2011 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 39th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 31, Number

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)

ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 25 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2012

Hon. S. Bond

Bill M213 — Senate Election Act

J. Les

Bill 24 — Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act, 2012

Hon. D. McRae

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

Firefighters in Burnaby

R. Chouhan

SUCCESS services for immigrants

J. Yap

Emily Case

M. Karagianis

Minoru Place Activity Centre in Richmond

R. Howard

Patricia Theatre in Powell River

N. Simons

Charlene Reaveley Children’s Charity Society

D. Horne

Oral Questions

Infection control and cleaning services at Burnaby Hospital

A. Dix

Hon. M. de Jong

M. Farnworth

R. Chouhan

Funding for groups participating in Missing Women Inquiry

S. Fraser

Hon. S. Bond

J. Kwan

Government consultation with public on throne speech

S. Chandra Herbert

Hon. M. MacDiarmid

Hon. C. Clark

Petitions

G. Gentner

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 22 — Education Improvement Act (continued)

G. Coons

J. Les

D. Routley

D. Hayer

D. Thorne

Hon. H. Bloy

M. Sather

B. Bennett

S. Fraser

Hon. M. McNeil

H. Bains

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Advanced Education (continued)

M. Mungall

Hon. N. Yamamoto

B. Ralston

C. Trevena

R. Fleming

G. Gentner

[ Page 9803 ]

TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 2012

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

S. Simpson: I know we've all been meeting with firefighters here. They came, and we had an enjoyable evening the other evening. They've been here talking to us about critical issues.

I'd like to take the opportunity to welcome a couple of the firefighters from Vancouver here: Gord Ditchburn, who's the president of the local; and Gord Wilson, who's the vice-president, government and public affairs.

I hope the House will make them welcome.

J. Yap: I have two introductions. In the gallery are two grade 11 students who are spending their day off from school here doing a job-shadow. It's a planning 10 course, and these two young students are volunteers and student leaders. Please welcome Alex Teoh and Jansin Cai, who are here to see the Legislative Assembly in action and to job-shadow someone that apparently has an interesting job as part of their curriculum.

Would everyone give them a great welcome.

J. Horgan: I want to join what I think will be a litany of members standing to introduce firefighters from their constituency. However, I'm going to deviate somewhat and introduce Steve Hanna, who is the president of the Saanich local. The member for Saanich South has allowed me to do this.

I mentioned two years ago that Steve saved my life as a young lad. I want to now say that I made him look like the best goalie on the team because of my prowess, and I know he'll debate me on that later on. Would the House please welcome Steve Hanna from Saanich, a known Reynolds Roadrunner.

B. Stewart: It always gives me great pleasure to introduce guests to the House, but it's a rare privilege to introduce real heroes. You know, all British Columbians know firefighters are heroes, but I think those of us from the Kelowna area understand that better than most. Their brave efforts in the 2003 Kelowna firestorm, the 2009 Glenrosa and 2010 Seclusion Bay interface fires saved not only millions of dollars of property but homes and our largest single employer in West Kelowna, Gorman Bros. Lumber.

[1335]

Dozens of kids around Kelowna are safe, sleeping in their own beds in their houses and apartments today, because of the efforts of men and women like our guests today. So it's with great pleasure that I introduce the following three gentlemen to the House: Trevor Bredin, president of West Kelowna Professional Firefighters; Nathan Pike, vice-president and treasurer of West Kelowna Professional Firefighters; and Dennis Hall, the secretary of the West Kelowna Professional Firefighters.

I hope my fellow members will help make them feel welcome.

C. Trevena: I'd like to join in the welcoming of firefighters. I have a number of firefighters in the gallery today from Campbell River. We have up in the gallery Scott Kratzmann, Kelly Bellefleur and Stewart Dumont.

They are joined by Reid Wharton, who I think many people may have met at the door yesterday. He is the secretary-treasurer of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association. Also, I believe, in the gallery is Les Ready, who is an honorary life member — can't give up, can't retire, an honorary life member — but also very active in the activities of Campbell River.

I hope the House will make all of them very welcome.

J. Slater: As you are very aware, we have two Penticton firefighters here today — Wayne McKenzie and Chris Forster. I'd like the House to make them very welcome.

K. Corrigan: I had the great pleasure last week of attending the Westburn Soccer Club annual banquet, and I am very pleased to see that we have here today a dedicated volunteer from Westburn Soccer, Lana Wong, who's actually from Vancouver. With her is Dale Gephart of North Delta. They are here for a business conference.

I hope the House will make them feel very welcome.

Hon. T. Lake: It's a great pleasure for me to welcome some real everyday heroes to the Legislature here today. My teammate from Kamloops–South Thompson and I were fortunate to have breakfast this morning, after meetings yesterday, with firefighters from Canada's tournament capital. They include Kris Krutop, Ryan Cail, Trevor Wilkinson and Max Auger.

I would like the House to please make them very welcome.

M. Elmore: On behalf of myself and the member for Vancouver–West End, we're very pleased to welcome firefighters from across the province here. We enjoyed the reception last evening and will be having meetings with them today.

We'd like to have the House welcome, from Vancouver, Graham Mervin, Don Robinson, Chris Coleman, Lee Lax and Dustin Bordelo. I please ask everyone to make them very welcome.

V. Huntington: It gives me great pleasure to introduce two gentlemen who teach at Delta Secondary School in

[ Page 9804 ]

Ladner — Mr. Casey Mynott, who is the automotive instructor, and whose classes, I might add, have achieved significant notoriety for building the only electric race vehicle in Canada, a vehicle which currently holds the electric vehicle speed record; and Mr. Duncan Cowen, who teaches technical studies at DSS and whose students often make parts for that same electric vehicle.

Will the House join me in welcoming those teachers.

M. Karagianis: Today in the House we have a not infrequent visitor, someone who is always full of sage advice. A former MLA, Mr. Gerard Janssen, is here today. Please give him a good welcome.

M. Dalton: In the House today we have Norm MacLeod. He is the captain for Fire Station No. 1 in Mission. He's been a paid on-call firefighter for 25 years and a full-time firefighter since 2009, when Mission expanded to a full-time firefighting team. I want to thank him and all the firefighters in Mission for the work that they do for the community.

[1340]

D. Black: I have two introductions to make today. The first is to introduce Tania Jarzebiak, my friend and former colleague, who's here in the precincts today. Tania is known to members of both sides of the House. She's celebrating a birthday this week, and I would ask all the members of the House to join in wishing Tania Jarzebiak a happy birthday. I'm asked by my colleagues what birthday, and I would just say 29 and holding.

I would also like to introduce two people from my community in New Westminster. Stacey Robinsmith, who is a teacher at New Westminster Secondary School, is with us today. Stacey and I have a passion for education in common, but we also have something else in common. We're both the parents of twins. That's kind of a unique club that Stacey and I both belong to.

I also want to introduce Michael Ewen, who is the vice-chair of the New Westminster school board and someone I've also known for many, many years, probably more than we both want to talk about. Michael holds the distinction of being the longest currently serving trustee in the province. He's now in his 33rd year as a school trustee in New Westminster.

Would the House please make them welcome.

N. Letnick: I'd also like to acknowledge our firefighters from the Kelowna area that are in the House: Larry Hollier, Dennis Miller, Mike Hill, Dave McCarthy and Jason Picklyk.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank all the firefighters. Yesterday I had the opportunity to speak to them, and they gave me something which I was not expecting, which was a beautiful axe, polished, with a little emblem, thanking me and all the people in this House who have worked so hard to introduce the Emergency Intervention Disclosure Act. It will sit as one of the highlights of my tenure in this House.

Would you please join me in welcoming all the firefighters.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Burnaby-Edmonds.

R. Chouhan: Finally, I got my turn. Thank you.

It gives me great pleasure to welcome my friends from the Burnaby local of firefighters: President Rob Lamoureux, Jeff Clark, Craig McDiarmid and Miles Ritchie. Please join me to welcome them.

L. Reid: My colleagues from Richmond Centre and Richmond-Steveston…. We are blessed to join together and welcome our firefighters. We have extraordinary firefighters in the city of Richmond. I'd ask them to please make welcome Cory Parker and Rich McMillan.

R. Fleming: I want to join with my colleague the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill and welcome Victoria firefighters who are with us here today: Gary Birtwistle, Darren Blackwell and Neil Pierson. Of course, the Victoria fire department is one of the oldest in the country. In fact, it existed before Canada was a country.

These three individuals serve on the executive of their union. They serve our community and our businesses to keep them safe each and every day. I will be meeting with them after question period, with members of the Saanich Fire Fighters. This is a rare moment of cooperation that will happen in my office after the Legislature.

Aaron Charlton will be representing the Saanich Fire Fighters. My colleague from Juan de Fuca has already introduced Steve Hanna, who will join us as well.

Will the House make all those firefighters from Victoria and Saanich welcome today.

Hon. S. Bond: On behalf of my colleagues from Prince George–Mackenzie and Nechako Lakes, we're delighted to have three of Prince George's finest here with us today: firefighters Mike Halladay, Blake King and Fred Wilkinson. We had a great, productive meeting this morning, and we're very grateful for the work they do in our community.

G. Coons: In the gallery today are two constituents of mine and friends from the International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 559: Calvin Thompson and James Daniele. They're going to be meeting with the member for Skeena and myself this afternoon to discuss some issues.

I'd like to extend our gratitude to all the firefighters for coming down in the last couple of days. Please make them welcome.

K. Conroy: I, too, would like to introduce some firefighters. I'd like to introduce the president of the Trail

[ Page 9805 ]

firefighters, Lee DePellegrin, and Rick Morris, who's the secretary-treasurer of the Trail firefighters. Also with them is a firefighter from Trail. His name is Richard Melnyk. He is right now the acting president of the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association.

In addition to welcoming these three firefighters, I'd also like you to welcome Wendy Letoria, who is a pharmacist from Fruitvale — not a firefighter but a pharmacist.

[1345]

H. Bains: On behalf of my colleagues from Surrey, the members for Surrey-Whalley, Surrey–Green Timbers and Surrey-Fleetwood, it is my honour to welcome a delegation of firefighters from Surrey. I'm told they're the best in the province, and I believe them. They are doing an excellent job, and please help me welcome them to this House.

M. Coell: I have a guest in the Legislature today, Kaylee Butler. She is a grade 10 student from Stelly's Secondary in my riding. She has a keen interest in democracy and is here to observe the protest and march outside and, also, to watch question period. So please make Kaylee welcome.

D. Thorne: I have four firefighters in the precinct, and I would like the House to make them welcome. Two of them have been here before, and two are new firefighters, but nobody from Coquitlam ever wants to miss a good party, and they always have a good party when they're here. So I would like the House to make them welcome. I will say their names: Jason Miller, Steve Farina, Steve Rocolo and Mac Sullivan.

D. Hayer: Just like all my other colleagues, we had also had a meeting with our Surrey firefighters, some of the best ones in the world. They met with the members for Surrey–White Rock, Surrey-Panorama and Surrey-Cloverdale. They included representatives from the Surrey Fire Fighters Association: Chris Skeena, Todd Schierling and Mike McNamara. There were some other members from Surrey too.

I want to thank them for coming over and also explaining what issues they have, how they want our help to make sure we help them with the issues they have. I have enjoyed every year when they come over and talk to us, both sides of the House — explain the issues. Both sides have worked very well to find solutions over the last ten years, and we look forward to finding more solutions about the issues they raised with us this morning.

B. Routley: We have with us in the House today Scott Lunny, who's a union rep with the Steelworkers. I worked with Scott over the years — a fine trade union representative who's helped bargain fair collective agreements that we can share with all British Columbians. So please join with me in welcoming Scott.

D. Routley: I'd like to have the House help me welcome two guests, and they're not firefighters. Joining me are two of my dearest friends, Patty McNamara and her husband, Mike McNamara. They're both on my constituency executive. Patty happens to be my CA. And all of us know how important our CAs are to having ourselves represent our communities properly.

Mike is a former military man who runs the constituency association probably like the military might be run if only it were that efficient. He's also a very humorous guy. We all bought salmon together once. I was late picking mine up, and Mike phoned me and said: "Do you want to pick this salmon up, or do you want to have us smoke it for you?" I said: "I'm not sure." He said: "Well, I'd smoke it for you, but I find it really hard to light." That's the kind of humour from Mike McNamara.

Can the House help me welcome Mike and Patty McNamara.

Hon. I. Chong: In keeping with the tradition, I, too, would like to introduce two firefighters from Oak Bay. They are Chris Melenovsky and Brad Trenholm. They are new this year, and meeting with me because some of their former firefighters have retired.

But I do want to put a shout-out to the two previous ones I used to meet with. That's Rob Keeble and Don Roskelly. My best wishes go out to Rob Keeble, who has undergone some major health challenges.

I would ask the House to please make welcome Chris and Brad.

[1350]

N. Simons: The two firefighters that I would like to introduce have left because the Queen of Burnaby is running today. Bill Grantham and Dave Ellis were in the precinct, and I was pleased to meet with them. Will the House please send them on a safe journey home.

M. Farnworth: I have a couple of introductions today — actually, not the Port Coquitlam fire department, with whom we had extensive discussions last night on the issues that matter to them, but rather two young individuals. We often, in this chamber and outside, want to see young people get into politics, encouraging politics. In the gallery today is a young fellow, a young student, named Keats Morton, who has a real interest in politics in B.C. and the Tri-Cities. He's up in the gallery. I'd ask the House to please make him most welcome.

The second introduction. It's my pleasure to welcome to this House a city councillor from my home town of Port Coquitlam. In fact, he is the youngest city councillor in the history of Port Coquitlam. When he was elected the first time, he was the youngest city councillor in all of British Columbia. He was re-elected this past year,

[ Page 9806 ]

topping the polls in the city Port Coquitlam, and that is Councillor Brad West, who one day I'm sure will be sitting in this House, on that side of the chamber — across. I'd ask the House to make him most welcome.

D. Hayer: I also want to recognize Saverio Lattanzio. He's a firefighter from Surrey, and I missed his name in the last introduction. I want to welcome him. Will the House please make him very welcome too.

L. Krog: I think our firefighters have already left. So for the members for Parksville-Qualicum and Nanaimo–North Cowichan, I won't introduce…. But there's a famous individual here — for the member for Cowichan Valley, who asked me to introduce him — who is known, for those of you who listen CKNW, as Tom from Cobble Hill, Tom Harkins. Would the House please make him welcome.

C. Hansen: I, too, want to welcome the Vancouver firefighters. I just wanted to let them know that the meeting that we have scheduled for 2:30 is going to start a little bit late because introductions have gone on so long today, but we will get there.

Mr. Speaker: I think on behalf of all members we want to thank all the firefighters in the province of British Columbia.

As one member said here, I don't think there are any more to introduce, but I think we have got them all.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 25 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2012

Hon. S. Bond presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2012.

Hon. S. Bond: I am pleased to introduce Bill 25, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2012. I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney.

Hon. S. Bond: I am pleased once again to introduce Bill 25, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2012. This bill amends the following statutes: the Assessment Act, the Environmental Management Act, the Farm Income Insurance Act, the Insurance for Crops Act, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Act, the Local Government Act, the New Relationship Trust Act, and the Park Act. The bill also makes consequential amendments and includes a validating provision.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 25, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2012, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

BILL M213 — SENATE ELECTION ACT

J. Les presented a bill intituled Senate Election Act.

J. Les: I move this bill be read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Member.

[1355]

J. Les: I'm pleased to reintroduce the British Columbia Senate Election Act today. We are continuing to follow through in our commitment to engage with B.C. voters, and we believe that British Columbians across the province will support this bill.

The act provides a legal framework for the election of senatorial nominees to represent British Columbia in the Senate of Canada. The primary purpose of the act is to set out the electoral process required to democratically elect senatorial nominees selected by the electors of British Columbia, to be submitted by the government of British Columbia to the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, for appointment to the Senate.

The act allows for a candidate to run as an independent or as an affiliate of a political party registered under the provincial Election Act.

The act creates a panel of three, including the Chief Electoral Officer, a distinguished political scientist and a member of the general public, who will create boundaries for six new senate electoral districts across British Columbia along four principles: firstly, keeping common geographic areas together; secondly, maintaining electoral districts that are manageably sized in sparsely populated areas of the province; thirdly, maintaining electoral districts that are similar in terms of population and interests; and fourthly, using federal electoral districts as a basis for division.

The act also requires the Chief Electoral Officer to find and approve a safe and secure method of allowing Internet voting to be the primary method of voting for senate nominees but also provides the possibility of mail-in ballots if an Internet-based system cannot be found in time for the first elections.

We're looking forward to working with our counter-

[ Page 9807 ]

parts in the federal government to find a mutually beneficial agreement to reimburse our government for the expenses incurred conducting the elections prescribed in this act.

Our government has made a commitment to support open government, and this act provides another tangible example of following through on that commitment. This bill contains a sunset clause of eight years.

Recognizing that the province of British Columbia currently has fewer Senate seats than both smaller provinces such as New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, which each have ten senators, and larger provinces such as Ontario and Quebec, which each have 24, we maintain that the inequity should be resolved in the midterm or the legitimacy of the Senate will be undermined. We urge the federal government and other provinces to move to a system which is more equitably representative.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M213, Senate Election Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

BILL 24 — PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO

ANIMALS AMENDMENT ACT, 2012

Hon. D. McRae presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act, 2012.

Hon. D. McRae: I move the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. D. McRae: Today I introduce the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act.

Many of you remember, when we brought forward the amendments to this act in spring 2011, we discussed the possibility of increasing oversight to the BCSPCA decision-making. The ministry has reviewed this issue with the BCSPCA and considered the input of the public on this issue as well.

Today I am pleased to introduce the amendments to the act that will increase transparency and accountability for decisions related to taking animals into custody, with an independent appeals process that will be led by the B.C. Farm Industry Review Board. The board has a successful history as an administrative tribunal, independent of government, in its general supervision of B.C.-regulated marketing boards and commissions.

I move that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

Bill 24, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act, 2012, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

FIREFIGHTERS IN BURNABY

R. Chouhan: On behalf of everyone in this House, I salute all firefighters across B.C. Every day firefighters put their lives on the line to protect our communities. We all know how challenging and dangerous their job can be.

Last September I had the privilege to participate in Fire Ops 101. That was an eye-opener. When we got there, we saw how they function in very dangerous situations. We learned a lot from their experiences.

[1400]

Today I would like to talk about the Burnaby firefighters, with whom I have worked since 2005. In addition to being ready and available 24-7, keeping our communities safe, the Burnaby firefighters are always available to help everybody who asks for help. Burnaby firefighters realize that their work is more than about handling emergencies. It is about helping the community with issues of poverty, hunger, health and so many other needs.

Through the work of the Burnaby Fire Fighters Charitable Society, firefighters have donated their time and efforts to host a yearly fundraiser. This Saturday they will be hosting their 20th annual charitable ball, a fundraiser that has in the last 20 years raised over $2 million to support over 60 community groups and fund programs such as teaching CPR to Burnaby high school students and snack programs for inner-city schools.

On behalf of my caucus members and every member in this House, we pay tribute to B.C. firefighters for their sacrifices and thank the Burnaby Fire Fighters Charitable Society for making a positive difference in the lives of the people they serve.

SUCCESS SERVICES FOR IMMIGRANTS

J. Yap: I recently, as did the Premier and other members of this House, attended the Bridge to SUCCESS gala dinner show, a signature charitable gala event that brings together people to raise money for this great organization. This year the gala raised $475,000 to support programs and services run by SUCCESS. While there, I was reminded of the valuable work that this organization does.

SUCCESS is one of the largest social service agencies in B.C., providing services for new immigrants, persons

[ Page 9808 ]

with disabilities, seniors, youth and families across the province. From Richmond to Fort St. John, SUCCESS provides programs and services in employment and language training; health care and social housing; family and youth counselling; and community, social and economic development.

In particular, SUCCESS provides support for new immigrants of Chinese and other ethnic origins to settle and integrate in Canada. This includes promoting and delivering public services and training, as well as encouraging clients to fully participate in community affairs to be active citizens.

Organizations like SUCCESS are crucial for supporting multiculturalism within our province. The SUCCESS mission is to build bridges, harvest diversity and foster integration through service and advocacy. It's a voice of social change. It's a force for community service. It's a builder of bridges between diverse communities.

I'd like to congratulate current SUCCESS board chair Dennis Chan and his fellow directors, SUCCESS foundation chair Maggie Ip and her fellow directors and all of their team members on the success of this gala and all the great work of SUCCESS in providing valuable social services and promoting multiculturalism in B.C.

EMILY CASE

M. Karagianis: Fourteen-year-old Emily Case is a grade 8 student at Colquitz Middle School in my community. For the past two years she has been actively involved in a group called Free the Children. This group teaches young people that they can be the change now instead of waiting until they are grown up to change the world around them.

Through the group, she'll be travelling to South America later this year to build a school for children in Ecuador. To raise the money for the trip she has been tirelessly fundraising through bottle drives and garage sales. On Sunday Emily held a fundraiser that was so successful she exceeded her goal for Ecuador and has already started fundraising for a 2014 trip to Kenya.

Emily has been planning an event called Chorus of Cans at her school. It's a singing competition, with the entry fee being a can of food. All the food collected will go to the Mustard Seed Food Bank. She's also done fundraising for the Stephen Lewis Foundation and the local SPCA. Emily was able to go to We Day in 2011, which included speakers Mikhail Gorbachev and Mia Farrow.

When she is not helping others, Emily finds time for other activities, such as the fine arts her school has to offer. She plays the trumpet, is a member of three bands, the choir, and participates in every theatrical production she can. She is currently rehearsing for this year's up-and-coming musical rendition of Bugsy Malone , where she'll play the lead female role of Tallulah.

Despite being that busy, she keeps herself busy and keeps up with all of her school work as well, without missing a single beat. Because of those things and more, she has been recently named the Save-on-Foods Amazing Kid, and she truly is an amazing kid.

MINORU PLACE ACTIVITY CENTRE

IN RICHMOND

R. Howard: Located in charming Minoru Park, next to the aquatic centre and the cultural centre, is Minoru Place Activity Centre, a valuable community resource for older adults in Richmond.

[1405]

As British Columbians, we enjoy the country's highest life expectancy and some of the lowest death rates from diseases like cancer and heart disease. As a result, seniors are living longer and more productive lives after retirement. Minoru Place is at the forefront of enhancing the quality of life of seniors in Richmond. Its goal is to continue providing affordable ways to stay active through recreational opportunities in a friendly and enthusiastic atmosphere.

A unique complex in Richmond, it has thousands of members, a full-service cafeteria, games room, woodworking shop, computer workstations and a multipurpose room. Just as the face of children's recreation is changing, so is the way seniors engage in physical and leisurely activity. That is why Minoru Place offers a wide variety of classes and clubs, like woodworking, dance, theatre and yoga. On top of the excellent selection of in-house activities, seniors can participate in day trips to special attractions, events and restaurants.

For great giving ideas, you can stop by the centre's boutique cupboard, showcasing beautiful, unique handmade articles for sale by the busy fingers ladies.

The incredible success of Minoru Place would not be possible without hard-working and dedicated individuals with a vision for active, affordable and quality living.

I would ask members to join me in thanking the president and board of directors; the program coordinator, Eva Busich-Veloso; and the staff and volunteers for their efforts in creating a welcoming and engaging community centre.

PATRICIA THEATRE IN POWELL RIVER

N. Simons: Over the past nearly 120 years movie theatres have become inextricably woven into the social fabric of our communities — a place to meet, to date, to share enlightening experiences, to learn, laugh, cry and cheer. Five generations of Saturday matinees and date nights, heroes and villains, love and loss and a healthy cementing of shared social experience have shaped our history.

Going out to the movies has survived radio, television, recordings, illegal downloads and home theatres, but the

[ Page 9809 ]

opportunity to sustain this tradition is being threatened now by the biggest compulsory shift in technology since the talkies were introduced in 1927. For the Patricia Theatre in Powell River, the longest continuously operating movie theatre company in Canada, it's digital or die. The Patricia, designed by the same architect as the Stanley Theatre, Henry Holdsby Simmons, has become an iconic landmark in Powell River by virtue of its location in the heart of the old townsite, a Heritage Canada–designated national historic district, and the beauty of an extensive perennial garden surrounding the federal designation plaque.

Every travel

article about Powell River mentions the Patricia. Every visitor to the Sunshine Coast is lured to some extent by what they hope to experience there.

British Columbia is far more than its natural beauty. Visitors come here because of the province's offering of diverse experiences far beyond the obvious. One of our most authentic experiences is to savour a preserved heritage environment.

With the help of the people of this province, everyone who has lived in Powell River or has visited there or who knows people who have, this iconic working cinema and vaudeville house with its atmospheric murals and projection booth equipment can be preserved as a true living museum of Canadian neighbourhood theatres. Please find out how you can help save the Patricia Theatre.

CHARLENE REAVELEY

CHILDREN’S CHARITY SOCIETY

D. Horne: Charlene Reaveley was a 30-year-old mother of four children, ages two to 11. A terrible tragedy took place February 19, 2011, on their way home from a celebration dinner. Charlene and her husband stopped at the corner of Pitt River Road and the Lougheed Highway in the Tri-Cities to help another stranded motorist, a 26-year-old Lorraine Cruz, attending Vancouver Community College from the Philippines.

Both women were tragically struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver. As a caution to drinking and driving, it appears that alcohol was both a factor in the original accident as well as with the hit-and-run driver.

Charlene was bright, vibrant and always full of life. Her infectious smile truly had the power to change the situation and make things better. She was a genuinely caring and loving person who always went out of her way to help others in need.

In memory of her approach to life, the Charlene Reaveley children's foundation was created by her devoted husband, Dan. After suffering the loss of his wife, he was left to pick up the pieces of their shattered dreams and to get his four children's and his life back together.

[1410]

The mission of the Charlene Reaveley Children's Charity Society is to offer immediate assistance to families with children experiencing the loss of a loved one by providing practical tools, resources, as well as emotional and financial support. Their desire is to help ease the stress of the undeniable question in these cases of: "What's next?"

I wish to commend her husband, Dan Reaveley, as well as Charlene's father, Colin Ogilvie, for a very difficult situation — for preserving their memory in the foundation. As well, the two, and especially Charlene's father, put up a loving display of candles and flowers. He maintains this to this very day, every single day.

There was recently a gathering to mark the anniversary. It was attended by many who share the desire to ensure that families have the community support they require in their time of need. For more information and to support the excellent work and vision of the foundation, please go to www.crccs.ca.

Oral Questions

INFECTION CONTROL AND CLEANING

SERVICES AT BURNABY HOSPITAL

A. Dix: Members of this House all know that infection control is essential to a hospital's ability to deliver quality care. That is surely the view expressed by Dr. Shane Kirby in a second letter he sent to Fraser Health last Thursday with respect to Burnaby Hospital.

According to Dr. Kirby: "Infection prevention and control had become 'an orphaned medical service' when the health authority restructured program delivery in 2009. The hospital's ability to take direct action against outbreaks was damaged in the process."

Can the Health Minister explain why the government's health authority allowed this to occur over a two-year period?

Hon. M. de Jong: British Columbians need to have confidence that when they attend at our hospitals, they will receive the best possible medical care and they will receive that care in a safe environment. That's why I attended at Burnaby yesterday, and I'm able to report to the House — having met with Dr. Kirby, the chair of Burnaby Hospital's infection control committee, the department head of internal medicine, the department head of acute medicine, the medical coordinator, the regional medical director of infection control, the chair of Fraser Health and the CEO for Fraser Health.

I can advise the House of this. They are all, together, collectively committed to ensuring that patients who attend at Burnaby Hospital are attending a medical facility that is safe. They are committed to ensuring that unacceptably high levels of C. difficile , which they all acknowledge is a reality in hospitals, continue to be brought down. They have committed collectively to the implementation of 13 recommendations presented by

[ Page 9810 ]

Dr. Gardam after he was called in by the health authority in November.

Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, they are committed to ensuring that patients at Burnaby Hospital are safe, and commit to the fact that they will be safe in the future.

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

A. Dix: I think it's been of concern to everyone, certainly in my constituency and everyone in Burnaby, that C. difficile rates at that hospital have been unacceptably high for too long. In fact, the Fraser Health CEO commented that their actions were "as a result of recent public discussion." That does not fill us, frankly, with confidence.

Now, in response to what the minister said last week, Dr. Kirby sent a second letter to the Fraser Health CEO where he said that he shared that enhanced housekeeping could have helped mitigate C. difficile transmission at this hospital. Dr. Kirby says that there were "unacceptable delays" in implementing enhanced cleaning protocols.

Can the minister explain why those unacceptable delays referred to by Dr. Kirby happened?

Hon. M. de Jong: First of all, I would caution all of us against engaging in any amount of revisionist history. I will say this. Fraser Health has been tracking…. In fact, the data on C. difficile infection rates is publicly available. It is publicly available, on a quarterly basis, on the Provincial Infection Control Network. So there's no secret about the challenge that has existed, and they have made good progress.

[1415]

But it was Fraser Health, responding to the situation and anxious to do even better at Burnaby Hospital, that called in an internationally recognized expert who completed a report that contains 13 recommendations. Those recommendations will be implemented. There is universal acceptance on the part of all of the partners at Burnaby Hospital.

In addition to that, a senior medical director for infection prevention and control is being appointed. In addition to that, Dr. Doug Cochrane is being tasked with the specific objective of tracking the implementation of the infection control recommendations from Dr. Gardam.

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

A. Dix: With the greatest of respect to the minister, I don't think the term "even better" can be used to describe the situation with respect to C. difficile at Burnaby Hospital. When you've dealt with as many constituents as I have who have dealt with the hospital, he'll know that. He'll understand the broad concern with issues of infection control and cleaning at that hospital.

Dr. Kirby raised specifically how proposals to enhance cleaning at the hospital, to improve infection control, have been longstanding. I'll quote from what he says: "In fact, proposals" — there it is — "for enhanced cleaning had been brought forward by our local infection control committee."

He goes on to say: "…practitioners over a year previous in regards to unacceptable C. difficile rates…." Sorry, hon. Speaker. I'll read the quote again, because it's very important. "In fact, proposals for enhanced cleaning had been brought forward by our local infection control practitioner over a year previous in regards to unacceptable C. difficile rates," but they were still not implemented.

The question to the minister is simple. Why?

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure from the dialogue that has taken place here today what part of the actions that I have outlined for the House the Leader of the Opposition disagrees with. I am trying to bring to him and the House the most up-to-date information I can, flowing from the discussion that I had yesterday with all of the relevant personnel.

Burnaby Hospital is 60 years old. It is an aged facility. There are rooms that contain three and four patients. Members will know that as we replace these old facilities, we are doing so with single-occupancy rooms or double-occupancy rooms. All of the experts, all of the infection prevention officers that were present yesterday, concede that there are unique challenges at Burnaby Hospital, which is why we're getting on with the task of planning for the redevelopment of that site.

I will say this last thing. When we as a government say that we are getting on with plans for redevelopment, people take notice because there's $7 billion worth of evidence that we actually follow through.

M. Farnworth: The minister just said Burnaby Hospital is 60 years old, and that creates challenges. That's absolutely right, which is why it makes cleaning standards even more important.

I'd like to quote Dr. Kirby. He says: "I fail to understand why it required an external reviewer to reveal the same recommendations as internally generated within the region to actually stimulate some results." Those are Dr. Kirby's words. The Fraser Health CEO has effectively admitted that action was being taken because of media attention. The Fraser Health CEO said: "As a result of recent public discussion, we have taken immediate steps to restore confidence in infection prevention and control practices."

The question to the minister is this. Why did it take so long? Why did it take media attention for the health authority to actually act?

[1420]

[ Page 9811 ]

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member, who I have known for a long time, is simply wrong. The report from an international expert — and I have heard no one dispute Dr. Gardam's qualifications to render an opinion on these matters — contains 13 recommendations. The member on Thursday in this House was quoting from those recommendations. He was retained by Fraser Health last year in the fall.

So to suggest that Fraser Health was motivated by events of the last few days to take action is simply wrong, and it is — on a matter of such importance, relating to the confidence people can have in a hospital — unfair and, in my view, bordering on irresponsible.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: What's irresponsible is that it has taken so long to get this issue dealt with. What's irresponsible is that physicians at Burnaby General were raising this issue over and over again, and in their own words, clearly they were ignored. That's what is wrong.

The minister stood in this House last week and said the recommendations are going to be implemented. He was, you know, very happy to read from the report. Trouble is, the health authority said, "Oh, we're only going to deal with ten of the 13 recommendations," and they weren't going to deal with the major recommendation, which was around having modern staffing levels at Burnaby General when it came to infection control.

Again, the question becomes for the government: why did it take so long when, as the minister said, stats are on the website all the time? Why did it take so long to get action? And when they did, initially it was only going to be ten out of 13 recommendations. Why did it take so long?

Hon. M. de Jong: Well, the member has changed his tune, perhaps recognizing that his initial assertion a moment ago was fundamentally wrong. When we're dealing with the confidence that British Columbians need to have in their hospitals, I think it's important that we be accurate.

There is a challenge at Burnaby Hospital. It is an aged facility. We are going to address that. Now, I have a prediction to make. I think later in these proceedings, during this session, I'm going to hear from the member beside the official opposition critic. I'm going to hear from the member for New Westminster. I'm going to hear from all these members who are advocating for the redevelopment of hospital sites in their community.

Now, there's a piece of paper in someone's desk over there that says how the NDP would prioritize those redevelopments. I'd be interested to know, because for ten years they did precious little to ensure that those three- and four-bed wards were being replaced by single- and double-occupancy bed wards.

In the short term, I'm happy to report to the House that the professionals at Burnaby Hospital are working together to continue to reduce the incidence of C. difficile , and we as a government are going to continue to work to ensure that the people of Burnaby and across British Columbia have the most modern hospitals possible.

R. Chouhan: The doctors at Burnaby Hospital noted that there was inadequate cleaning and said that this was part of the reason for the C. difficile outbreak.

A constituent of mine, Ujagar Singh Gill, is a 77-year-old patient at Burnaby Hospital who has been in the hospital for six months now waiting for residential care. Unfortunately, the care Mr. Gill has received paints a picture of inadequate cleaning. The family has asked repeatedly for the room and the bathroom to be cleaned, only to be told that there is not enough staff.

This is just one example of the Liberals failing Burnaby patients. What is the minister doing to ensure that patients have clean hospital rooms in Burnaby Hospital?

Hon. M. de Jong: Well, here's a significant difference that characterizes the circumstance today versus what it was not so long ago. The member can stand in the House and present, as part of his line of questioning, specific data that is tracked on a weekly, monthly and quarterly basis. He couldn't do that ten years ago. There was no data.

[1425]

We actually take these matters so seriously that we have measurements in place. The health authorities have measurements in place, and that data is presented publicly so that people can assess the progress.

In the case of Burnaby I will say again, in case the member wasn't listening earlier, that there have been challenges. The people that work there do so diligently and have managed to bring the incidence of infection down by 40 percent. Not as far as we would like it to be, but they and all of the people that I met with yesterday are committed to the objective of reducing the incidence of C. difficile infection and providing a continued safe environment for the people in that hospital.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

R. Chouhan: The minister can quote all the numbers and data he wants, but the fact remains that the patients at Burnaby Hospital are not getting the services that they deserve. Mr. Gill's family is very concerned about the state of cleanliness in their father's room and bathroom.

Burnaby Hospital physician Dr. Kirby, in his March 1 letter to the Fraser Health CEO, said there were "unacceptable delays" in the implementation of enhanced cleaning protocols designed to help combat the spread of C. difficile .

Mr. Gill's son says he noticed the same stains — and we have pictures — on the toilets for four days. No, noth-

[ Page 9812 ]

ing was cleaned — four days. The family repeatedly asked for the cleaning to take place, but they were told there weren't enough staff to do it. Is this the kind of standard of care patients can expect at Burnaby Hospital?

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm going to refer the member, with the greatest of respect, to the report that Dr. Gardam prepared, because to this point I have not heard anyone take issue. The 12th finding says this: "The Aramark housekeeping staff appear quite dedicated to their tasks and understand the important role they have in patient safety. Given the additional cleaning being recommended, it may be that existing contracts will need to be revisited. The existing…."

Interjection.

Hon. M. de Jong: Yeah. Well, it would help if you read the report, you see.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. de Jong: "The existing external auditing of housekeeping activities should continue."

I'm sorry if the hon. member is offended by the fact that we actually have data that we collect and report upon and make available to the public. But that's the basis of the public confidence that we will ensure British Columbians can have in the safety of the hospitals that are providing services right across the province.

FUNDING FOR GROUPS PARTICIPATING

IN MISSING WOMEN INQUIRY

S. Fraser: Missing and murdered aboriginal women are supposed to be at the centre of the Missing Women Inquiry, but aboriginal groups were forced to withdraw from the inquiry after the government specifically — specifically — denied them the resources they needed to take

part in the proceedings.

Now Robyn Gervais, the lawyer representing aboriginal women at the inquiry, is resigning. Ms. Gervais is frustrated over how the commission continues to ignore aboriginal witnesses.

The Premier told this House that her government wants to "make sure people's voices are heard." Those words ring hollow. Will the Premier take the necessary steps today to ensure that the inquiry no longer marginalizes the voices of aboriginal women?

Hon. S. Bond: All of us in this House and in British Columbia want to ensure that this process continues, that we actually get to the bottom of what happened for missing women, aboriginal and others, so that this circumstance is not repeated in British Columbia again. The commission of inquiry was created by this government for exactly that reason.

[1430]

Today taxpayers in British Columbia continue to support a process that will seek inclusion, we are hoping, over the next couple of months. We have extended the deadline of the Missing Women Inquiry until the end of June.

We have confidence that Commissioner Oppal is fully aware of the expectations that we hear from the voices of aboriginal people and that we will get to the bottom of what happened so it will not be replicated in this province.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Fraser: Without the aboriginal women and the groups who drew attention to this in the first place, this inquiry wouldn't have even happened. From the very start, however, the Liberals have been denying them a real presence and a voice in this process. That's the fact, hon. Speaker. Ms. Gervais was brought on as a compromise, if you will, but she has now lost confidence in the inquiry and has withdrawn.

Will the Premier commit today to take the necessary steps to restore credibility to this Missing Women Inquiry and finally give priority to those voices that matter so much?

Hon. S. Bond: Perhaps the member opposite needs to be reminded that the commission of inquiry is independent, and in fact the commission has been provided with a significant budget that is in excess of millions of dollars to ensure that there's adequate representation.

It is this government that set up and proceeded with the commission of inquiry. Four additional lawyers were added, including the lawyer that chose, unfortunately, to step down. But funds were set aside within the commission budget to ensure that there were lawyers providing adequate representation.

In fact, the member opposite is correct. This government made a choice. We made the choice to provide lawyers for those most significantly impacted, and that was the families of missing and murdered women.

J. Kwan: The Missing Women Inquiry was seriously jeopardized by the B.C. Liberals' refusal to accept the recommendation of their own commissioner to cover the legal costs for the 13 groups granted standing. These groups had some of the most valuable experience, knowledge and information to offer, but they had the least amount of resources. Groups like the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, the February 14th Women's Memorial March, the Native Women's Association of Canada, the Ending Violence Association of B.C. and the

[ Page 9813 ]

Women's Equality and Security Coalition were forced to drop out of the process because of the lack of resources.

Given that Ms. Gervais, an independent counsel for aboriginal interests, has just lost confidence in the inquiry and withdrawn, what action will the Premier take to ensure that the integrity of the commission is restored and that the voices of aboriginal women are heard?

Hon. S. Bond: Once again, the member opposite should perhaps take some time to look at the mandate of the Missing Women Inquiry. What the government did was create the opportunity for this to be a less formal commission, a study commission. What it means is that in fact Commissioner Oppal didn't simply sit in a courtroom and wait for lawyers to appear. One of the things he did was actually travel throughout northern British Columbia to speak to women's groups, to speak to aboriginal communities right up and down Highway 16.

The study commission means that you don't need to have a lawyer to have the ability to participate. We did make a choice. We chose to fund the legal counsel for families of missing and murdered women in British Columbia. Commissioner Oppal will continue the process. He is independent, and I have confidence that he will complete this work with credibility.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[1435]

J. Kwan: Surely the minister knows that some 24 lawyers are representing police interests at this inquiry, when in fact the most important voices are the aboriginal peoples' community voices at this inquiry. The 13 groups granted standing were denied access to resources, and that's why they have been shut out of the inquiry.

This inquiry came about because of the unimaginable horror that took place in this province. The voices of the aboriginal women and community groups are essential if we are to learn about how to prevent this kind of tragedy from ever happening again. Their voice needs to be heard at the inquiry.

Last May the Premier said: "It's incumbent on all of us in every aspect, in every corner of our society in British Columbia, to care and to show that we care by doing something about it." That's what the Premier said.

My question is to the Premier. What concrete action will she take to show that she cares about the voices of aboriginal women in this inquiry?

Hon. S. Bond: What happened in British Columbia was tragic, and we want to ensure that it does not occur again. What we did as a government was we created a less formal study commission, and what that study commission allows is for people to have the opportunity to participate without the necessity of having a lawyer. That's about increased access.

When the concerns were raised about participation from groups like the ones the member opposite mentioned, the commissioner actually appointed four additional lawyers — two of them pro bono, and we appreciate their work; and two that are paid for from the commission's budget.

I refer to a comment made by a previous Attorney General in this House, speaking about work that Commissioner Oppal did in a previous inquiry, and this is what he said. It was NDP Attorney General Colin Gabelmann. "Mr. Justice Oppal has conducted the inquiry" — referring to the 1990 Oppal Commission — "in a way that is sensitive to the needs of differing groups who come to speak to him…. I think he has made it very clear that you don't have to have a lawyer in tow and that you don't have to do a formal presentation."

If it was good enough under the NDP and the Attorney General of the day set up a similar practice, I would assume that we would extend the same courtesy to Mr. Oppal again today.

GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION

WITH PUBLIC ON THRONE SPEECH

S. Chandra Herbert: As part of the Premier and this government's desire to be seen as changed, as a new style of politicians, ones who are open to listening to the people, the Premier and her Liberal government put in the throne speech — the official throne speech, I might add…. They called for "citizens to go on Twitter today and make their own contribution at #throne2011. In 140 characters or less, tell your government about the kind of B.C. you want for your family."

This new style of political consultation was intriguing, so I did a freedom-of-information request to find out what the Liberals were doing with the requests of the people of B.C. What did I find? Well, not four blank pages. None at all. There are zero records of the government doing anything with the information they called on the people to deliver to them.

My question to the Premier, in 140 characters or less, I might add, is: why ask the people of B.C. for their ideas when you refuse to listen — #bcpoli?

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: Our Premier and our government are absolutely committed to a different way of doing things as a government, and we are leading across Canada as a province in all of our open government initiatives. Last summer we launched three programs — our program of open data, open information and a new government website.

We are responding to people, and we have new public engagement. I think that the member opposite is well aware that we are providing this kind of leadership across Canada.

[ Page 9814 ]

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

[1440]

S. Chandra Herbert: If the minister is proud of appearing to be so open that they've actually done nothing to respond to the people of B.C.'s concerns that they asked for, well, then, she wins.

This government doesn't do anything. They appear to be listening. They like to appear to be responding, but when you actually do freedom-of-information requests, what you find is zero, nothing. It's what Jack Layton — the late, great Jack Layton — would call a hashtag fail.

I requested any and all memos, briefing records, reports, PowerPoint presentations, Q-and-A records, communication records, strategic communication plans and the Twitter submissions themselves related to the throne speech requests for ideas through #throne2011, and it was a big zero, a fail.

Again, my question to the Premier, if she decides to rise to the debate at this point — or maybe tweet about it later to her followers: will she explain why her government invited B.C. to be involved through #throne2011, only to then refuse to do anything about their requests?

Hon. C. Clark: I was actually thinking of putting in a freedom-of-information request on where the Leader of the Opposition stands on very important issues facing British Columbians these days. In fact, I was going to put in a freedom-of-information request asking for all notes, memos, documents and anything else that might suggest where he stands on the issue of a $2 billion addition to the budget in order to pay for the teachers union's demands. I won't put it in, though, because I bet you it doesn't exist.

[End of question period.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Member.

Hon. R. Coleman: Orders of the day this afternoon will be second reading continued on Bill 22, intituled the Education Improvement Act, in this chamber, and in

section A, the Douglas Fir Committee Room, we will be doing the estimates of the Ministry of Advanced Education.

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

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

G. Gentner: I present a petition with 406 signatures, all students of the North Delta Secondary school asking the Legislature to support teachers and quality education in the province of British Columbia.

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 22 — EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT ACT

(continued)

G. Coons: I rise to respond to Bill 22, the Education Improvement Act — so-called.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

This is a very, very important piece of legislation. I believe that it will once again violate collective bargaining rights for teachers, and it will definitely have a profoundly negative impact on learning conditions for students in British Columbia. I can attest to that. Over the years teachers in this province have sacrificed to win protections for class size and composition and many of the learning conditions for students.

[1445]

Contrary to what the other side believes, teachers care about public education. They care about their profession. They work hard. They care about their students and want to be able to teach to each student's individual needs and make a real difference.

I represent three school districts — school district 52 in Prince Rupert, school district 50 in Haida Gwaii and school district 49 down on the central coast — and I know that, in the riding I represent, teachers in these regions have a real challenging time in the classrooms.

As far as EDI and scores, the regions up on the north coast are the most challenging for teachers, and it's important for students to have the necessary tools they need to feel good in the classroom.

B.C. Liberal governments continue to undermine the great public education system we have, and we can see that with the past decade of Liberal cuts. That's proof of that.

I have some experience in teaching. I taught for about 28 years. It's interesting, the rally outside, with thousands upon thousands of teachers, of workers, of public sector workers, of parents, of students and concerned British Columbians expressing their concern about the draconian legislation that is before us today.

When I started teaching in 1977, I had the special class. So I was involved in special education. I had the class of ten or 12 students who…. They told me, down by the boiler room: "Do whatever you want. We don't want to see these guys."

Over the years I found it very challenging to work with students, and I did some upgrading. In my summers I went off and upgraded in special ed. I ended up acknowledging that lots of these students should be in normal classrooms.

When I was teaching, I would take these kids to the

[ Page 9815 ]

gymnasium and do gym with them. I'd take them to the shops and make candy dishes. I'd take them to the home ec room and make cookies. I would do everything with these kids.

After about a year and a half I started integrating them in regular classes. I acknowledged that it took a lot of learning, not only for myself but for my colleagues, to understand the importance of integration of students with special needs.

When I heard the executive member for the Special Education Association speaking out at the rally, and their concerns about this legislation…. What their concerns are…. Students with special needs are at the heart of all teachers' concerns within this current labour dispute. They're willing to take a strong stand, and they are.

This is Vice-President Alison Ogden, and she says: "The current legislation not only fails to restore the resources so cavalierly withheld from our children with special needs for the past decade; it further threatens our ability to meet their needs."

These are from teachers — 600 teachers just attended the Crosscurrents professional development conference sponsored by the Special Education Association. I think that's a very important component of this legislation, because it's going to make educational circumstances in classrooms worse off for students and for parents.

I do have to add that 25 years ago I was the vice-president of the Special Education Association. So I have a clear tie to what is happening right now and experiences as to what is happening in education over the last ten or 12 years.

British Columbians, with this bill…. They can see that this Bill 22 makes things worse for students, worse for parents and teachers. It increases class size. It weakens protections for special needs students, and it hurts the quality of education that our children receive. It will violate negotiated working rights for teachers, and it's putting this government on their path of decimating working rights for all British Columbians.

But we have to remember that this is the B.C. Liberal strike. It is a direct result of Liberal mismanagement of education and the mess they've made. That started with the illegal ripping up of teacher contracts. I remember that well. I remember that well in Prince Rupert, back in 2002.

[1450]

This government, these Liberals, have played politics. They've been increasing the fears and anxieties of parents and students to distract from their mismanagement of our important public education system.

This legislation before us is more about B.C. Liberal politics than it is for a concern about public education. Teachers, parents, students and taxpayers all have so much riding on a contract being agreed to in a fair and respectful way. A real mediation process would be the way to go, versus this some sort of legislated mock version of one.

Last week the employers and the BCTF wanted to go to some sort of mediation process, and this government failed to do that. They had the opportunity, and it fails. It appears it's this government's intention and agenda to give the mediator — you know, a government-appointed person — their own agenda, to strip teachers' contracts once again. Whether it's stripping of class size and composition, post and fill, seniority, due process and dismissal or professional autonomy — it's all coming under

section 6 of the bill before us.

The minister, with this legislation, this Bill 22, will choose the mediator along with carefully crafted and tightly controlled B.C. Liberal terms of reference, to deal with concessions and contract stripping that this government was seeking at the bargaining table. I hate to say bargaining table, because there wasn't any bargaining going on. There was not any good-faith bargaining going on. This government wanted this to happen, and now we're seeing the end result.

This is a lot about respect — respect for the collective bargaining process. We see that this government is unwilling to come to a fair and reasonable negotiated settlement. There's been a long and destructive history of disrespect, especially with the current Premier and in her previous role as the Minister of Education back in 2002.

Again, it's about respect, and the lack of respect for teachers — and for our public education system, in ensuring that it can meet the needs of our students in today's world and in the future.

Now, if we look at the recent budget that we just saw a couple weeks ago, Budget 2012, it states on page 25, under the budget and fiscal plan, "Despite continuing declining enrolment, blocked funding to school districts remains unchanged from Budget 2011," right through to 2014-15.

However, the material assumptions in the budget show that the number of students is actually set to increase each year. The reality is that student enrolment is set to increase, and the government is essentially cutting over $100 million for failing to increase funding by the rate of inflation. Again, a disrespect not only for the collective bargaining process; a disrespect for public education and a huge disrespect for teachers in this province — and workers.

We see over the years that…. The most recent Stats Canada reports show that while funding for elementary and secondary public schools increased from 2005 to 2010, B.C. ranked at or near the bottom in terms of education expenditures.

When we look at the ranking, tenth is the lowest and one is the highest. For operating expenditures for that five-year period, B.C. was tenth — last in all of the rankings of all of the provinces. Total expenditures: tenth. Total expenditures per students: tenth. Total expenditures per student in constant dollars: tenth. Total expenditures per capita: tenth. Total expenditures as a

[ Page 9816 ]

percentage of GDP: ninth. Total expenditures per student as a percentage of GDP: eighth.

We can see this government treating our public education system with disdain and disrespect and not funding it the way it should be, as other provinces have. The recent budget basically does little to reverse the trend in terms of improving education.

[1455]

Now, it was a disappointing budget for students, parents and teachers — and districts. Michael McEvoy, the president of the B.C. school trustees, said, "Districts will be feeling the pressure right across the province…. The 0.6 percent hike is targeted money for specific programs…and won't help boards deal with inflation and rising costs," such as MSP.

If we look at this, despite the Liberal government previously committing to making B.C. the best-educated, most literate jurisdiction on the continent, this government continues to cut and hack at the budget. The overall increase in the budget falls well below the rate of inflation.

Peg Orcherton, Victoria school board chairperson, says that the decision to freeze block funding is a cut, the same as a cut. This government gives with one hand and takes away heavily with the other. This cut, which is well over $100 million, will mean even less services for students. After ten years of devastating cuts, this will have even more impact in the classrooms.

But the real rich line is that the minister talked about investing an additional $165 million to deal with issues with class composition. This bill deals with that, but that's after this government has basically pickpocketed over $330 million a year by illegally stripping the rights of teachers to bargain class size and composition. That, as we all know, is in Bills 27 and 28. So this extra money, $165 million, is confirmation by the Supreme Court of British Columbia in their ruling against this government, against this Premier who was the Minister of Education at the time, forcing them against their will to deal with it.

To some degree, what we have before us is a bill that is trying to deal with the illegal stripping of contracts in this province. I'm sure most people remember that on April 13, 2011, the B.C. Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, struck down B.C. Liberal amendments to the teachers' collective rights as unconstitutional and suspended that effect for 12 months. Bill 22 is this government's way of trying to deal with it.

Madam Justice Susan Griffin ruled that these bills were unconstitutional because they violated teachers' rights to freedom of association under

section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These two bills strip collective agreements of class-size limits and guarantees of support for students with special needs, bringing along with it disastrous consequences for teaching and learning conditions in classrooms across the province.

Again, the significance of the decision, the illegal contract stripping, can't be overstated. Last year there were 12,000 classes that had over 30 students, and thousands of students with special needs whose basic rights were also violated by this government's draconian actions. The illegal legislation allowed this government to underfund education and limit teachers' abilities to insist upon adequate resources.

Basically, the passage of these bills by this government under the current Premier constituted a theft of 20 years of work and sacrifice of classroom teachers to ensure adequate funding, smaller classes and attention for kids with special needs. It was wiped out by a government that violated the rights of thousands and thousands of educators. We know an appeal went to the United Nations where the International Labour Organization found this B.C. Liberal government, with the Premier as the instigator, in violation of international law.

Now the government of the day, the Liberals of the day, just smile and let ten years pass. But in the end, the court found that this government's working condition provisions, forced upon teachers by the current Premier, were unconstitutional and invalid. This government was forced to deal with it, and that's what this $165 million is — a payback for breaking the law.

We go back and look at Justice Susan Griffin's comments in her ruling. She found that the Premier and her colleagues had trampled the collective bargaining rights of teachers by legislating away class sizes and other protections. She also said: "By passing this legislation…the government did not preserve the essential underpinning of collective bargaining, namely, good-faith negotiation." She also said — and this is when the Premier tried, in proud defence of herself….

[1500]

Talking of balance in what they did when they stripped the contracts, Justice Griffin said: "The evidence that the government relied on to support its assertion that class-size limits were causing hardships to students and parents was anecdotal hearsay. It was so vague and unsubstantiated…. It would be unfair to give it any weight for the truth of its contents."

Any weight for the truth of its contents. So it sounds like a lot of misleading, and perhaps some of the evidence put forward was lies.

You know, the justice says: "Why not provide for a traditional solution to solve a labour dispute?" What we want….

Deputy Speaker: Member, I would caution you to use parliamentary language at all times.

G. Coons: Thank you, hon. Chair.

Why not provide for a traditional solution to solve a labour dispute? That's what nearly happened. That's what should have happened last week when we had an opportunity for a real mediation process to happen, asked for by the employers association and the teachers, but this

[ Page 9817 ]

government went ahead and sledgehammered this bill before us.

Another quote: "The legislation undoubtedly was seen by teachers as evidence that the government did not respect them or consider them to be valued contributors to the education system."

It's shameful that we have come to this Bill 22, which continues the disrespect for collective bargaining, the disrespect for teachers, the disrespect for our public education system.

The Premier, as Education Minister, orchestrated the most regressive pieces of legislation affecting class size and composition that this province has ever seen. These two pieces of legislation systematically decimated B.C.'s special education infrastructure. I've been hearing that, and I saw it in the classrooms that I taught in. This infrastructure had been built up carefully over four decades and turned the official policy of integration of students with special needs into mainstream classrooms. It just turned it on its head.

What we do know is that teachers continually strive for a public education system that enables every student to have the support they need. Teachers and students need class sizes and composition that enable teachers to meet students' diverse needs. They need learning specialists to support students with special needs, whose very learning styles require additional assistance or modified programs. But over the last ten years, from 2001-2002 to 2010-2011, what we've seen is a huge cut in specialist teacher positions.

A teacher from Prince Rupert, Anna Ashley, whom I have known for many years as she's taught in Prince Rupert for many years…. This is a quote from her.

"We want to be able to give children the attention they deserve in our classrooms. We want to be able to meet the individual needs of each and every student so that they can be successful when they leave school and enter the workforce. We don't want to see some students left behind.

"This cannot be done in classes of 30-plus students. This can't be done when classes are full of students with specific special learning needs and inadequate resources. As always, teachers will teach as best they can within the limits that they are subjected to. But in the end, it will be the children and our future generations that will ultimately pay for the lack of resources and underfunding of our education system, which is simply unacceptable."

As we move forward here, we've got many situations that point to the fact that this government has not been bargaining in good faith. An editorial in the Times Colonist a couple of days ago: "…the Liberals' unbending hostility. The reason this turned from negotiation to dispute to strike, and potentially a wildcat strike to come, is that the Liberals have never bargained in good faith."

[1505]

So here we are, sitting here with this bill before us, and in it there are many, many things that are going to hurt students, teachers, the education system and parents. I'd like to look at some of the sections here.

Bill 22, cynically called the Education Improvement Act, is basically a destructive act of legislative vandalism that will violate collective bargaining rights for teachers and have a huge negative impact on learning conditions for students. I can only imagine how concerned parents will be when they realize that learning conditions are only going to get worse as a result of this bill.

section 6, under "Mediation" — the imposition section. It provides that the Minister of Education must appoint a mediator to assist the parties in determining their new collective agreement. But the mediation is specifically to concessions brought forward by the employer.

The new collective agreement is to enable high-quality teaching through "effective feedback and evaluation of teachers to promote improvement." That's from the act. But that means dismissal and due process clauses stripped in current negotiated contracts.

They talk in the legislation about an "alignment of professional development with teaching needs." All this is doing is attacking the professional autonomy of teachers.

Another in

section 6, "Mediation," is "scheduling and selection of teachers suited to students needs." This is going after, in negotiated contracts, the posting and filling of teachers and their seniority rights.

You know, what this appears to be, this mediation forced upon teachers in some sort of mock mediation process…. It's designed to make teachers complicit in stripping the remaining protections of their own collective agreements. The mediation is one-sided and only includes concessions that were tabled by the employer side of bargaining. So it's a farce.

Now, we've heard a lot about that, about the mediation section, where it's mock. There should be a real mediation process, which we're calling for, the employer has called for and the BCTF has called for. That's where we should be right now.

section 7 it talks about the offences — the intimidation section, with very severe penalties for any action. This is just sort of more bullying and an attempt to intimidate teachers. The fines are just so outrageous — $475 a day for an employee, $1.3 million for the BCTF.

If we look at that and compare it to recent fines and the Langley mushroom farm that got fined $350,000 for three deaths and two others that are permanently disabled…. These are outrageous, bullying and intimidation factors in this legislation.

Section 13 removes the provision respecting restrictions on bargaining that was found to be unconstitutional by Madam Justice Griffin and substitutes the exact same

[ Page 9818 ]

language, with a few slight changes. Again, this is what this government is doing — attacking the public education system, attacking teachers and attacking workers in this province.

You know,

section 14, the second-last

section that I want to talk about, looks at…. That's a contract-stripping section. It removes provisions about average class sizes. It removes the requirement to obtain the consent of a teacher where classes exceed 30. It removes the requirement that there be no more than three students with an individual education plan, unless the superintendent or the principal — or maybe even the minister — thinks it's appropriate for student learning and there had been some consultations.

So basically, there's an unlimited number of special needs students in classrooms. And this removes any teacher input in the makeup of classes, and it removes reporting requirements under this section.

Again, it also looks at removing accountability.

Section 15 removes the requirement to set a calendar for the school year in consultation with teachers and school planning councils. So school planning councils are going to be left out of the picture.

[1510]

Also,

section 15 removes the requirement that superintendents prepare a report on organization of classes within the school district and present it at a public meeting of the board. They don't have to do that anymore.

It also removes the reporting requirements on class size and composition at the start of the year, essentially removing any accountability on class size and composition. So when we look at this legislation before us…. It is a horrendous piece of legislation.

Another teacher, who I've known for many years, is saying:

"Why am I on strike? Teaching has been my calling, my passion, my vocation for more than 30 years, and it is with difficulty that I walk out of my classroom. I'm not usually in favour of a strike. However, this government leaves me no choice due to the actions they have taken and the statements made by our Education Minister.

"First and foremost, the future of our students in our province is at stake. In the past decade our class sizes have increased; the numbers of special needs students in our classes have increased; the compositions of our classes are increasingly complex, including students with social, emotional, behavioural and learning difficulties. Ten years ago the government stripped provisions of class size and composition from our contract,

an act that was found to be illegal.

"I am standing up in support of my students, in support of future conditions and in support of what has been fought for and gained over many years of respectful negotiations."

This is an elementary teacher, Laura Esposito, who talks about how normally, she would not be out there protesting the actions of this government over the last ten years.

I can attest to what teachers go through every day when they walk into a classroom and there are 25 or 30 students and it's very difficult to meet the needs of the students in their classrooms.

This last story I want to refer to is a grade 6-7 teacher. Ten girls, ten boys — that's it — 20 in the class. Three of them have moderate intellectual disability. Two of these take medication. It can be hit-and-miss. Another student is intensive behaviour designation. The fifth special needs student, diagnosed with FASD and ADHD, lives in foster care. Constant monitoring is required. The sixth special needs student is intensive behaviour designation. And of the remaining 14 students, one was assessed for mild intellectual designation, but support wasn't allowed. Two more have self-regulation problems and impulse control and so on and so on.

A student teacher was coming in, and she asked the teacher to find the designated students, and the teacher could not in her class of 20. But her classroom was deemed an appropriate learning environment by administration.

This bill is a blueprint for an attack on all workers, takes away the rights for working conditions, unheard of fines. It sets up a phoney mediation. It eliminates the Charter of protective rights to free collective bargaining. It also predetermines the outcome of the mediation. It is a blueprint for eroding the quality of public education and the future of our children.

It makes a mockery of the B.C. Supreme Court decision on Bill 27 and Bill 28. Rather than dealing with Bill 27 and Bill 28, they introduced contract-stripping language word for word. It must be stopped — this bill. It's regressive legislation. It's bad for our public education system. It's bad for students, parents and teachers. It's bad for workers, and it's bad for British Columbia.

This is the B.C. Liberals' strike. They've mismanaged education. They've hurt students, parents, and they played politics with teachers.

We should be in an independent mediation process. Even though teachers and employers wanted to do this, this government has failed public education again.

I agree, I stand tall, with the thousands of teachers in this province and the majority of British Columbians who think that independent mediation or arbitration is the way to go, and we must kill this bill.

J. Les: I appreciate the opportunity to rise this afternoon and offer a few comments on Bill 22. I will make my comments fairly brief, as I think it's necessary that we move forward with this legislation as quickly as possible.

[1515]

I know that members of the opposition are doing their level best to string this debate out. Each one of them is taking their full 30 minutes of allocated time. I think it's important that we recognize the urgency of the situation. Hundreds of thousands of students across this province are being denied their opportunity to an education. I think it is a travesty that students in British Columbia are being used yet again as a pawn in a dispute between

[ Page 9819 ]

adults. That, to me, has always been unacceptable, and it remains unacceptable today, so I will do everything I can to make sure that this goes forward very, very quickly.

Now, I've been listening carefully to some of the debate from members opposite, when I've had an opportunity, and the level of rhetoric is, I think, pretty significant. Sometimes I'd like to see a little bit more thoughtfulness, but unfortunately, I guess, members have a specific mission when they come in here and really haven't, I think, looked that closely at the legislation before they start to speak.

To the bill. Bill 22 actually responds, largely, to many of the requests that we've been hearing over the past number of weeks. For example, we heard that there should be a mediator appointed. And what does this bill do? It in fact allows for a mediator to be appointed and for a cooling-off period to be put in place as well.

I think these are responsible things to do. These aren't solutions that are easily captured in inflamed rhetoric that we hear from the members opposite, but I think this is a responsible approach to try and find our way through the many difficult issues and bring about a solution that is good for our children and good for the teachers of this province, as well as good for the taxpayers of this province. We have to be fair to each of those parties.

That's one of the difficulties in government. Choices have to be made, yet when we challenge the Leader of the Opposition, for example, as to whether or not he agrees with the demands that have been placed or put forward by the teachers, he is singularly evasive. He says: "Well, you know, that needs to be sorted out at the bargaining table." Well, there have been 78 bargaining sessions with the B.C. teachers union, and of course, there has been exactly no success derived as a result of those bargaining sessions.

The opposition leader continues to say that these matters should be discussed at the bargaining table, and he is completely unclear as to what he would suggest, in a constructive way, perhaps. Maybe that's too much to expect of an opposition leader, but some constructive contribution would be nice from time to time.

We are forced to look, then, at what the Leader of the Opposition has espoused in the past. We go back to 1998, when he played a significant role in the negotiations and bargaining that was going on back in those days with the teachers union. He takes credit for coming to a resolution or an agreement that resulted in a zero-zero-and-2 settlement, as it was then advertised by the then NDP government.

The now Leader of the Opposition very much is an architect of that solution, except that they forgot to point out that there were all kinds of other side deals included within that purported zero-zero-and-2 arrangement. The actual cost was an overall increase in cost to government of some 11 percent, which led, of course, to the inevitable headlines back then — typical NDP math: zero plus zero plus two equals 11. You know, it has been ever thus. Members of the New Democratic Party have extreme difficulty with mathematics.

There are many statements, some wilder than others, that are made in this House. There's talk about education cuts, for example. Well, I should put on the record that the education budget has actually increased by 29 percent in the last decade. That is not a cut. That is in spite of declining enrolment of about 70,000 students in that period of time. I don't know how people come to the conclusion that that is a cut. It simply isn't. It is significantly increased resources, with a significant decline in student enrolment at the same time.

[1520]

The facts are what they are, and I think we need to pay a little bit of attention to the facts once in a while, including the members opposite.

We have claims being made, such as, for example, 700 fewer special needs teachers will be available under Bill 22. The fact is that it will actually enable the hiring of 2,100 additional special needs teaching assistants in British Columbia classrooms.

There's a claim being made that B.C. teachers are actually ninth on the scale of teachers' remuneration in Canada. The fact of the matter is that B.C. teachers' salaries plus benefits are fourth best amongst the provinces in Canada.

There's a claim that seniority is being done away with in the proposals in Bill 22. Clearly, that's not the case. No government would trash seniority. But it's also important to understand that if in a school, for example, they're looking for a new math teacher, the shop teacher with the highest seniority does not get to qualify for that math teaching position.

There's an assertion that the contract demands that have been made by the B.C. teachers union are very, very reasonable — some 15 percent, which is, of course, a cost of $2 billion. Well, the teachers union in their last contract achieved a 16 percent increase and an almost $4,000 signing bonus. That, I think, was a very generous settlement and very appropriate for the time. Since that time the economic circumstances of the province have declined somewhat, and government has proposed a zero-and-zero mandate for all public sector unions.

Some 120 or 130 public sector unions have now agreed with that mandate and have ratified or signed off on those negotiating parameters. I actually have the list here. I'm not going to take the time to read off all of the agree-

[ Page 9820 ]

ments that have been arrived at between government and the various public sector unions. But the B.C. Teachers Federation somehow seeks an exemption from that zero-and-zero mandate that has already been agreed to by hundreds of thousands of public sector workers across British Columbia. That is not reasonable.

Everybody in British Columbia understands that we live today in an economic circumstance that is not quite as robust as it was a few years ago because of the world economic decline that we're not immune to. B.C. teachers still are, as I've said before, fourth best paid in Canada. Asking B.C. teachers to adhere to the zero-and-zero mandate, while allowing them to go to mediation to discuss other aspects of their working conditions and arrangements, I think, is a very fair approach.

There's another assertion that class-size limits are being eliminated. Well, clearly that is not the case. First of all, there are strict limits in place, and they remain in place for K-to-3. Caps in other grades remain, but exceptions can be made by principals and superintendents, and in some cases, if they exceed a certain number, then additional pay is provided for teachers as well.

You know, there are all of these assertions that are out there, and in a labour dispute, of course, that's par for the course. Everybody seeks to sway public opinion. But I think it's important sometimes to put the facts on the table.

I've also heard one about 12,000 overcrowded classrooms across British Columbia. Well, we have 65,000 classrooms in British Columbia. Fewer than 1,500 have more than 31 students, and fewer than 600 have more than 33. Most of those, of course, as you can imagine, are for things like band, choir and theatre, where actually you want as many students as possible within reason.

[1525]

It's easy to say: "Well, we've got all of these classes that are way larger than they should be." You need to look at the facts. The facts are that in a lot of these cases that is exactly what discerning parents and their students and their children want to have. If you've got a school band, you probably don't want just 15 kids in that class; you're probably better off with 50. You've probably got a much more robust-sounding band.

We've got to sort out the rhetoric from the facts. I hope that we will have the ability to continue to do that. Again, I'm going to cut my remarks here, because I think it's important that we move this forward quickly.

I hope that I can tell the children of British Columbia as quickly as possible that this dispute is resolved and that they can get back to learning and achieving their educational goals, because, quite simply, it's important.

We all owe the children of British Columbia a lot better than us bickering in here and arguing in great rhetorical oratory. Frankly, some days I almost want to apologize to the kids of British Columbia, because I think we all need to be doing better than this.

D. Routley: I think the members opposite do owe the children of B.C. an apology. They owe the people of B.C. an apology. They owe an apology for so many issues that they've brought to this House, be it the HST or the tearing up of the HEU contracts or selling B.C. Rail when they promised not to. This is just the latest reason that the people of B.C. would deserve an apology.

From the member who spoke before me in particular, given his personality, I'd use the phrase "less is more; more is less." It's an Orwellian phrase that encourages us to believe that less is in fact more, that less funding in education is more funding in education. We have had successive ministers stand in this House and proclaim to the province that less is more.

They say: "We have spent more per student than ever before in the history of B.C." That sounds like a big claim, but it's not such a big claim when you consider inflation and the downloaded costs that this government has imposed on our school systems. Bills 27 and 28 imposed two years of wage increases for teachers onto school districts without funding. Those are the things that have driven the deficit in our classrooms.

The deficit in our classrooms is a deficit in service, a deficit in support. Every school district has had to grapple with these problems, and the B.C. Liberals pretend and would have us believe that there is no problem. "Those silly teachers, those silly parents, they must be wrong. We are spending more per student than ever."

Successively, I have asked every minister who has sat as a Minister of Education to manage my daughter's allowance. They can double Madeline's allowance from $25 to $50 a week, and then I can download onto Madeline the salary increase for her teacher, the new accounting system that the province has imposed on her schools, the increased heating cost, the increased costs of the carbon tax — whatever it might be that this government has downloaded onto the school system.

Then when she tells me, "Dad, I don't have money for that," I can simply send her to the minister, whoever that might be at the time. The minister will tell her: "No, Madeline, you have more allowance per student than in history. You have the most." So more is less; less is more.

It doesn't make sense. Everyone knows. Everyone who has been impacted by Liberal education policies knows the truth. They know that there is a deficit in our classrooms. They know that there is a deficit in the learning conditions of the children of British Columbia.

The previous speaker said that somehow the NDP is responsible for drawing this debate out. Well, we owe it to our constituents to debate legislation. This government had an option of calling this bill on Wednesday. It was the Premier on Tuesday who challenged the Leader of the Opposition to ask questions out of order on the bill.

[1530]

She was so eager to have it debated in question period on Tuesday, but then on Wednesday did we see the bill?

[ Page 9821 ]

No, we didn't see the bill. On Thursday morning, did we see the bill? No, we didn't see the bill on Thursday morning. We did see it briefly on Thursday afternoon, but then what happened? The government adjourned the House, and we went home.

The government had the option of keeping us here all weekend, if they'd chosen. But they didn't, because they think they need this dispute. They think they need this dispute to change channels, change the channel from their failed policies, their absolute failure to build the trust of British Columbians and their failure to live up to their word in so many ways. "Look over there. Now it's the greedy teachers' fault."

And the NDP? We want to debate a bill that doesn't make sense. When both sides of a dispute are calling for mediation and the government refuses to engage in that mediation, we should just agree — shouldn't we, Madam Speaker?

I think that would be the worst thing for the B.C. Liberals right now, if we sat down and agreed, because they need this fight to change the channel from their absolute dismal state in terms of the polls of the province, the support of the people. The people have lost faith in the B.C. Liberal government.

This is the government's strike. They went to the table those 78 times with no flexibility, no mandate to negotiate. Those are not good-faith negotiations. They drove for this strike, and now they have it. They drove for this dispute, and they created a battlefield in our classrooms.

The people who have created pawns of our children in the school system are sitting on that side, the B.C. Liberal government of British Columbia. They have chosen this conflict. They have chosen it, and they have driven it. Bill 22 is the wedge they hope to drive now.

Bill 22 needs to be opposed for so many reasons. Bill 22 responds to a Supreme Court decision that found that Premier to have imposed legislation in 2002, Bills 27 and 28, which was unconstitutional — illegal. That's what the court said about our Premier's legislation introduced when she was Education Minister in 2002.

When that decision came down and the government was given one year to rectify the situation, there was some glimmer of hope in the province amongst educators, children, parents — even us on the opposition side — that maybe what would happen would be that legislation would be brought forward or a contract agreed to with the teachers which would address the terrible conditions imposed way back in 2002, which would address the failure of the government even to live up to its own legislation, Bill 33 of 2006.

Imagine our surprise. Maybe we're a little more jaded on this side of the House in opposition, but imagine the surprise of teachers who fought for that decision, who knew that those bills, 27 and 28, were unconstitutional. Imagine their surprise when what they got was worse.

Imagine that the Supreme Court could tell the government that it had unconstitutionally stripped working conditions from the negotiating process. The result of that was increased class sizes and decreased supports for students, particularly the most vulnerable students. Imagine their surprise when Bill 22 delivered worse.

How did it deliver worse? Well, it delivered worse, first, by removing any limits on special needs students in the classroom. The Education Minister defends that as some sort of defence of their right not to be considered different in the classroom. Those caps were put there to support those children. Those caps were put there to protect working conditions so that the teachers could cope with the demands. So they were removed.

It is a little bit like someone who got caught speeding too many times, so they just removed speed limits. It's inconvenient. It's a pattern for the B.C. Liberals. They put in a law that says: "We won't run a deficit." They run a deficit. They say: "Well, we'll change that rule." This is the same.

[1535]

When they can't live up to the obligations they have in fact imposed on themselves as employers, they say, "Well, we'll just remove that. We will call it the Education Improvement Act. Why don't we call it that? That will make it sound good" — when in fact it's bad, when in fact it makes things worse for children and worse for teachers.

Teachers weren't rallying out here 5,000 strong and all across the province because things have improved. Children and parents aren't alarmed and angry because things have improved. They are voicing their concerns because they know that the true deficit in this province exists in their classrooms. They know it exists in hospitals. They know it exists throughout the services that British Columbians depend on, which this government has undermined.

They are saying it loud and clear to a government that refuses to hear, to a government whose policies have left us in the dismal situation where the total expenditures in this province — operating expenditures in current dollars — place us tenth of all provinces.

We're tenth in total expenditures. We're tenth in total expenditures per student, tenth in total expenditures per capita. Oh no, hold on. We're only ninth in total expenditures as a percentage of GDP. Ninth — that's a big improvement over tenth,

These are the real outcomes. The real outcomes are…. My sister in her class will find how much more difficult it is to manage her classroom, to teach the way she wants to teach, to be effective. My whole family are teachers and have been teachers. They won't have the wool pulled over their eyes by a government that defends its policies the way this government does — tells us that less is more and more is less. They know the truth. British Columbians know the truth.

Let's look at the history. Bills 27 and 28 in 2002 wound up costing so many children their chance at the best education that we could deliver them. Children who were in

[ Page 9822 ]

kindergarten back then are in grade 11 now. They have lived their entire school career under these diminished conditions delivered by the B.C. Liberals.

It took that long for the teachers to prove that act was unconstitutional. Now it's taken a year since that time for this government to deliver yet another blow. That is extremely disheartening for professionals who are teachers, who have chosen the profession because they care — not because they want to get rich, because they don't.

Did you know, Madam Speaker, that in one of the districts I represent, it takes an average of 12 years for a teacher to get a full-time continuing contract? Did you know that it's common? I think in B.C. it's about eight years.

During that time, because they don't have continuing employment, those teachers can't qualify for mortgages. Those teachers don't know what their annual income will be, even their monthly income. They cope with that because they love the profession. They cope with all the conditions downloaded and placed upon them — the burdens to success with their children — by the B.C. Liberals, because they love teaching.

We should be thankful for that. We should not further burden them and further insult them with legislation like that and a defence like we just heard from the less-is-more argument. I just think it's really an insult. It's another slap in the face of people who have devoted themselves to our future, our collective future.

Why are we here? Why are we here debating this act? We are here because British Columbians understand that investing in the future…. I think all people understand that investing in future generations is the last thing we should fail to do — the last thing. But what do we see from this B.C. Liberal government? We have seen deteriorating conditions for our future. We have seen diminished supports for our future.

[1540]

We've seen a disinvestment in our future. We have seen a government that's given up, that has simply handed to its friends the benefits of this province and, with a bill like this, makes our children pay for that. That is disgraceful.

That does a disgrace to the commitment of teachers. It does a disgrace to this province, to this House. It's the House of the people of B.C. It's ornate. It's beautiful. It's made that way to uplift all of us in our common interest. This government and its policies have been an affront to those principles. This bill is, in a sense, an acknowledgment of that failure.

Another little piece of history when it comes to the Premier's involvement in education. On April 23, 2003, the school trustees of the Premier's own constituency at the time demanded her resignation because of the conditions that she had imposed on them.

The outcome of Bills 27 and 28 just in that district alone left an $8.7 million deficit that had to be partially made up by closing three elementary schools and by other cuts, still leaving a million dollars to be cut at the time. This government's policies led to 2,500 fewer teachers and the closure of 113 schools. Throughout the province we fought for our small schools.

These are the issues that brought me into politics. This is it — Bills 27 and 28 and what they did to our school system. I was working for the Cowichan school district at the time as a custodian. We grouped together with other employee groups — teachers and educational assistants — and became politically active. We knew we needed to elect people who could push back against this agenda. I became a school trustee. This is the reason why I stand here — what this government did to our public services generally but in particular to education at that time.

We fought and fought for our small schools. We would have public meetings. One in particular I remember. Youbou, a small community, quite distant from any other community that could support it — trying to save its school. We did. Three times in a row we saved that school, until finally the target was reached and the school was closed.

We were told to look through the lens that the cost of delivering education per student in Youbou was some $6,000, when the average was supposed to be about $1,800. We asked that they turn the lens around, and the cost to the rest of the 8,000-odd students in the Cowichan Valley school district at the time to maintain Youbou was something on the order of about 50 cents per student.

It all depends on your perspective. If your perspective is one that says, "You know what? It's really troublesome to deliver these public services, and this is a great profit-making opportunity for our friends. Let's undermine this. Let's cause a battle in the classrooms. Let's cause a battle in every small school in this province. Let's undermine the faith of the people in their education system, in their health system, and we will back-door privatize those services. We'll push so many students out of the public system and into the private.

We'll push patients out of the public health system and into the private health care deliverers — our friends, our contributors, our donors," this is a great plan, a really great plan.

Do you know, Madam Speaker, that when we saw the shift, a lot of the declining enrolment in our district, we looked at the numbers of school-age children. The decline in enrolment was double the decline in school-age children. Where did they go?

Their parents fled the system. Those who could afford it fled the system, and they went to the private system. Overall there was a 9 percent shift of enrolment. Now, if you shift 5 percent of the public school student body to private education, you have only cost the public system 5 percent, but you've increased the private system's enrolment by 50 percent, because the private system currently is about 10 percent of the size of the public system.

[1545]

This is a great scheme. I call it that — a scheme to

[ Page 9823 ]

undermine public services, to let the people who can least afford it continue to pay for breaks for the people who can most afford it and need the least help. That has been a pattern with this government all the way through their governance of this great province.

The HST is another example of it. Shift the burden from those who are the most wealthy onto those who can least afford it. On and on we go. I mean, if you believe that, Madam Speaker, and if you believe that the benefits of society should be funnelled up towards those who have the most and away from those who have the least…. If that's the transfer of wealth you're working on, which is what the Liberals have done, then say it. And if you're proud enough to say it, defend it.

It had to be veiled — didn't it? This continues to veil that. This continues to veil the effects of transferring the burden of providing services more and more onto those who can least afford it in order to pay for tax breaks for those who least need them. So on we go. On we go, this Liberal train wreck that they call the management of British Columbians' affairs.

If this is a philosophy that you believe and if you think that's a good thing, you can make an argument for it. I don't agree. I think most British Columbians wouldn't agree. I think most British Columbians believe in empathy and equity and a collective pursuit of excellence. The opportunity to thrive and benefit should be equally shared. Our kids should start at the starting line together, and when the gun goes off, everybody's kid has as equal a chance as possible.

But if you don't believe that, if you believe that those who were born ahead of the start line should stay there and that those who were born behind the start line should stay where they belong…. Okay, it's a philosophy. I don't agree with it. I don't think many British Columbians would. But it's a philosophy.

When it becomes particularly tragic, when it becomes a crime against what people consider to be their common wealth, is when you impose that without a mandate onto those who can least afford to pay for that silly notion. When you take from those students who can least support themselves, who need the most support, and you somehow justify that to yourself if you are a legislator….

If you somehow say to yourself: "No, it's okay. This is a good thing. You can't shovel money off the back of the truck to support those vulnerable students. We'd rather put a $600 million hole in a roof over a stadium. Can't shovel the money off the back of a truck to support those seniors, can't shovel the money off the back just to make class sizes smaller for teachers. Can't invest in the future. We'd rather invest in billion-dollar overruns on convention centres."

That's a good priority. This bill simply continues that. We have teachers in our province who are struggling every day to cope with unmanageable workloads. I get so many letters, and I was going through some of them, trying to decide what I should read into the record here. There are just a couple of them that I'd like to share.

This is from Linda Torgerson of Nanaimo. She says:

"With funding cuts, there are not as many school psychologists. These professionals test students who are identified by a school team as at-risk learners. Students who are tested and identified as having a learning impediment, such as a learning disability, receive a designation. A student with a designation is supported with extra funding for educational assistant hours. Many of our vulnerable learners are not being tested due to long wait-lists. Hence, they become invisible to the system. They are visible to me. I see them every day."

[1550]

I know it's true. As a school trustee I managed the budget where we could afford only so many evaluations per year. It wasn't that there were more evaluations than students who needed to be evaluated. The opposite was the case.

We were budgeting the number of students we would designate as special needs because we just couldn't afford to address the need that was obviously there — a need that grows and grows with the complexity of society, with the increasing rates of autism, with the increasing poverty in this province.

Those issues are growing every day in the classroom. The classroom is ever more complex and difficult to manage, yet this bill makes it worse. Imagine that. It makes it worse, and they have the gall to call it an improvement, the Education Improvement Act — like the clean air bill that allowed more air pollution, the Peacemaker missile. Take your choice. It's all Orwellian.

An Hon. Member: NDP math.

D. Routley: Oh, NDP math. Well, this is Liberal language. This is Liberal language for you — an improvement act that makes classroom conditions worse. Hooray. Pat yourselves on the back. Don't break your arm doing it.

She goes on to say: "In our district autistic students who had full-time EAs last year now share one half-time with several other high-needs students. I guess they are not quite as autistic as last year." It's kind of funny — right? — but not. In fact, it's tragic.

There's a thin line sometimes between tragedy and comedy, depending on your distance from a situation. But if you're in a classroom and the distance is from the front of the class to a child that can't be reached and a teacher who hasn't got the time to invest in the technique and attention that they know could reach that student, that indeed is tragedy. This bill makes it worse. Unbelievable.

Russell Berg from Nanaimo: "I love to teach." You want to know how many letters start that way? Do you want to know how many letters from teachers start "I love to teach"? Okay.

"I love the spark that opens up slow at first, then wider and wider, when a grade 8 student sees the wonder of life that teems in a drop of water. I love to watch the distracted and troubled young man

[ Page 9824 ]

who is always moving and never quiet find a calm centre as he steps onto the stage in our theatre production."

"I love the quiet sense of satisfaction that a student gets from finally taming the many-headed beast that is a quadratic equation. I love to see the young, shy girl who has worked so hard to never be noticed find her voice as she steps into the light to sing in public for the very first time."

These are really important things.

"I love all of these things and so many more about the work that I do. I have the privilege and honour of working with the province's young people, and I am fulfilled and exhausted by it every day. I do work that has lasting and significant meaning in the lives of the people around me.

"I love that I can express myself creatively as I think, plan and dream about the best way to reach them, to help them, to explain. I do not always succeed. Sometimes I am too tired, or my patience is not what it should be, or I have not anticipated correctly what it is my students truly need. But every day, every semester, every year I get to go out there and work hard to make it better.

"In order to make this happen, I need something from you" — the hon. minister to whom this letter is addressed.

"I need you to listen to me. I need you to hear that I cannot connect with 30 students at once in a meaningful way. I need you to know that having four students with learning designations — in addition to the one who is living on his own because his parents kicked him out and the three who came to school hungry because their parents live in poverty and the two who are dealing with drug problems — is just too much. I cannot be the teacher I want to be in those circumstances."

[1555]

Well, guess what. Bill 22 just made those circumstances worse. It's a crime. I think that we need to step back. I think that we need to put down the rhetoric that allows members on the other side to ignore the truth and argue that less is more and more is less.

I think we need to take another assessment of how this is going. I think we need to listen to both sides in this situation. Even the trustees are calling for mediation — mediation that could be independent, that could help arrive at a solution, that could help address some of the problems. No one will get everything they want, but it has to be better than this.

It has to be better than this solution, which in answer to a Supreme Court decision that said that government's education laws were unconstitutional and stripped the classrooms of over $200 million per year…. The answer to that can't possibly be something that has made it worse. But this does, and that is a pathetic condemnation of a government that is failing in every way.

They are tired, and they've lost vision. They don't care. It's time for them to either step back, listen to the people of B.C. and respond in a way that serves the common wealth, or move over, get out of way, call an election and let a government that will act in the true public interest take its place. That's what we intend to do. I know teachers and students need that. They need it today.

D. Hayer: Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to Bill 22, the Education Improvement Act.

This bill, as we all know, is aimed at resolving the current dispute between the government and the B.C. Teachers Federation. But I want it very clear that I am — and I'm sure everybody else in the House is — very supportive of teachers.

The opposition have a different way of expressing their views now that they are not in government. But if somebody really wants to see what the views were from '91 to 2001, they should go to Hansard and check it. Then also compare, when three times they forced the BCTF back to school, what their views were and how they expressed their views in this House in Hansard . Then you will get the fair view.

You can listen to our current views, and you can listen to the opposition's when they were in government. Then you'll have a fair and correct way of looking at how we're doing.

Many of us, including myself, have family members and friends who are teachers. As a matter of fact, our Minister of Education was a teacher. He used to be a member of the BCTF. Many other MLAs on the government side and, I'm sure, on the opposition side have spouses, children, grandchildren, friends or other family members who are teachers.

So we understand the issues fairly closely to most people. Even our Deputy Speaker in the chair now was a teacher before she was elected. So we know, when we discuss within our caucus…. Everybody brings the experience of their family members and the experiences of all their colleagues and their spouses who are teachers.

We all know the immense value teachers have in our lives and their contributions to the education of all of us. Every one of us has memories of school classes. Every one of us can use and also remember and recall a wonderful teacher or teachers who left us with lasting direction for a better life today.

Teachers are role models. Through dedication and devotion to their profession, they accomplish greats things in the lives of our children and in our lives when we were students. Teachers set the course of our lives in our formative years. We spend more time with teachers interacting and learning than any other person, even our family members.

Almost every teacher is caring, is concerned about chi