUARDING YOUNG PEOPLE'S FUTURE G. Heyman: We have now entered graduation season. It's a time of transition for young people. It's a time they want to celebrate. Th ey have a lot to celebrate — both what they've accomplished and their future.

It's also a time when they're called upon to exercise judgment, oft en based on their limited life experience. It's a time their judgment is also oft en aff ected by their peers. [R. Chouhan in the chair.] Shannon Raymond. Ernest Azoadam. MacKenzie Gortva. Th ese three young people are the reason I'm speaking this morning. It's been almost six years since 16-year-old Shannon Raymond died following a party which was followed by a trip on a party bus in which alcohol and drugs were readily available.

It's been 15 months since 16-year-old Ernest Azoadam died at Surrey Memorial Hospital aft er being found abandoned at a Chevron station in Surrey following a ride on a party bus. [1005] It's been six months since 17-year-old MacKenzie Gortva and three of her friends were picked up in Surrey and given free alcohol while on a party bus. MacKenzie was then sucker-punched by a male passenger, and rather than being taken for care, she was taken off the bus and left in a parking lot, along with her three friends, while the bus drove away. MacKenzie survived, but there could have been another outcome.

There are undoubtedly countless incidents about which we haven't heard. Y outh are vulnerable, particu- larly to those who provide them with drugs and alcohol and ignore their duty to off er protection. Some time ago the former Transportation Minister, now the Environment Minister, promised to review regu- lations in order to increase the safety of the party bus industry. In March 2013 she said: "Should there be a nar- rowing, a specifi c type of licence?

Th ose are the questions we're asking as we undertake the review." She also said: "As a mother and as Minister of Transportation, I will not tolerate unsafe practices that put our young people at risk." Y et there's still no action — simply a pledge to talk tough to the industry. Party buses are usually licensed under the Ministry of Transportation's general authorization category, which is the most wide-open category. It requires no chauff eur permit, and fares are not regulated. Th ey do not even have the level of regulation that applies to limousines and taxis.

More and more of these vehicles are operating as little more than rolling bars, oft en targeting under- age customers. This unregulated industry is operating on the frin- ges of the legitimate taxi and limousine industry, and it threatens youth and threatens public safety. We as legis- lators, as legislators around this continent are beginning to demonstrate, have a very special duty to protect the safety of young people. In 2012 California passed laws to protect under-age passengers from harm and to end the practice of dump- ing sick or distressed passengers in isolated, dangerous locations.

Th ere is now a requirement for chaperones to be on board. Th ey caught up to the rules for other pas- senger vehicles because their party buses, like here in B.C., operated in a great grey area. Th at legislation passed both the state senate and the assembly with no oppos- ition whatsoever. Recently in Long Island, New Y ork, a bus driver claimed not to know that 42 teens on board had more than 100 cans of beer plus bottles of hard liquor. Th is was only brought to police attention following a 911 call from a bystander who heard a young girl's screams for help.

As a result of this, in New Y ork a state assemblyman and a state senator are introducing laws that would regulate the party bus industry, saying: "We are incredibly lucky that none of the children on that bus were hurt. We can- not aff ord to take that chance again." In Washington State the Utilities and Transportation Commission looked at the United States and B.C., al- though they had not had much in the way of reported incidents, and they've decided to be proactive. Th ey've begun the process to develop legislation for the next legislative session in January.

Th e commission's report was well received by both parties in a joint transportation committee, and they ex- pect the legislation, when it's introduced in January, to have bipartisan support. Th e study they presented that was so well received noted that between 2009 and mid- 2013 party buses were involved in 22 incidents in the United States and British Columbia, and 21 of those re- sulted in fatalities. There is industry support for regulation. Tommy 4089

British Columbia Debates4090 Monday, May 26, 2014 Cuscito, the longtime owner of Vancouver Partybuses and Limousines, wrote to the Transportation Minister recently, asking that he tighten the rules, saying that un- safe operators were giving his industry a bad name. "At least 50 percent are not playing by the rules. A general au- thorization licence to operate a limo or bus is practically turnkey. Th ere are no background checks." [1010] We see ads for the industry that show open drinking. Th at is part of what sells this to children.

We can't aff ord to turn a blind eye and simply say: "Th e law is there, and it should be enforced." It's clear that a greater level of regu- lation — at least akin to t axis and limousines — needs to be brought in to protect young people from unscrupu- lous operators who, unfortunately, are making up a large part of the expansion of this industry. We need greater enforcement of existing laws as well as new regulation that should be brought in. We need stiff er fi nes, because we cannot aff ord to wait for another tra- gedy before we act. Th e time is now. J. Sturdy: Th ank you to the member opposite.

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak to the issues raised by the hon. member, for the subject certainly is worthy of discussion. Y outh safety, especially at this time of the year, is a concern. But really, we should be thinking about it every day. Safety is about the quality of judgment and decision- making in a complex environment not just for govern- ment and industry but for each and every one of us at an individual level. Th is issue is recent, current and compelling to me.

Last year — in which, in the province, we had two grave inci- dents involving youths, party buses and substance abuse — my daughter was celebrating her high school gradua- tion — and my older daughter the year before. Really, what is a father to do? Perhaps we've forgotten, but I think we do all know what it's like to be young, per- haps naive and maybe impetuous, during a rite of spring — a graduation — when you feel as though you'll live forever. As a parent, you hope they make good decisions.

Y ou trust that they think critically and understand that every day they're making choices that have consequences and that, ultimately, they're the ones who will live with those consequences. Y ou trust that they understand the need to be aware of their surroundings, that they assess risk and make deci- sions appropriately. Be it in the mountains, on the ocean or downtown, be it biking or driving or gaming, meeting a new dog, a new boss or attending another party — we all have to keep an eye out to look and listen and make thoughtful, considered decisions.

My wife and I tried to incorporate the idea of a de- cision tree in our family discussions, albeit imperfect- ly. We talked with our girls about our lives and choices, both good and bad, the risks, and the potential and real consequences. I know my wife will comment that I have a tendency to be creative — or very creative perhaps — in my negative consequence generation. But you know, I don't like to be surprised, and I don't want my kids to be, either. Bad things can happen regardless, but there's little to be lost from thinking critically and understand- ing the risks you take.

As a parent, we just can't be there all the time, ready to help out. Right now my two girls are in Africa, and for whatever reason the Whip wouldn't give me leave for a month. We were on FaceTime with them yesterday, and they were telling us about what was going on with them, and it all seems good. But they're on their own way. We can only hope that with some good judgment and a little luck, they'll be home in no time. Whether you're in Africa or Vancouver, in the moun- tains or on the job, hanging out at the lake or on a party bus, we all have decisions to make.

As a society and as a government, we have a collective responsibility to legis- late and regulate and create codes of ethics, and we do. From food to fuel, mediations to merry-go-rounds, the rules of conduct are most oft en clear — as they are in the circumstances of party buses. Open alcohol is prohibited in a motor vehicle, be it a car, a limousine or a bus. It is against the law.

I understand that the passenger transportation branch of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure con- tacted bus charters and limousine operators to review their policies regarding transporting liquor in vehicles, and reminded them of their obligations and responsibil- ities under the Liquor Control and Licensing Act. [1015] We must recognize not only that are there many trans- portation options that graduates will be making use of at this time of the year — transportation planning should be top of mind, given the usual intensity and duration of grad celebrations — but that there will be many other critical choices to be made that day or on any day.

Th ere isn't any substitute for vigilance and personal judgment. Government has a part to play, as do parents. But ul- timately, it's the responsibility of the individual to be their own best advocate, to keep an eye out for themselves and others, to plan for the worst and hope for the best. At least, that's what this farmer would do. I do welcome the chance to ruminate on our collective and individual rights and responsibilities, and I do thank the member opposite for the opportunity. G. Heyman: While I welcome the concern expressed by the member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky, we ultim- ately

part company over the thought that in the end we have to, essentially, police ourselves. Th ere are so many areas in which we don't apply that criteria to adults, let alone to young people who are feeling their legs for the fi rst time as young adults. We have had serious incidents in British Columbia.

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4091 We have had fatalities. We have had incidents that could have been far more serious than they were and might have been fatalities. More incidents will likely happen if we do nothing. Th e industry itself is calling for greater regulation. As I mentioned, Tommy Cuscito of Vancouver Partybuses and Limousines also said: "Government right now has their blinders on. I think they should open their eyes and realize these challenges aren't going to go away".

Todd Curley, also a general manager in the industry, said that the industry has been "spiralling out of control" for three years now. We have an industry that openly advertises that when you are on their bus, the liquor laws will be broken. Th ey do this by running ads showing people standing up, hold- ing open bottles of alcohol and open glasses of alcohol. We know this is illegal whether you're an adult or a child, but we are not taking action.

Do we have to wait for an- other tragedy while parents of children who have died lobby and advocate and try to get some closure and re- spect for the loss their families suff ered? Vancouver city council has endorsed a call for regula- tion, as has Maple Ridge. Recently the Lower Mainland municipal government association passed a call for regulation, and this will now go to the Union of B.C. Municipalities. Support for government action in this area is growing because there's a lack of appropriate regu- lation for the limousine and party bus industry. Th ere is no requirement for chaperones.

Th ere is no requirement that people not be dropped off in an unsafe manner in the middle of nowhere if they are in distress or in trouble. I t is time to make change. I t is time to listen to the voices of parents. It's time to listen to the voices of other jurisdictions that are being more proactive than British Columbia aft er reviewing British Columbia's own history. We can do better than simply saying that if there's open alcohol on a bus, you're subject to a $234 fi ne and a li- quor pour-out. It is time to bring in specifi c regulations. AAA J.

Y ap: Last year British Columbians chose a govern- ment that would continue to balance the budget, keep taxes low and set the right economic conditions for our province. Well, it has only been just one year since the 2013 election. Th is government is on track and deliv- ering precisely on that promise. It's with great pleasure, therefore, that I rise on behalf of my constituents of the riding of Richmond-Steveston to acknowledge British Columbia's triple-A credit rating, the highest credit rat- ing possible. One might ask: what is so important about the prov- ince earning a triple-A credit rating?

Is it some esoteric academic construct? What's so important? [1020] Well, in short, it is an acknowledgment by internation- al credit agencies that the B.C. government is directly on target by balancing the budget, by keeping control of government spending and by taking a balanced ap- proach to increased demands on core programs such as health care and education while at the same time respect- ing the taxpayer. More importantly, it means that, through prudent fi s- cal management, our government has the fi scal freedom to choose its own direction.

Y es, we have made some diffi cult decisions to balance the budget and return the province to a position of fi nancial strength. Still there are many, many demands to spend money in program areas. But through a disciplined approach, we have been able to focus on the most important priorities that matter to the people of British Columbia. It should be mentioned that we have not been able to do this alone. Our hard-working professionals in the public service deserve a great deal of credit, because they have agreed to modest wage increases over the past few years.

Aft er the market meltdown in 2008, the worst fi - nancial crisis since the Great Depression, there are very few jurisdictions that enjoy a triple-A credit rating. Th rough prudent fi scal management, British Columbia has worked hard to regain our fi nancial freedom. But what does that mean in real terms? Even during the aft ermath of the 2008 economic crisis, British Columbia was still able to fi nance spending on vital capital projects. While other jurisdictions were forced to curb spending and make drastic cutbacks, British Columbia was able to use our triple-A credit rating to stimulate the economy.

While other jurisdictions were forced to put off the re- placement of worn-out bridges and roads in desperate need of repair, British Columbia, our province, was in a position to make those investments and save taxpayers a considerable amount of money in the long run. In the years following 2008 British Columbia con- tinued to make signifi cant investments in infrastructure, including schools, health facilities, public transit and improvements to our highways and bridges, all the things that make British Columbia a competitive economy. Th at is the value of a triple-A credit rating.

We have earned that credit rating because we have adhered to a disciplined approach to spending. For the second year in a row, British Columbia has balanced its budget. Th is is a remarkable accomplishment for any gov- ernment, especially in the wake of 2008. It's the reason why British Columbia continues to maintain the highest credit rating possible with Moody's, Standard and Poor's and Fitch, the leading credit agencies in the world. While this is good news, we must remain cognizant of a fragile global economy.

While it may seem like time to pull out the champagne and pop the corks, we are by no means in the clear. In its most recent report Moody's Investors Service reminds us that the B.C. economy re- mains vulnerable to fl uctuating demand for our natural resources.

British Columbia Debates4092 Monday, May 26, 2014 Weaker commodity prices could threaten the general outlook for the B.C. economy. Th is is the reason why we must adhere to a disciplined, prudent approach to fi scal management. As much as the opposition would like us to, this is not the time to throw open the doors on public spending. Th is would threaten our future. In conclusion, I invite members opposite to support the value of sound fi scal management on the basis that job growth and our provincial economy is benefi ting from a triple-A credit rating. I look forward to the com- ments of the member opposite.

M. Elmore: Th ank you to the member for Richmond- Steveston for moving the motion today. I'm looking for- ward to responding to his statement. [1025] Th e concern I'd like to raise and register — it was ref- erenced by the member — was certainly looking behind the credit rating but also acknowledging that the outlook has been downgraded from our previous provincial rat- ing of stable to negative.

I think it's important to have an understanding of some of those dynamics that have caused that downgrading of the outlook and look into some of those underlying issues that contribute to our fi nancial stability here in British Columbia. Moody's Investors Service downgraded B.C.'s out- look in December 2012 from stable — previously we were stable — to negative, and with the recent report, it maintains that rating as negative. So we have not seen a return to that level. What were some of the concerns, in terms of driving that decision?

Th e key behind that was the citing of the increased debt that we have here in British Columbia, lower than anticipated natural gas revenues, which we ex- perience from time to time with the fl uctuation of com- modity prices in the global market, and also the regular pressures of expenses on our budget. I think we need to have an understanding in terms of what's behind the concern registered by Moody's with respect to the debt and our accumulation of debt. When we look at our debt, it has really been a situation of bal- looning debt.

We've seen, not only over the past ten years but even if we look at the last two years, last three years, under this government and with Premier Clark, that we've added $10 billion to our debt. With our current fi s- cal plan to 2016, we're going to be adding an additional $14 billion debt. Th at means that by the end of the plan our debt will have increased by $24.3 billion or 55 percent, and this is, indeed, the biggest increase in B.C. history — that, in the face of the recent election promise of running a debt-free B.C.

We see that not only do we not have a debt-free B.C., but we are experiencing the fastest-growing debt ever, and in terms of reducing that, that's not in sight. In addition to the debt and that going out of control, with regards to the concern with the other factors that were driving the downgrade in the outlook, with regards to our weaker commodity prices, certainly we have the concern with respect to the negotiations around what is going to be the tax and pricing regime with our lique- fi ed gas industry. Th at's a concern, as well, and has not been addressed. Behind that, as well, we have the reality of….

I'd char- acterize it as fi scal, fi nancial mismanagement in a num- ber of diff erent areas that have driven the debt up. Th is is with regards to investment in projects that have ex- ceeded the proposed budgets. We've seen budget over- runs. We've also seen quite dramatic mismanagement in our Crown corporations — B.C. Hydro, B.C. Ferries. We've seen costs rising there. Additionally, with regards to our fi scal abilities, we've seen, on the one hand, a restriction of our revenues but also an increase in taxes, particularly, borne by British Columbians. We've seen, overall, an expansion of debt.

We've seen mismanagement on a number of infrastruc- ture investments, mismanagement in Crown corpora- tions, leading to concerns in terms of the management of our economy. [1030] J. Y ap: I'd to acknowledge and thank the member op- posite for her comments. I gather from the tone of the comments that it sounds like she and, perhaps, members opposite believe that we should certainly move forward and build a brand-new industry, liquefi ed natural gas, to ensure British Columbia's continued economic growth and prosperity, which is exactly what this government is pursuing.

I'd like to draw on an example of what it would be like to not have a triple-A credit, and that is the Ontario example. Th e province of Ontario, once the economic powerhouse of Canada, does not have a triple-A credit rating. With a higher cost of borrowing, Ontario has to pay 9.3 cents out of every tax dollar on interest. Th at's more than double what British Columbia pays, which is four cents on the dollar. If B.C. was in the same boat as Ontario, we would be paying roughly an additional $2.2 billion on servicing the debt. Th at's a $2.2 billion hole in our budget if we did not have a triple-A credit rating.

Th ankfully, that is not the case. I still hold out hope that members opposite will join me in supporting B.C.'s prudent approach to managing tax dollars by prudent fi scal management, by making tough choices, by spending discipline and by ensuring that we continue to maintain the triple-A credit rating that we have earned as a result of these initiatives. It takes discipline to control our spending despite many, many demands placed on the public purse.

British Columbians have made it clear that they value a prudent approach to the management of their tax dollars, and the triple-A credit rating that British Columbia enjoys is a re-

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4093 sult of our concerted eff orts. THE PRIV ATE SECTOR H. Bains: It is my pleasure to stand up today and speak about our economy, jobs and the private sector. In order to have a thriving economy, we all, I'm sure, agree that you must have a thriving, strong, vibrant and diverse pri- vate sector to create jobs and to improve our economy. In addition to that, we need a strong middle class and work- ing class. We have neither. Th at's the problem. Statistics that just came in recently, two weeks ago Friday, I think paint a very worrisome picture.

I want to talk about that because it's not just this one report; it's the trend. When you go back 31 months ago, for the en- tire period the trend is there. The trend is that we are losing private sector jobs rather than building and enhancing private sector jobs in the province. It's at a time when the last election was won over the economy and jobs. We have seen quite the opposite aft er the election, largely, I would say, due to neglect by the government to deal with some of the fun- damentals that our economy is facing. We are trying to put all eggs in one basket — LNG. Th e high-tech industry is ignored.

Th e forest industry is ig- nored. Many other manufacturing industries are ignored. Time and again the industry, from all sectors, have it in mind that this government and everyone who will lis- ten…. Th e diffi culty is and the challenge that they face in investing in B.C. is because of the shortage of skills in this province. I'll give you some of the statistics — and these are quite alarming — the recent report that came from Statistics Canada. B.C. lost 3,700 jobs last month, including 5,000 full-time jobs and 9,600 private sector jobs. Th at's the worrisome number — 9,600 private sector jobs.

Month aft er month we have seen these reports. Y ou don't see any light at the end of the tunnel. Th at is not a good sign for our economy or our youngsters coming out of schools and universities. For example, youth 15 to 24 lost 5,500 jobs last month. Th e youth unemployment rate increased from 11.1 percent to 11.4 percent, and 41,000 youth are offi cially unemployed. [1035] Th ere's a large amount of underemployment as well. Th ere are 342,000 people in B.C. who want full-time work but can't get it.

In addition to 143,000 people look- ing for work, there are 136,000 who work part-time but want a full-time job and 62,000 who want a job but have stopped actively looking for a job. Mr. Speaker, 62,000 have stopped looking for jobs. Th at is really worrisome. Since the jobs plan started 30 months ago, B.C. has had one of Canada's worst records of job creation — sixth place in overall job creation. We created 26,600 jobs ver- sus the population growth of 103,700 — eighth place for private sector job creation and tenth place for wage growth.

If those are not worrisome numbers to that side of this House, then I feel for everyone who is looking for a job. I feel for all those who are coming out of schools and universities. On top of that, if you want to really measure how our economy and jobs are doing, you need to actually look at not the unemployment rate; you need to look at the employment rate. Th ose 62,000 will not be counted when you are looking at the unemployment rate. Right now the B.C. employment rate is around 59 percent, which is second worst of the provinces.

How does anyone have any faith in looking at a job and having a hope or oppor- tunity — those who are coming out from the universities and schools? It's so bad…. Just looking historically, B.C. had almost the same as the Canada rate when it comes to employment — 63.7 percent prior to the recession that hit us, 2008-2009. Th e decline during the recession was much steeper. By sum- mer 2009 it fell to just 62 percent. Since the recovery of- fi cially began in summer 2009, things have only gotten worse. Th e employment rate has only bounced around in subsequent years with no discernible recovery.

In fact, by March 2013 the provincial employment rate declined below 60 percent, slightly lower than the summer of 2009 during the worst days of the recession. We are actually not recovering. We are going down from the worst time in the recession. Th at should worry everyone in this House and everyone outside. Th ese are not numbers that somebody can pick from thin air. Th ese are Statistics Canada numbers. Th ey have been monitor- ing it for quite some time. Th at is a real, real problem for our economy and for the private sector. Th ere are many reasons. Th e C.D. Howe report that was mentioned earlier on….

Th ey are also worried that the unemployment rate actually increased because of the introduction of temporary foreign workers. Th ere are some policies in place that are actually adding to the un- employment in the province. Th at's why we have people leaving the province. Over 12,000 people left B.C. last year. Since the jobs plan was introduced, 12,000 have left — than people who came in. Th at is a very serious con- cern, and I urge everyone to start paying attention and build a strong private sector. M. Hunt: Thank you to the member for Surrey- Newton for his comments and raising this issue.

I'm ab- solutely delighted that he raised the issue, because I think the economy is extremely important to everyone in the province of British Columbia. Th at's why just over a year ago we ran on the whole platform of building a strong economy and a secure tomorrow. In fact, that's the man- date that the citizens of this good province gave to us to work on, and that's certainly what we're doing. [1040] I think it's important for us to always recognize, when we're looking at trends, looking at how things are map-

British Columbia Debates4094 Monday, May 26, 2014 ping out over time, is how long a space we are actually taking. As the member mentioned, the downturn of '08 is extremely signifi cant in British Columbia. But the rest of Canada, the rest of the world…. We see the world's economy not going down as soft ly as it happened in Canada — and in western Canada, in particular. We see drastic downturns. We see unemploy- ment in some areas up 30, 40, 50 percent when we get over to Europe. We see drastic situations. What we have here is we are very fortunate and we are very blessed com- pared to the rest of the world.

As a matter of fact, if we take that trend out a little further, let's look at things like the unemployment rate. Unemployment in the province of British Columbia is in fact lower than the national average across Canada. If we take it across a longer time period, we fi nd that if we…. Let's deal with diff erent regions of the province while we're thinking about this. If we go to the Cariboo, for example, and what's hap- pening in the Cariboo, if we go back to January of 1999, the unemployment rate was 16.3 percent.

Th e unemploy- ment rate today in the Cariboo is 6.3 percent Th at's a trend in the positive direction going the right way, cre- ating jobs and employing our citizens. If we look at the north coast and Nechako, in May of 2002 the unemployment rate was 16 percent. Today it's 7.3 percent. Certainly, we want to do better than 7.3 per- cent, but again, the trend is going in the correct direction. In the northeast sector the unemployment in 2002 was 11.8 percent. Today it's 8.6.

Again, depending on the time frames that we look at, if we look at longer terms, we see that in fact the trend is going in the right direction be- cause we have a government that is committed to grow- ing the economy. When we talk about the jobs plan, certainly at any point in time these numbers can fl uctuate, but the basic principles are solid and true. The basic principles of growing an economy are, fi rst of all, having low taxes. Th at's one of the most critical areas for employment for businesses to be attracted to an area.

Second, of course, is having a balanced budget, which again is something that we put forward to the citizens a year ago. Th e citizens supported us in that, and we're working hard on accomplishing that. Th ird, of course, is to create an atmosphere that is busi- ness friendly. Th at is why the mantra that you hear from this side of the House is working on the process of getting to yes — fi nding ways to see responsible, environment- ally sound development happening within this province so that we can in fact build those jobs.

Of course, we need to be recognizing that we are a resource-based economy, so we have to be looking at trade. We have to be looking at our business part- ners around the world and what's happening there. I'm pleased to advise that we're fi nding our exports are in fact increasing. British Columbia total exports were $33.5 billion in 2013, which is an increase of 6.4 percent com- pared to 2012, while the rest of Canada only increased their exports by 3.8 percent. So we see a tremendous in- crease in the province of British Columbia.

Forest products alone had exports of $11.6 billion in 2013, which is, again, an increase of 14.2 percent over the 2012 number, which is $10.16 billion. We see that we're going in the right direction. Th at's why we're also looking at education, right from kindergarten through to post-secondary education. We're remapping, and we're re-engineering how we do that process so that in fact we actually see more jobs, more skills being developed within our young people; so that they're there, available for those jobs as those jobs become available. H.

Bains: I knew if somebody was to stand up from there that they would fi nd something to tell the public that all those statistics that I read from Statistics Canada somehow are wrong, and that somehow the investment they have made in spin-doctoring that they are…. I must admit that this crowd here is the best in the country when it comes to spin-doctoring. We've just seen it now. [1045] Th e sloganeering continues on. A secure tomorrow: that's how the election was run and won about a year ago. Th e statistics clearly say that there is an insecure fu- ture.

Th at tomorrow is now, and that tomorrow today is not very good. Th at's what Statistics Canada says. Th at's not just what I'm saying or what anyone else is saying. Statistics Canada numbers are showing that it's a very, very worrisome situation right now. We talk about the outlook. Y ou take a look not only at the statistics on what we've done so far. Th e outlook that came just the other day is negative for this province. Th e reason for a negative outlook is because of the balloon- ing debt that this government has incurred. When this Premier took offi ce, the debt in the province was $45 billion.

In the last two years that has ballooned by $17 billion, and there will be another $7 billion added in the next three years. Over 53 percent debt is added to us, to our children and their children, and they're talking about a secure future, a secure tomorrow? Moody's clearly showed that that is not a very secure future — that they have no plan to reverse the increas- ing debt in this province. Th at's why the negative out- look. Also, they are talking about the commodity prices. It's worrisome. Y ou can't put all eggs in one basket. Th at's exactly what's been happening here.

Th ey are saying that weaker commodity prices — suit- ably cautious, including on the promise of liquefied natural gas. "Th e decline in commodity prices, notably natural gas, had a signifi cant impact on natural resource activity." "Th e United States" — Jock Finlayson's quote I'm go-

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4095 ing to give to you — "will be energy self-suffi cient in the next decade." If they do that, if they stop buying energy from the rest of the world, think what's going to happen to our commodity prices. Th is government obviously is not interested in looking at that part of the picture. We need to do better, and we need to have a better private sector. BEEF D. Barnett: Th ank you for the opportunity to speak to something of special importance to many — to myself and to rural British Columbia — the ranching and beef industry. May 29 is B.C. Beef Day.

In partnership with the B.C. Cattlemen's Association, the B.C. Association of Cattle Feeders and the B.C. Association of Abattoirs, we honour all the cattle ranchers and farmers who work and make their living in the beef industry. It's a tough job but one that is a way of life for many British Columbians. B.C. ranchers take pride in fi lling the fi rst role in the beef production chain. Ranching is also an important part of the history, environment, economy and future of British Columbia. Th e annual B.C.

Beef Day is a great example of our government and the agrifood industry working togeth- er to promote local foods and generate economic bene- fi ts for B.C.'s food producers and communities. It is of great importance to our economy and agriculture sec- tor, as there are 5,069 farms reporting beef cattle, and 1,593 were feedlot operations. Th ere are 60 provincially licensed abattoirs, and 36 are for red meat. Th e total eco- nomic contribution of the industry is estimated at $600 million annually or 0.25 percent of the provincial GDP .

B.C. ranchers occupy more than fi ve million acres of private land and have tenure on a further 21.5 million acres of Crown land. It's impossible to travel this prov- ince without noticing the beef industry, whether it's driv- ing through ranch land, past a feedlot or stopping for a burger at a roadside restaurant. As part of B.C. Beef Day, local community organiza- tions are encouraged to have community barbecues and to partner with local grocery stores to celebrate. Th e B.C. Legislature also hosts a barbecue to celebrate on the back lawn. [1050] If you eat beef, then you have an interest in B.C. Beef Day.

As more and more of us develop an awareness of where our food comes from, it is important that we stay informed about the cattle industry in British Columbia. Our government is committed to promoting local foods, and we look forward to continuing to work with the in- dustry on a B.C. Certifi ed Beef label. Th e B.C. Certifi ed Beef logo on beef products, from prime cuts in fi ne res- taurants to ground beef in the meat case at your local grocery, guarantees that the beef was born, raised, fed and processed in British Columbia. Th at is something to be truly proud of.

It is also worth highlighting the many positive eff ects the beef industry can have on the environment. Th e agri- culture industry is closely tied with the environment. Ranchers know that a healthy environment and good business go hand in hand. Cattle, like all living things, have a place in nature's cycle, contributing to its balance by consuming and returning nutrients to their natural surroundings. Pasture lands used to feed livestock play a large role in cleaning our air. Carbon is absorbed through the extensive root systems on grasslands, in some cases working more eff ectively than trees.

Most land used in cattle production is unsuitable for crops. Ranching enables this land to contribute to food production. Ultimately, when you think of it, cattle pro- duction uses simple resources like sun, soil and grass to grow a healthy, safe and delicious product. Th ank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to- day on the importance of cattle ranching and the hard work B.C. ranchers do in our province. N.

Simons: I'd like to start by thanking the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin for giving us a good rundown on the cattle and ranching industry in British Columbia and pointing out the statistics and the importance of the in- dustry on our economy. I always look forward to Beef Day here. It's one of those days when we're sitting in the Legislature, and we're always happy to smell the waft ing fumes from outside at the back. It sure as heck beats the exhaust fumes of the Sysco truck back into the cafeteria.

I'd just like to say that it's also important at this point, perhaps, to point out some of the challenges that the in- dustry faces. I think, obviously, since 2003 of some of the health concerns around BSE, which had a huge impact on all of us as British Columbians. We're still, I think, work- ing out of that. I think there's still progress to be made as we emerge from that. Th ere's a role for government to play in supporting our ranching industry and our cattlemen.

I think one of the main cornerstones of that support has to come with consultation and making sure that government is in con- stant conversation with the folks who raise cattle and who basically have a vested interest in the policies that impact them, wherever they live in this province. Th e government's actions in the past have supported the industry, in terms of fi nancing for fencing issues and around increasing our export markets. I think one of the things that I'd like to see this government do more of is promote the local domestic consumption of our own B.C. beef right now.

British Columbians only consume about 20 percent of the beef that's raised in British Columbia. Th at's one of the angles that I would like to see govern- ment try to maybe put more eff ort into — the fact that B.C. Certifi ed Beef could be a brand that attracts British Columbians to purchase it. I looked at their Facebook page yesterday. Th ere are

British Columbia Debates4096 Monday, May 26, 2014 only 93 likes on it. I know that isn't necessarily the fi nal determinant of whether something's popular or not, but I think there needs to actually be concerted eff ort in pro- moting that.

Maybe even a buy-B.C. program would be one that would be more eff ective in getting us back to the point where British Columbians are extra conscious of where their food is coming from. [1055] Some of the more recent comments from government have not indicated support for the industry and, in fact, have been somewhat insulting to the cattle industry and the cattlemen, in particular, who have been requesting some input into legislative changes that are being con- templated by this House.

Some of the statements made by my friends and colleagues in this House, many from the government side caucus, indicate that there's a nega- tive impression of ranching, because they talk about how unviable it is compared to farming in the south. I think the government really needs to make sure that when they talk about the importance of supporting farm- ing, it isn't to get out of farming. Our policy in this House should not be to promote farming by letting people do other things to make money.

We should be supporting the farming and the ranching, not giving options for cre- ating diff erent industry on land that we need to preserve for agricultural purposes for generations to come. We should have measurable outcomes in terms of how government's specifi c policies are working. Are we in- creasing our domestic consumption? Are we increasing the export? Are we supporting farmers in their fencing needs? Are we dealing with issues of invasive plants? Are we actually making it easier to do the slaughtering?

I don't think that the meat regulations were exactly a pat on the head for the folks in the cattle industry. Now with the most recent insult, being left out of consultations around how our agricultural land is protected, I think it does tend to make people realize that the relationship between the sector and government isn't something you can count on forever or take for granted. In fact, I would like to quote from the most recent cor- respondence from the B.C. Cattlemen's Association to the ministry. Th ey would have been pleased to be consulted on Bill 24.

Th ey would have been pleased to have some op- portunity to discuss the changes that would have a direct and negative impact on their sector. But that opportun- ity was not aff orded to the B.C. Cattlemen's Association. "We kindly request that the minister delay any deci- sion on Bill 24 until further information is provided and consultation can be had with the farming and ranching community. It is our desire to be included in developing both the legislation as well as the regulations." Th at, to me, shows a defi nite weakness in this government's re- lationships. D.

Barnett: Our goal has always been to support agri- culture and the people who work in it. We are protecting valuable farmland and further supporting farming fam- ilies in the farming sector. A one-size-fi ts-all approach to regulating the use of farmland does not refl ect this reality. We want to help farmers and ranchers, many of whom are from my constituency, grow their business and earn a better living. Initiatives by our government such as the provincial Buy Local program with the B.C. Association of Cattle Feeders are helping introduce retailers and consumers to the Certifi ed B.C.

Beef brand in order to build relation- ships and promote these fi ne local products. B.C. beef is safe, as the industry practises safe and healthy methods in all production aspects, including animal health, transportation, food safety and trace- ability. Th e B.C. cattle industry is extremely diverse and includes small hobby farms, diversifi ed operations and large cattle ranchers. Most land in cattle production is unsuitable for crops. Ranching enables this land to contribute to food produc- tion.

Many ranchers collaborate with environmental and conservation groups to develop and protect areas on both private and government lands. B.C. beef producers are true land stewards and work to protect and sustain lands through a variety of programs and management practices. We support our farmers and ranchers and are pleased this week to celebrate B.C. Beef Day. Hon. T. Lake: I now call for private members' motions. Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, we need unanimous consent to proceed with this motion. Leave granted. Private Members' Motions MOTION 20 — CO-GOVERNANCE OF PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM R.

Fleming: [Be it resolved that this House support the principles of co- governance of public education between the Province and the Board of Education.] It's a pleasure to rise and speak a little bit about co- governance and the issues facing public education in British Columbia right now. [1100] [D. Horne in the chair.] To begin with, I want to talk about what co-governance is, because not everybody understands that this is backed up by a protocol in government. Th ere are references to it in the School Act.

It's basically a series of obligations and principles between the unique shared governance of pub- lic education that has evolved in British Columbia over a

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4097 long period of time, over many, many decades, and that were encoded in a protocol several years ago. Th ey outline some of the responsibilities as well as some of the norms for operating between the Ministry of Education and school districts. I'll highlight a few of, I think, the key principles that are incorporated in the school board. Th e protocol states a number of points, but one of them is that the province recognizes and acknowledges that boards of education are democratically elected by their constituents to represent the public interest in edu- cation.

It outlines that the minister recognizes the B.C. School Trustees Association as representing its member boards of education. In turn, the B.C. School Trustees Association recognizes the minister's right to determine public education policy for the province.

But I think one of the most key parts of this protocol document is that both parties are bound to "work in con- sultation with one another and with boards of education on new initiatives and seek to work cooperatively in the furtherance of public education in the province." Th e province must, in this protocol, notify the B.C. school trustees "on matters aff ecting boards of education and, in particular, on legislation, regulation, policies, programs, projects and initiatives; and individual boards of educa- tion on matters aff ecting them." What's interesting about that — just to bring this right up to date — is that where we are here on Monday, May 26, with an escalation of job action, with a partial lock- out being pursued by government, is that none of that was done.

Th ere's a letter from the B.C. School Trustees Association saying: "Where is the provincial govern- ment?" in terms of consulting with them on the imple- mentation of a lockout. Of course, things are unfolding rather quickly for those that are paying attention to this dispute, and there are millions that are in British Columbia because it af- fects their lives as parents, as students and as otherwise interested parties in public education. Th e government has completely failed to consult any of the interested parties in education, particularly school boards, though.

Government is now aggressively escalating this dis- pute and seeking to dock teachers' pay by 10 percent. School boards are the administrators and the employers of teachers and support staff . Th ey have no idea and have received no consultation or communication about how this will be accomplished. Th ere are so many questions about this measure now because it was not explained and their guidance was not sought by the Ministry of Education. It is threatening to put the education sector into chaos at a time when people thought that this school year would be completed on an orderly basis.

It now brings all of that into question. I suspect that this week could go disastrously if we don't see a change of course from the provincial government. Th e backdrop to all of these latest moves at and away from the negotiating table by government — these carrot- and-club negotiating tactics, if you will — is that we had a budget that was producing all kinds of unfunded cost pressures on school districts. Six weeks ago, eight weeks ago we were talking in British Columbia about mass lay- off s in schools, in growing school districts where enrol- ment was climbing.

We were talking about the loss of services and programs in our schools. It's because this government has produced a fi ve-year freeze on educa- tion funding. Th e imbalance of the protocol on co-governance is this. Th ere are obligations to communicate, to have a respect- ful relationship between school trustees and government. But of course, there's always going to be an incredible power imbalance because the partner that is in charge of administering the school system and making the day-to- day decisions, running the schools and doing all of the oversight of public education has no taxation authority.

Th ey have no power on the funding equation. So we're always going to have an imbalance, and the ministry has the upper hand in this regard. Th is is creat- ing incredible problems on the ground. One would have expected to fi nd a funding plan in this budget to match a throne speech commitment that had a 21st century em- phasis on individualized learning, and there was none of that in this budget document. [1105] Instead, we've had a one-sided — not collaborative — process, confrontational and not cooperative.

It has violated all the core principles on co-governance, and it will produce a disastrous result unless government takes a diff erent tactic. Finally, for once, try something diff er- ent; try something new. Deputy Speaker: I'm certain, as we move forward this morning and not…. To remind everyone, as we've had a week off , that this is Monday morning and is private members' time. I'm certain that members will recognize that while this is a timely and passionate issue in front of both sides of the House, private members' time is for less partisan debate. J.

Th ornthwaite: Y es, I'm going to stick to the topic of the motion about co-governance. Co-governance is alive and well in British Columbia. B.C.'s public education system is co-governed by the Education Ministry and 60 elected boards of education. B.C.'s boards of education are autonomous, responsible and accountable to their electorate for their budgetary spending decisions. I encourage all residents to attend public school board meetings, fi nance and facilities, education and priority meetings to ensure that your voice with regards to school district issues is heard, either as a parent or a community member.

Local boards of education have the autonomy

British Columbia Debates4098 Monday, May 26, 2014 to make decisions regarding the selection of resources, programs and services off ered to students within the school district and are responsible for developing their own policy, depending on local priorities. I would encourage people, with the upcoming munici- pal elections coming in November, to interview any can- didate that is considering running for school board. How about interviewing your mayors, your council candi- dates? Co-governance is all about working together.

Our government values the relationship with local boards of education on co-governance, because we believe that the end result is a stronger educational system. Let's talk about North Vancouver. We have a plethora of recent, successful co-governance projects that I'd like to highlight. A couple months ago I attended the open- ing of Queen Mary Elementary. I was actually involved in that project when it fi rst was started because I was the chair of the North Vancouver school district.

Th ere are daycares, neighbourhoods of learning, StrongStart cen- tres and even a connection with CommunityLINK for breakfast and lunch programs. Ridgeway School as well as Westview School are also recent capital projects that partner progressive school districts like North Vancouver with the province and the city of North Van. What about high schools? Carson, Sutherland, Windsor — all in North Vancouver — have great part- nerships and great co-governance with the school district and the municipality. We have artifi cial fi elds. We have a track fi eld. We even have a Windsor soccer bubble.

Th at was a partnership not just between the province and the school district but also the municipality of the district of North Vancouver, the federal government and a private company that gave some money for that artifi cial soc- cer bubble. What about Argyle? Th at's the new one that everybody wants right now. I'm working very, very closely with the school district with that project, and so are the commun- ity associations, the PACs, the district PACs, the district of North Van and the province.

In fact, Argyle is being even more progressive with their school district because they're off ering the brand-new skills exploration course, a new semester-length sampler beginning this fall for grade 10s and 12s. Lest I ignore the rest of the province, because obvious- ly I'm very North Van–centric, Belmont high school in Sooke has got a great project going with the district that off ers amenities for the entire community. How about Pomeroy Sport Centre in Fort St. John? And don't forget West Vancouver school district.

Th ey partnered with the community and got Kay Meek theatre into place. [1110] I just want to make it really, really clear that the co- governance model in British Columbia is alive and well, with very progressive school districts that work together with their municipality, with the government, with all levels of government, to make amenities for the com- munity happen. Th at's what partnerships are all about. S. Robinson: I'm pleased to take my place in this de- bate on co-governance.

I'm so pleased that the member for North Vancouver–Seymour spoke about how co- governance ensures that parents' voices are heard be- cause as luck would have it today, as I was checking on my Facebook, there was a letter that was posted and cir- culating around. It's a letter from a parent, and I thought: how appro- priate. Th is parent speaks about the challenges about co-governance. She's written a letter to the Minister of Education, to the Premier, as well as to the member for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain. I'm really pleased to read this letter here in the House.

"Dear Sirs and Madam, "I write today to convey my extreme disgust with the manner in which the education system is being treated by the government. Th e conduct you have displayed with regards to the future of our children's education is reprehensible, claiming to put families fi rst and to hold the needs of the children above all else, yet there are children in our system who have challenges and special needs who are being lost because you won't fund the help they so des- perately need.

"Y our condescension towards teachers is easily traceable back to 2002 when, as Education Minister, the Premier removed the teachers' right to bargain for learning and working conditions by enacting Bills 27 and 28 — action that has since been deemed by the Supreme Court of B.C. to have been a violation of Charter rights. Undaunted by the illegality of your position, the govern- ment enacted Bill 22." Deputy Speaker: I'd remind the member…. S. Robinson: It's a parent's perspective on the co- governance model, hon. Speaker. Deputy Speaker: Whether it's a letter or not, it's still bordering on…. S.

Robinson: Perhaps I can go to the point where she does speak about co-governance. May I do that, hon. Speaker? Deputy Speaker: Please do. S. Robinson: She certainly does do that. She writes: "When a government requires a school district to submit a bal- anced budget but makes no budgetary allowance for increases in fuel costs, electricity costs or tax increases, the government knows that the only way the district can possibly submit a bal- anced budget is by making cuts to our children's education services.

"When a government announces new schools but doesn't ac- tually provide capital funding or build them — resulting in the school district having to use millions of dollars from their operat- ing budget to purchase, maintain and service portable classrooms — the government knows that the only way the district can pos- sibly submit a balanced budget is by making cuts to our children's education services. "When a government knows that enrolment is declining, funds schools on a per-student basis, and it costs virtually the same

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4099 amount in fuel, electricity and staffi ng to have 480 kids in a school versus 500 kids in a school, that government knows that the only way the district can possibly submit a balanced budget is by mak- ing cuts to our children's education service.

"When the government abruptly changes policy for funding of school seismic upgrading and announces that school districts will have to pay for up to half the cost of putting our children in safe structures, the government knows that the only way the district can possibly submit a balanced budget is by making cuts to our children's education services." I think that what this parent is trying to get across to us is saying that we are not actually working with a co- governance model.

Our boards of education are stuck with these decisions being made by government with- out providing the proper tools that they need, the proper resources that they need, to actually deliver the services that they're supposed to be delivering. A co-governance model, one where there is a good re- lationship and cooperation, would actually tell us that there was a give-and-take and an understanding.

When we have school districts that have to cover increased util- ity rates, when they have to fi nd money to do increased MSP premiums, then we have this real challenge where school districts actually have to make the cuts to services. Having said that, one of the things that this parent says — and she sums it up very well — is that her seven- year-old came to her aft er some budget meetings. I quote from the seven-year-old: "Mom, you said you pay taxes so that the government gives us hospitals and schools to help us to learn.

But how can we learn without books and a library?" Th e child goes on, actually, to just say that he feels that the government doesn't care about us and then ac- tually says something inappropriate. So the mother says: "I chastised him for using an inappropriate word, but I cannot disagree with his opinion or fail to marvel at how astutely a child can assess a complicated situation and distill it down to its core." It's signed by Kristina Lee from Coquitlam. Her perspective and her son's perspective is that there's a complete disconnect with what this relation- ship is supposed to be.

Th ere's supposed to be a collab- orative, cooperative relationship between government and our school boards, and we don't have that. It's very disappointing for this parent. It's very disappointing, cer- tainly, for this child. [1115] I will note that this parent says in her postscript: "I'm not a teacher. I'm not married to a teacher. My parents were not teachers. I have no direct fi nancial interest in this dispute, other than being a very, very annoyed par- ent." While the member opposite talked about parents hav- ing their say, certainly this parent doesn't feel like she's having her say.

She will get to vote in November for people who represent her on school boards, but unless we go back to a cooperative model, we don't have a work- able relationship. L. Reimer: I rise in the House today to respond to the motion put forward by the member opposite. Our government values the relationship with local boards of education on co-governance work because we know that the end result is a stronger education system.

I've had the pleasure of working with my school district 43 over a 13- year period as an involved parent and chair of the dis- trict parent advisory council, as a former Coquitlam city councillor and former chair of the city–school board li- aison committee and now as a member of this Legislative Assembly. In my particular district our funding has gone from about $183 million in 2001 to $248 million. Our learn- ing improvement fund is currently at $3.1 million and is slated to go to $3.9 million in 2014-15. We also have some very exciting projects happening in our district.

Currently Eagle Mountain elementary will be opened this coming fall. As well, we're involved in doing plans for the rebuilding of Moody middle school in my riding. Only by working together will we get the best possible outcomes for our students. We need to keep focused on our one key goal, and that's to produce capable young people ready to thrive in a rapidly changing world. In B.C. a million job openings are expected by 2022. Forty-three percent of those jobs will require skilled workers, and some areas of the province are already ex- periencing shortages of skilled workers.

We know that the better prepared our students are, the more success- ful they will be in fi nding meaningful careers and jobs. We want to make it easier for B.C. students and fam- ilies to make the best possible career choices in a changing economy. Our government recently launched B.C.'s skills-for-jobs blueprint, re-engineering education and training. We'll be creating more educational pathways from K to 12 to post-secondary to in-demand careers in LNG, mining, forestry and other sectors of our economy.

Th roughout B.C. individual school districts are under- taking innovative programs to get students excited and make them more aware of trades and technology ca- reers at a younger age. A superintendent for careers and student transitions has been appointed to help districts develop and expand partnerships with local industry, businesses and post-secondary institutions. More hands- on trades and technical learning will mean that students are better prepared to take advantage of future oppor- tunities.

Th ere's also new fl exibility for school districts to apply provincial funding to scholarships and awards related to trades and technical training. Government will also fund apprenticeship trades ambassadors and new online re- sources to better promote career options and pathways to parents and students. To provide further support, the ministry recently introduced a skills exploration course for grades 10 to 12. Th e course is designed to give students valuable hands-on experience in important trades sectors and an introduc-

British Columbia Debates4100 Monday, May 26, 2014 tion to core skills common to many trades. We are working to give students a seamless pathway right from school to the workplace. Programs like the Industry Training Authority's women-in-trades train- ing initiative provides information and training to open doors for women who want to pursue careers in trades and industry. We are supporting the education system in providing students with more opportunities to personalize their learning. We're supporting learners around the prov- ince, recognizing there isn't a one-size-fi ts-all approach.

Th is includes creating more opportunities for hands-on learning and helping students get a head start on realiz- ing their full potential and contributing to the well-being of our province. As we move forward, we need to keep focused on transforming curriculum and fi nding innovative path- ways to graduation. Th ere is no question that working in partnership on all the items I have mentioned is what we need to best move forward. Partnership equals suc- cess. Co-governance equals success. K.

Corrigan: I'm pleased to rise to speak in favour of the resolution that this House support the principles of co-governance of public education between the province and boards of education. [1120] I spent nine years as a school trustee and believe pas- sionately that a strong public education system is the most important tool we have to increase opportunity and to decrease inequality. School boards in the province co-govern education in B.C., and it has worked well.

Co- governance means that both the provincial government and local school boards, which are elected to protect and refl ect the interests of the local community, are equally responsible and important to education. In a practical sense, local school boards are best at hir- ing teachers, administrators and support staff ; working with parents; organizing classrooms; setting policy; and craft ing the district budget. Most importantly, they are accountable to the local community. Parents and others can and do call their school board if they have concerns about their local school.

In my school district, Burnaby, trustees attend all the district parent meetings. The philosophy behind co- governance is that everyone will benefi t if many of these kinds of decisions are made close to home, if they are de- centralized. Th is principle of subsidiarity has worked well. Provincial government can set standards, set curricu- lum and plays an important role in ensuring that there is consistency and a sharing of best practices. Speaking of best practices, local school boards — the organizations — have been around since 1905.

Many of the best programs and practices have, in fact, originated from dedicated professional teachers and administrative staff . In my district I would point out one example — Byrne Creek School. Th is is a high school in Burnaby with a very high percentage of immigrants, a very high per- centage of refugee students and families and a high per- centage of families living in poverty. But because of the passion and dedication of the teachers and administra- tors at Byrne Creek, many unique programs have de- veloped to address learning gaps and challenges.

Th ose include a Later to Literacy program; the Village of Attachment; some ESL creative programs; and youth in transitions, which is an after-school program that works closely with students alongside their parents; and PAWS.All of this creativity and innovation led to them receiving the 2012 international ASCD Whole Child Award. Th e province and local boards are both critical in this co-governance model. B.C. School Trustees Association recently sent MLAs questions and answers about co- governance, outlining similar principles to those I've already mentioned.

Th e document also observes that ef- fective, timely, frequent communication and inclusion in decisions are critical. For example, it says: "As fre- quently as possible co-governance partners communi- cate with one another and seek to work cooperatively. Co-governance attempts to reduce surprises and en- hance stability. Communications are respectful, timely and partner to partner." Unfortunately, those principles of co-governance may not have been remembered by the provincial government in recent bargaining developments.

Last week teachers were partially locked out by BCPSEA that is supposed to be representing boards in bargaining but in essence has been taken over by the province. Th ey did not warn school boards this was going to happen, they did not consult in this decision, and they have not worked with school boards to provide clarity as to the

interpretation. Surely, if government intends to minimize the impact on communities — to minimize confusion and, therefore, disruption — they would be working hard with boards, but, unfortunately, they are not. Boards are unable to do that local part of providing answers to questions that families have and unable to provide some stability and certainty. Maybe if they had communicated with boards, they would have avoided the embarrassing mess that they put themselves in, having to write several letters of clari- fi cation of what is meant by a lockout.

One can only conclude that the intention of govern- ment is once again to create maximum disruption, to antagonize teachers and to gain political favour, which we now know from sworn court testimony was a past in- tention. When we have a government whose every move seems to be a political tactic, when that's the lens rather than good governance, in this case co-governance, then services, in this case education, suff er. Th at is indeed unfortunate. [1125]

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4101 S. Gibson: It's a pleasure for me to be here to speak on behalf of the constituents of the Abbotsford-Mission rid- ing. My opening remarks, however…. I'd just like to point out that my wife has been a public school teacher in our province for all her working career. We value education around our home very much. I taught in the public uni- versity system for many years. I might add this as a personal insight. My wife and I have a special needs daughter, and we know the chal- lenges that special needs young adults face even today, as our daughter is now an adult.

But the challenges that special needs children face are something that we are aware of personally. I might add also that I have a graduate degree in edu- cation, and for a thesis that I wrote I studied a key aspect of public education. So I take it seriously, and I do appre- ciate the motion by the hon. member for Victoria–Swan Lake, and I realize the signifi cance he places in it. We all desire long-term stability in our province. Th at's something we value on both sides of the House. It's about the success for future generations. Th at's something that we aspire to here.

Long-term stability means focusing on what really matters — the outcomes in learning so every B.C. young person succeeds. It's something we treasure. Today local boards of education have the autonomy that they need. Th ey make decisions on the resources and the programs for the best interests of their particu- lar area. It's off ered throughout their school districts to ensure that education is of the highest value. Local boards, local priorities. Th at means diversity across our school district.

Th ere's diversity there so they can respond to the needs of the individual students and parents and guardians in their various communities. I especially like the theme of Abbotsford school dis- trict, the three words: "Respect, opportunity and innov- ation." Knowing Abbotsford school district as I do and having served on council and gotten to know many of their school trustees and administrators over so many years, I know they live it. Mission's theme is "A world of learning right here." If you look at their site, it's got a young woman holding a globe.

Th at's the passion that Mission school district has for their students. Both districts in my riding are passion- ate about success. Th ey believe in their students. Th ey be- lieve in them passionately, and the result is that student outcomes are very promising. B.C. students have consistently ranked in the top groups in international and national studies. Th e 2012 program for international student assessment of 15-year- old students — among 65 participating countries and economies, only one jurisdiction statistically performed above B.C.'s range in reading, only two in science and only nine in math.

Th ese are good records. On a straight numerical basis, B.C. is sixth in both reading and science and 12th in mathematics. Th ose are stats to be very proud of, and we're pleased to share those. Compared to other Canadian provinces, our students were top-ranked in reading and science — top-ranked — and second only to Quebec in math. Very good rat- ings. In 2011 the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study assessed reading ability of fourth-grade students. In the study B.C. students had the highest score in Canada — the highest. We're recognized as one of the top seven jurisdictions in the world.

Th is is something to be very proud of in this House. Th e 2010 pan-Canadian assessment program. Eighth- grade students in B.C. matched or outperformed all but one province in reading, all but two in science and all but three in math. Th ese students show that B.C. students are doing really well. Today more students are complet- ing high school and going into post-secondary and the workforce. Th ey're making a contribution. Our six-year student completion rate was 83.1 percent in 2012-2013, up 10 percent from 2000 and 2001. Again, a symbol of progress. Greater success, too, for diverse learners.

Six-year completion rate for students with special needs… Deputy Speaker: Th ank you, Member. S. Gibson: …increased by over 75 percent. Th is concludes my comments. [1130] N. Macdonald: Obviously, there is merit in the idea of co-governance of public education between the prov- incial government and the local school boards. Th e B.C. School Trustees Association has been pushing this idea for a long time. I think many of the MLAs will have met with their trustees.

Th ey will have had the opportunity to see the notes that were provided for the school trustees in making the argument for further co-governance with the provincial government. It's interesting to look at those notes, because what it tells you is the areas that the trustees perceive as areas of weakness in their dealings with the provincial gov- ernment. If you look at points E, G and H, all of those points that the trustees are making relate to their rela- tionship with the provincial government, relate to weak- nesses they have in their relationship with the provincial government.

Here's what they're asking for. Th ey're asking for the senior level of government, the provincial government, the B.C. Liberals…. Th ey want them to communicate properly. Th ey want the B.C. Liberals to reduce surprises. Th ey want them to be consistent, and they want them to allow for planning. Th at's what the trustees association is talking about when they ask for cooperation from the senior level of government. It speaks to the fact that these are areas where, consistently, the B.C. Liberals have failed, impos- ing ill-considered and poorly thought-through initiatives

British Columbia Debates4102 Monday, May 26, 2014 again and again. Th e B.C. Liberals have dumped what is clearly abysmal technology on school boards. Th e B.C. Liberals agreed to collective agreements that they sub- sequently do not fund, leaving school boards in terrible situations. Th ey seem intent on continuously disrupting the public education system. As we speak, having this debate today on this motion, we're in the midst of another disruption in the school system.

I just want to talk for a second about some of these in- itiatives where one would reasonably have expected there to have been a degree of consultation with the school boards, and that's with the BCeSIS. BCeSIS is a com- puterized system for recording marks, for sharing those marks provincewide. Now, we had computerized mark systems. I was a teacher, and I was a principal. We had a system. Each school district had diff erent systems, but we had one called Windsor. Th ere are other teachers here; I don't know what systems you used. It was commercially avail- able.

It was a system that worked well, and we were forced as a school district to replace it with BCeSIS, which never worked well. So on top of the cost of the new system — which is in the hundreds of millions — that this gov- ernment imposed on school boards, you had the cost of training, and you had the cost of the constant fi x that went on year aft er year aft er year. Now, that's a powerful argument there alone for hav- ing some consultation with people that actually use the technology that you're trying to introduce.

We had a question period here where the minister re- sponsible for computer programming was answering questions about one of the most recent failures in the technological purchases made by this government. He talked about archaic systems. BCeSIS, when it was intro- duced, was completely archaic. If you had to work with that system, you had to close boxes to make comments. Y ou had to shift around. It did not do even the most basic things that you would expect from a computer program. The government has now given up, after spending hundreds of millions of dollars on that, and introduced a new system.

Who was responsible for that technology? Ultimately, it was the person who is now Premier, be- cause she was the Minister of Education at the time when that was imposed on school districts. We also have the downloading of costs. If government members look back on the New Era document that start- ed with this government, you'd see on page 16 of the 2001 document that it assured multi-year funding for school districts. Th at never happened. Now, that's a long list of broken promises from that document, but there's another one for you. It never happened.

So rhetorically, just as the government signed on to this idea of co-governance and government members stand up and say how they're cooperating, the meat and bones of cooperation, the important stuff , never happens with this government. It's promised. It never happens. Multi-year funding — wow, that would be a real treat, and maybe someday they can look forward to that. [1135] Well, I wish we had more time, but thank you for the opportunity. I look forward to the continuation of the debate. S.

Hamilton: I'd like to take a few minutes to talk about an important issue — obviously, an important issue to this government. I'm glad that the member op- posite was using the word "rhetorical," because there was a lot of rhetoric coming from the other side of the House. Deputy Speaker: Member. S. Hamilton: I have personal experience, profession- al experience with the computer networks in this prov- ince. I spent ten years designing them for the provincial learning network, so I'm intimately familiar with some of the issues with regard to the computer networks that serve our schools throughout the province.

As a matter of fact, the member…. Interjection. S. Hamilton: If I may, BCeSIS was more of an issue of bandwidth and trying to provide extra bandwidth to small, remote communities in this province. Interjection. S. Hamilton: It was an issue. It was an uphill battle that this government took on. Now we are better con- nected electronically through Internet access in remote locations in this province than we have ever been, and it continues to grow. I want to talk about our government's commitment to our communities in real and tangible ways. Some people might propose that we continuously throw money at a problem.

Th is government believes in a diff erent way of doing things, in a way that quite literally achieves con- crete, on-the-ground results. In other words, we on this side of this House believe in investing in our commun- ities. One of the most important and visible ways we can do this is through the development and building of schools and other educational facilities that will have a signifi cant and lasting impact on our communities.

Since 2001, regardless of what's being said on the other side of the House, this government has committed more than $4.1 billion on school capital maintenance projects throughout this province. Since then, government has also spent more than $2.5 billion to complete capital projects, including 99 new and replacement schools, 151 additions, 27 renovations and 26 site acquisitions across the province. Th is includes approximately $1 billion for

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4103 133 seismic safety projects. All new and replacement schools have been constructed to meet the latest seis- mic standards. In my own riding of Delta North we have also bene- fited from this government's commitment to capital investment, despite what's being said. Since 2001 this government has invested more than $47.5 million in the Delta school district, including additions to Burnsview and Delview secondaries and seismic upgrades to six ele- mentary and secondary schools.

Our government has also committed $10.1 mil- lion to seismically upgrade South Delta Secondary School, which is expected to be completed this fall. Delta Secondary — we're well into the planning stages, and it's an important thing that we do these for the safety of the children in our schools. Th is government has taken on that challenge, and we're there. We're there. Th is is part of a bigger picture. It's part of the way this government gets things done. It's part of the way that we're preparing for a more prosperous future, and it's a huge part of the way in which we plan our budgets.

We know that this government has successfully kept its promise to deliver a balanced budget. Budget 2014 has projected surpluses over the next three years of $175 million, 2013-14; $184 million the next; $206 million the next; and fi nally, $451 million in 2016-17. It's expected that taxpayer-supported capital spending on schools, hospitals and other infrastructure throughout British Columbia will reach $11 billion in 2014. We're reinvesting money in communities large and small across British Columbia.

Th is is what we were elect- ed to do, and this is what a healthy economy and a strong natural resource sector will enable us to do. Th e $11 billion being invested in B.C. infrastructure in 2014 includes $1.5 billion for K-to-12 facilities and $2.3 billion spent on post-secondary institutions. What's more, all new and replacement schools have been con- structed to meet the latest seismic standards. We talked about that a moment ago and how important it is for the safety of our kids.

British Columbians want and deserve a government that will invest in their future, a government that ensures we have educational opportunities and facilities that meet the needs of every British Columbian in a way that fos- ters growth and opportunity. Th at's a promise that this government is keeping. [1140] Deputy Speaker: I thank the members, and I would remind the members that the motion before this House this morning has to do with governance and the co- governance model. We seem to be straying to a fairly broad discussion of education policy in general.

I would hope that the members would bring things back to the co-governance model. C. James: I am pleased to rise to speak to the issue of support for the principles of co-governance in pub- lic education. Co-governance really talks about a part- nership — a partnership with locally elected boards of education elected by their communities. I think it's im- portant to note that this government actually even signed a protocol of recognition of co-governance. I just want to read one line from that protocol. I think it's important to recognize that actions speak louder than words, and I'll get to that in a moment.

Th at proto- col said that we recognize the importance of consulting on new initiatives and working cooperatively to improve education in this province. Th at was the protocol signed by this government around co-governance with boards of education. Well, I would say, just based on actions over the last 12 years, that this government is two for two on failure of that protocol — two for two. Th e government certainly hasn't consulted on new initiatives when they've come forward. And working cooperatively to improve educa- tion?

Now, that would be a wonderful thing in this prov- ince if we actually saw this government step up and say that they wanted to improve education in this province. We have an incredible education system in British Columbia. Th at's an area where I would agree with mem- bers who've spoken, but it's despite this government, not because of it. It's despite the work that they've been do- ing in picking a fi ght and causing chaos.

It's because of the incredible people who work in the education system — everyone from support staff to teachers to parents to boards of education to school principals to administra- tors — who put in the time and energy to try and build a strong education system, while this government does everything they can to try and take it apart. First, let's take a look at downloading of costs.

Did this government sit down and talk with boards about the new initiative of insisting that boards pay for hydro increases or that boards should have to pay for MSP premium in- creases or the fact that they froze funding for transpor- tation? No. None of those conversations happened with school boards. Th ose are things that the government just decided they were going to do. Improve education? Well, the fi rst thing that we saw this government do back in 2002 was, in fact, to strip contracts. Th at was the fi rst step. Th e Premier said this would help to improve standards for students and stu- dents' needs.

Well, what was the result? Th e result was fewer teacher-librarians, fewer teachers for students with special needs, fewer counsellors, fewer supports, larger class sizes. Th at hasn't improved education. Th e Supreme Court ruled that that action — stripping contracts — was illegal. What did the government do a number of years later? Th ey decided to introduce legisla- tion almost identical. Again, they were told that that was illegal. But that seems to be the direction that this govern- ment has decided to go — to pick a fi ght in the system, to

British Columbia Debates4104 Monday, May 26, 2014 cause chaos — instead of sitting down and saying: how can we work together to improve the system? I just want to mention that on Friday night I had the pleasure and the privilege of attending a school concert with my granddaughter. Th at school concert showed the best of our education system. In the midst of everything going on, in the midst of what this government has been doing to the system, teachers got together with parents, students and support staff and put on an incredible con- cert on Friday night.

Th ey had teachers come from the secondary schools down to the elementary schools. Th at's the kind of edu- cation system that we have in British Columbia. Th ey de- serve to have a government that actually works with them to improve the system, not to cause chaos, as they've been doing, but to actually support people who work in our schools. I have, again, had the privilege of serving as a parent and president of a parent association, the district parent association and a trustee for 12 years. Each of those roles is critical to our education system. Each of those roles plays an important part.

Government plays an important part too. Just im- agine our education system if the government decided that instead of picking a fi ght, we'd sit down and work together. We'd say: "We're doing well in our education system. What can we do to improve it, and how can we do that together?" [1145] Th at's what we teach our children. We teach our chil- dren to work cooperatively. We teach our children to work with others to improve things, and yet we certain- ly don't see that coming from government, on the other side.

What could be more important than a quality pub- lic education system — important to our communities and to our economy? M. Dalton: I am pleased to speak on this motion of co-governance today. We do have a very good education system. I was pleased to be a teacher in public school sys- tems for some 15 years prior to being elected in Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, and my children went through the public school system, so I've seen a lot. I know that we have great teachers and great results. Just to respond to a couple of the comments from the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill, as far as the num- bers of teachers.

Th e ratio of teachers has been consist- ent through the years: approximately 16.5 to 17 teachers — that's enrolling and non-enrolling teachers — for the past decade or 15 years, as long as I have been in. Th at's one thing. As far as labour unrest goes, this is not something that is new. It is something that was very prevalent under the former government. When I was a teacher, there were constant strikes. I think that's important just to keep that as a matter of perspective.

We are very fortunate in British Columbia to have an education that is made stronger by the relationships be- tween governments and boards of education. Th e co- governance of B.C.'s public education system by the Education Minister and 60 elected boards of education is the best possible path for the best outcomes for our students. Even with the co-governance of education that we all enjoy, B.C.'s boards of education are autonomous, with the independence to make decisions. With what, what types of decisions? Well, the selection of resources, pro- grams and services off ered to students within its district.

And it's responsible for developing its own policies de- pending on local priorities. Th is government, what it has done is it has allowed more fl exibility among the school districts to divert funds to programs that they feel best suits the local area. Boards of education are also responsible and accountable to the electorate for their budgetary spending decisions. We also — as far as the government — are responsible to the electorate. We ran on a balanced budget. We ran on living within our means. Th at's tough. Th at's meant mak- ing tough decisions. Would we like to see more money put into education?

Th e answer is yes. As more funds are available, that will happen, but we are doing the best that we can with the means that we have. Th at's something that we are facing as far as a provincial government, but also that is something that has to be faced with the local school boards. Nevertheless, government funding for education re- mains at record levels, increasing steadily since 2000. In fact, the Ministry of Education is providing $4.7 billion to districts in operating grants between 2014 and 2015, which have seen a 27 percent increase since 2000-2001.

Th at's despite seeing 70,000 fewer students enrolled in British Columbia since 2000-2001. The average per- pupil funding has increased by 38 percent since 2000- 2001, to $8,654. To ensure that the students have safe and modern learning environments, our government has committed or spent nearly $4.1 billion for school capital and main- tenance projects throughout B.C. Of that amount, $2.2 billion was spent or committed through the seismic miti- gation program to upgrade or replace high schools. I remember in 1998 when I was teaching at Pitt Meadows Secondary School.

I was on the second level, and we all felt the school shaking. Th ere were some inter- national students there from Japan, and they were very panicky, because they knew what could happen. [1150] So this is important. Th e seismic upgrading is very im- portant. One of the schools that we recently put signifi - cant funds into in my area is Garibaldi Secondary School, which was a $20 million upgrade. Actually, we'll have the students from Garibaldi visiting us today. Our government is not content to rest on its laurels.

British Columbia DebatesMonday, May 26, 2014 4105 We are proud of our record but continue to seek the best long-term solutions for our young people today, tomor- row and into the future. In addition to operating grant funding to districts, the government provides approxi- mately $51 million annually through CommunityLINK, which helps school districts provide breakfast and lunch programs, inner-city and community school programs and school-based support workers and counselling for at-risk children and youth. B.

Ralston: Our topic here in the chamber is the dis- cussion of the protocol of recognition between the gov- ernment and the B.C. School Trustees Association. It was fi rst signed in 2011, and it is to be reviewed every three years, starting in 2014. It's important, I think, in order to understand the debate, to have some understanding of the protocol — because it's mutual recognition of the roles of each party.

But in particular — I'm reading from the agreement, the protocol: "Both parties agree that, wherever possible, they will consult with one another and with boards of education on new initiatives and will seek to work cooperatively in the furtherance of public education in the province." A reasonable goal. "Th e province will notify and consult…with the BSCTA" — that's the B.C.

School Trustees Association — "on matters aff ecting boards of education and, in particular, on legislation, regulations, policies, programs, projects and initiatives; and individual boards of education on matters aff ecting them." So the boards recognize the right of the Ministry of Education to set overall education policy for the province, and the province agrees to consult and understand the issues of individual boards in the challenges that they face. One would think that in the matter of co-governance, one of the most important aspects of co-governance would be fi nancial co-governance.

In other words, before the province would take an in- itiative that would have a fi nancial impact upon school boards, the protocol clearly says that there should be a process where the province will understand the impact of those initiatives before undertaking them. That's a good theory. That's a good agreement. Unfortunately, what has happened is something very much the opposite of what was clearly intended by both parties in the protocol, if they were adhering to it. Th e previous member mentioned the issue of seismic upgrading and gave an example from a school in his area, a couple of decades ago.

But what happened in April 2014 is that the Ministry of Education informed school boards that they would be expected to use capital surpluses to pay for 50 percent of seismic upgrading projects. Th is initiative came out of the blue, without any real understanding, according to the boards, of just what those cash reserves were intended to be used for. As a result, a number of board chairs spoke out about how the government failed to understand the nature of cash reserves simply because they'd failed to follow the proto- col and consult with the school boards prior to imple- menting the policy change.

Clearly, if the protocol is there and there are import- ant initiatives that are undertaken by the provincial gov- ernment, the provincial government and the Minister of Education have failed to follow the protocol and, as a re- sult, caused intense budgeting turmoil within individual boards of education. As the member has rightly pointed out, there is a seis- mic program. It's an important one. Th e Auditor General has refl ected that perhaps it's not moving as fast as it might. Th e timeline for completing seismic upgrading has been moved forward a number of times.

Nonetheless, the way in which the province is now seeking to advance that is completely without any understanding of the fi - nancial position of individual school boards or boards of education. How can this be an adherence to the protocol? [1155] As a result, individual boards will have to reorder their capital priorities, and some of that funding will have to come from operating funds.

Th is, unfortunately, is again in defi ance and disregard of the co-governance protocol — a pattern that has continued now for some years, not- withstanding the agreement to consult and understand one another before undertaking major initiatives. My colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke raised BCeSIS. I think this was one of the clearest moments of lucidity in the debate, where the member for Delta North took personal responsibility for the utter and complete failure of BCeSIS — something about bandwidth. I do admire him taking personal responsibility for that col- ossal failure. I think that's a step forward.

Th ere were other fi nancial initiatives where the prov- ince…. I see my time has expired, and I move adjourn- ment of the debate. B. Ralston moved adjournment of debate. Motion approved. Hon. T. Lake moved adjournment of the House. Motion approved. Deputy Speaker: Th is House stands adjourned until 1:30 this aft ernoon. Th e House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

Hansard Reporting Services Director Robert Sutherland Manager of Reporting Services Christine Fedoruk Publishing Supervisor Laurel Bernard Editorial Team Leaders Janet Brazier, Karol Morris, Robyn Swanson, Glenn Wigmore Technical Operations Offi cers Pamela Holmes, Emily Jacques, Dan Kerr Indexers Shannon Ash, Julie McClung, Robin Rohrmoser Researchers Jaime Apolonio, Richard Baer, David Mattison Editors Kim Christie, Deirdre Gotto, Jane Grainger, Betsy Gray, Iris Gray, Linda Guy, Barb Horricks, Bill Hrick, Paula Lee, Donna McCloskey, Bob McIntosh, Anne Maclean, Jill Milkert, Lind Miller, Lou Mitchell, Erik Pedersen, Janet Pink, Amy Reiswig, Heather Warren, Arlene Wells, Anita Willis Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker.

Printing Agent Crown Publications, Queen's Printer for British Columbia PO Box 9452 Stn Prov Govt, Victoria, B.C. V8W 9V7 www.crownpub.bc.ca Daily and annual Hansard subscription information is available from Crown Publications. www.leg.bc.ca Acces

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20140526am-Hansard-v13n6
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20140526am Hansard v13n6
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	e771a23ab5af3753894a4c7d1b063e93d2db1289

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