2014 Legislative Session: Second Session, 40th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes

only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 5, Number

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)

ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Tributes

Gary Romalis

K. Corrigan

Introductions by Members

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 10 — Pension Benefits Standards Amendment Act, 2014

Hon. M. de Jong

Bill 9 — Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act

Hon. M. de Jong

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

2014 B.C. Winter Games in Mission

M. Dalton

Oak Bay arts laureate Barbara Adams

A. Weaver

Heart health

L. Larson

Dan Hamhuis

D. Donaldson

Centennial of Pitt Meadows

D. Bing

Advocacy for seniors centre in southeast Vancouver

M. Elmore

Oral Questions

Budget and job creation

M. Farnworth

Hon. M. de Jong

Budget and government action on poverty

M. Mungall

Hon. M. de Jong

Budget provisions for education and skills training

A. Dix

Hon. M. de Jong

D. Routley

Hon. S. Bond

D. Eby

Hon. A. Virk

Electricity rates and B.C. Hydro management

J. Horgan

Hon. B. Bennett

Ministerial Statements

Mining Day

Hon. B. Bennett

S. Fraser

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate (continued)

M. Farnworth

Tabling Documents

Official Opposition slide presentation in response to Budget 2014

Budget Debate (continued)

D. Ashton

B. Ralston

R. Sultan

M. Elmore

Hon. T. Stone

N. Macdonald

Hon. D. McRae

[ Page 1387 ]

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2014

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[1335]

Tributes

GARY ROMALIS

K. Corrigan: I wanted to take a moment to honour the legacy of Dr. Gary Romalis, who passed away on January 30 of this year. Dr. Romalis was an obstetrician and gynecologist who was a staunch believer in women's reproductive choice. He worked at Vancouver General Hospital, B.C. Women's Hospital and the Elizabeth Bagshaw Clinic.

As the department of obstetrics and gynecology at UBC has pointed out in its tribute, as a result of his work and belief in the pro-choice movement, Dr. Romalis suffered significant violence and harassment, including a sniper attack in 1994 while he sat in his kitchen.

After a very long recovery, Dr. Romalis showed tremendous courage, perseverance and strength when he returned to work, which included the provision of abortion services. He was attacked again and stabbed six years later but continued to provide care. He served as an inspiration to those who also care deeply about ensuring women's access to safe abortion services.

Our condolences go to the family and friends of Dr. Romalis.

Introductions by Members

Hon. T. Lake: I rise in the House today to introduce members of the B.C. Care Providers Association who are in the capital for their first-ever B.C. Care Providers Association awards.

Daniel Fontaine, Andre Van Ryk, David Cheperdak, Isobel Mackenzie, Kristi Osguthorpe, Ted Semmons Jr., Heather Campbell, Annette Elieff, Maureen Parks, Jennifer Lyle, Elaine Price and Aly Devji are dedicated men and women and part of a group which, for over 35 years, has continuously worked to improve seniors care throughout the province of British Columbia. Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

R. Chouhan: It gives me great pleasure to introduce my dear friend Gordon Larkin, whom I've known since he was the staff of the Canadian Labour Congress. Currently he's doing a very important job in Burnaby as the president of Burnaby Citizens Association. Please join me to welcome Gordon Larkin.

Hon. P. Fassbender: I rise to introduce a couple of people that are in the gallery today: Teresa Rezansoff, who is the president of the B.C. School Trustees Association, and Dr. Stephen Hansen, the BCSTA executive director. I believe, if my eyes serve me well, other members of the board of directors have joined them. I do want to say that they represent a very passionate commitment to the future of education throughout the province, and I ask all the members to join me in welcoming them.

A. Weaver: I'd like to introduce two constituents who are visiting the Legislature today. The first is Mayor Nils Jensen, the mayor of Oak Bay, and the second is Barbara Adams — whom I will be speaking about shortly in a member's statement — a recent recipient of the Arts Laureate award in Oak Bay. I wish the House to please give them a warm welcome.

Madame Speaker, if I may, I also wanted to point out that this seat in the House is one of the hottest tickets in town, in light of the historic vote and cooperation between the official opposition and the government earlier this week, resulting in a 73-to-1 vote on a motion.

Hon. B. Bennett: I have four people here from the Mining Association of British Columbia who I'd like to introduce. First of all, Karina Brino is the president and CEO of the Mining Association — has been president and CEO since August of 2011.

[1340]

John McManus is the chief operating officer of Taseko Mines. He is a past president of the Mining Association of B.C. John actually won an award, the E.A. Scholz Award, just last year for his more than 30 years of working in the mining industry, in recognition of excellence in mine development in relation to the Gibraltar mine project.

Thirdly, Tim Bekhuys is the director of environment and sustainability for the mining company New Gold. New Gold has the new mine in New Afton in Kamloops and also has the very exciting project out in the Chilcotin called the Blackwater gold project.

Lastly but not least, Ken Roberts is the Canadian sales director for FLSmidth Minerals. Ken is currently the chair of the Mining Suppliers Association here in B.C. They have small businesses represented in most of our communities around the province.

Please help me make them welcome.

S. Simpson: We all know that coming to this place takes us away from our families and that.

All I want to say to my wife, Cate Jones, is that a gift and dinner are coming on the weekend. But for today, happy birthday, and I love you.

[ Page 1388 ]

Hon. S. Bond: I have two introductions to make today. It's a great pleasure to invite one of the very hard-working administrative staff from my office, Nicki Tuttle, and her mom Karen here to the gallery today. It's their first time, and we're very excited to have them here.

Secondly, I want to introduce someone who has become a friend. She is Trish Bella. She is here from Prince George, and she is a second-term school trustee with the Prince George board of education. She's also a director of the B.C. School Trustees Association.

Trish came to be a school trustee like many of us in this place. She had a passion. When her daughter went to kindergarten, she decided she wanted to get involved. She's now a director with the BCSTA.

She was very inspirational in leading a campaign in Prince George to make sure that playgrounds were in place for kids. I certainly had a lot of visits from her during that period of time. I have a great deal of admiration and respect for the work that she and other school trustee do. I'd very much like you to join me in welcoming Trish Bella to the gallery today.

S. Fraser: I'd like to join the minister in welcoming members from the Mining Association of British Columbia. Besides Karina and the lengthy list that the minister had, Gavin Dirom is also here from the Association for Mineral Exploration of B.C. There are quite a few other members joining us today in the House, and around the House in various meetings, who were not named. I want to acknowledge them also.

Hon. A. Virk: I'd like the House to note that there'll be 56 young, bright minds from the Pacific Academy in my riding of Surrey-Tynehead joining us today. They are the fifth-grade classes of Mr. Grant Wirtz and Mrs. Sue U-Ming. May the House make them feel welcome, please.

Hon. T. Stone: It gives me a great pleasure today to introduce someone who actually is a constituent of mine from Kamloops–South Thompson. Mitchell Zulinick is the chief operating officer of Arrow Transportation Systems. In addition to being a hard-working leader in the goods movement in British Columbia, he's also a great dad, and he's an outstanding chef.

I'd ask the House to please make Mitchell feel welcome.

J. Tegart: It's with great pleasure that I stand today and ask the House to join me in welcoming a constituent, Gordon Swan, who serves as vice-president of the B.C. School Trustees Association. Gordon is a school trustee with Nicola-Similkameen board of education. He's served in many roles on the B.C. Public School Employers Association and the BCSTA.

Gordon says: "No matter how we slice the education pie, if the students, who are our future, are not at the forefront of our discussion, then the rest is meaningless. At the end of the day, it comes down to the students, and it always will. Our deliberations should always be about students and what's in their best interests for a brighter future."

Would the House help me welcome Mr. Gordon Swan.

J. Horgan: Again, in the absence of George Abbott, we need to recognize in the gallery Prof. Paddy Smith from SFU, the shepherd of the interns. He's here reviewing applications for coming years. He's going to have a three-year service plan, I think, for the interns soon enough. Would the House please make Dr. Smith very, very welcome.

[1345]

J. Darcy: I'd like to join with the Minister of Health in also welcoming the B.C. Care Providers Association today on behalf of my colleagues and myself who met with them. What was especially wonderful about the delegation — and this is sometimes unusual — is that it was a combination of CEOs and executive directors as well as family members and front-line care staff.

I want to pay tribute to all of them, because it takes very, very special people to care for what is some of the most important work in our society, and that's caring for our seniors and caring for them so well.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 10 — PENSION BENEFITS

STANDARDS AMENDMENT ACT, 2014

Hon. M. de Jong presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Pension Benefits Standards Amendment Act, 2014.

Hon. M. de Jong: I move the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. de Jong: Pension standards legislation sets the minimum standards for benefits funding, investments, disclosure and regulatory oversight for workplace pension plans.

In 2008 a panel of experts from B.C. and Alberta conducted a comprehensive review of pension standards legislation in each province. Submissions from two rounds of public consultations indicated broad support for recommendations in the panel's final report. In May 2012 recommendations from that final report were enacted in British Columbia as a new Pension Benefits Standards Act. Parallel legislation was enacted in Alberta in November 2012. The new Pension Benefits Standards Act is a comprehensive rewrite of the existing legislation

[ Page 1389 ]

and is designed to improve workplace pension coverage for British Columbians.

The private sector, under this regime, will have a wider choice of pension plan options, such as jointly sponsored plans and target benefit plans as well as new tools such as solvency reserve accounts. Other changes will reduce administrative costs and enhance members' rights, including benefit security and disclosure of plan information.

This bill is needed to correct some technical errors and omissions in the new Pension Benefits Standards Act, including clarification of one substantive area of the law. With these amendments, and after regulations have been completed and approved, we hope to have and bring the new Pension Benefits Standards Act into force later this year.

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

Bill 10, Pension Benefits Standards Amendment Act, 2014, 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 9 — POOLED REGISTERED PENSION

PLANS ACT

Hon. M. de Jong presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act.

Hon. M. de Jong: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. de Jong: This bill is substantively identical to Bill 16 of 2013, which I introduced last spring before the dissolution of this House prior to the May election. This bill will make the pooled registered pension plans pension option available to B.C. workers, in conjunction with the federal government and other participating provinces.

Last year the federal government implemented its legislative framework for PRPPs. This bill will operate within that framework by adopting the federal legislation by reference, with some modifications for B.C.'s legislative context. PRPPs will be defined contribution pension plans administered by regulated financial institutions to relieve employers of the burden of pension plan operation.

I move the bill be placed on the orders of the day for consideration by the House at the next sitting after today.

Bill 9, Pooled Registered Pension Plans 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.

[1350]

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

2014 B.C. WINTER GAMES IN MISSION

M. Dalton: As Canadians across our land are experiencing Olympics sports fever, British Columbians will have another opportunity to cheer on our athletes over the next number of days. I'm speaking of the B.C. Winter Games being hosted for the first time in Mission, February 20 through to the 23rd. Over 1,800 athletes, coaches and officials will be participating in 18 different sports including hockey, figure skating, skiing, curling, judo and Special Olympics basketball, to name a few.

Without the volunteers, the B.C. Winter Games just wouldn't happen, and Missionites have come out in spades. Some 2,000, including 125 chairs and particularly 14 directors and President Kelly Mann, have been working hard at it for years in preparation. Hats off to all of them.

Corporate and funding partners are critical to the success of the Mission games. Many thanks to the district of Mission, school district 75, Jazz air, Global B.C., CN, the Mission City Record and, of course, the B.C. Games Society.

The B.C. Games are a stepping stone to national and international competition, and ten B.C. Games athletes are on the 2014 Canadian Olympic team in Sochi, making us proud.

Athletes ranging from nine to 40 will compete at venues primarily in Mission but also in Abbotsford, Langley, Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge, Hemlock and Whistler. Over 1,300 medals will be awarded. Whether you're a participant or a spectator, sports are good, old-fashioned fun, and Mission is the place to be this weekend. The B.C. Winter Games will be fast-paced and action-packed for everyone.

Thank you to everyone who has supported the games, and thanks again to all the volunteers. Let's watch and cheer on our athletes.

OAK BAY ARTS LAUREATE

BARBARA ADAMS

A. Weaver: Today I rise to pay tribute to a constituent, Barbara Adams, and to the municipality of Oak Bay together with its mayor, Nils Jensen, for nominating Barbara Adams as their inaugural Oak Bay arts laureate.

Barbara Adams is a passionate and tireless advocate for the arts in our community. For a decade she taught at Monterey School, where she built the arts program and established the artist-in-the-school program. Her innovative approaches to art education and community

[ Page 1390 ]

engagement were so successful that her annual Monterey Art Gala netted the school department between $10,000 and $25,000 each year.

In her 37-year career as an educator, Barbara Adams has inspired a generation of children to appreciate and celebrate the arts, each in their own personal way. Being appointed the Oak Bay arts laureate is just the latest of numerous honours that have been bestowed upon Barbara Adams over the years, including a Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal and a Community Arts Council Community Arts Award, to name just two.

I know that being named the Oak Bay arts laureate is very special to her. The Oak Bay arts laureate is an honorary position whose creation was championed by the mayor, Nils Jensen. It is the first such position in the capital regional district and, as far as I can tell, British Columbia or even Canada. The arts laureate acts as a goodwill ambassador to enhance arts and culture within the community of Oak Bay. The arts laureate organizes and coordinates events and creates projects that enhance arts and culture in Oak Bay.

The arts laureate also liaises with arts and cultural organizations across the capital regional district, and yes, the arts laureate has indeed a budget to work with. I, for one, am excited about what's in store for Oak Bay as Barbara Adams enriches the profile of art across our community.

Thank you to Nils Jensen and the district of Oak Bay for creating the arts laureate position, and thank you, Barbara Adams, for all that you do in our community.

HEART HEALTH

L. Larson: Just a reminder to everyone: February we recognize as Heart Month. We should all take a few moments to learn a little bit more about our own heart health and the basic steps we can take to minimize our risk. All of us have family or friends who have had a brush with this often fatal disease. Despite the fact that many cases are preventable, this is the second leading cause of death in B.C., claiming nearly 6,000 people every year.

There are three simple lifestyle changes that can dramatically reduce your risk and keep your heart healthy. Quit smoking. Smoking is linked to virtually all major causes of death and disease in Canada. Take advantage of B.C.'s smoking cessation program and QuitNow services, which provide 24-hour, seven-days-a-week advice and support. There is also legislation that is specific to protecting us from secondhand smoke.

[1355]

Healthy eating. More fruit and vegetables and less salt and fat will help to keep your heart healthy longer. We as government continue to promote our agricultural industry and encourage our children through specific farm-to-schools programs to eat healthy. I hope that will influence their parents also.

Finally, physical activity. Even 15 to 30 minutes a day can make a difference. With every step you take, you are doing your heart a favour and ensuring you will have more time to spend with your family and friends.

DAN HAMHUIS

D. Donaldson: The last time I spoke about a hammer in this chamber, it wasn't about the need for more trades training in the north or the final rock in a curling match, although it did have something to do with ice. It was just about three years ago, and the hammer I was referring to was the only B.C.-born player starting for the Vancouver Canucks in the Stanley Cup final against the Boston Bruins.

The Hammer is Smithers' own NHL defenceman Dan Hamhuis, Olympian Dan Hamhuis, who was on the starting roster today in Canada's quarter final 2-1 win against Latvia.

Late in his Smithers Storm minor hockey days, Hamhuis broke his leg while playing at the Barn in Hazelton, an ice arena that locals are working hard to get replaced. His dad says it was a turning point, because he missed the major junior hockey draft event as he recovered. Undrafted, he was listed by the Prince George Cougars of the Western Hockey League, made the team and began playing for them at 15. So he is a true product of the B.C. hockey system.

Dan is quiet and unassuming and contributes to community life off the ice without a lot of fanfare. This will be the fourth year he is supporting a contest for youth run from our MLA offices in Stikine. The themes have been "Don't let gangs score," "Don't let cyber bullies score" and "Don't let apathy score."

This year's contest is "Don't let intolerance score." Young people are asked to submit a short message on how they have demonstrated tolerance to those who are different from themselves — things like a different culture, a different religion, a different sexual orientation, or whatever they choose. It's a great way to highlight positive behaviour by youth. And what an important message, considering the intolerance displayed by the Russian government, with oppressive laws and actions leading up to and now during the Olympics.

Dan is donating two tickets to a Canucks game, Hawkair is sponsoring the airfare, and the Gitxsan Chiefs Office and Gitksan Government Commission are covering accommodation.

All the best in the next few days to Team Canada and Dan, and thanks for your support, Dan. The Olympics is a stage to say: "Don't let intolerance score."

CENTENNIAL OF PITT MEADOWS

D. Bing: I have the pleasure of inviting the members of this House to a birthday party. I'm pleased to inform

[ Page 1391 ]

the House that the community I represent, the city of Pitt Meadows, celebrates its centennial this year.

On April 25, 2014, Pitt Meadows turns 100 years old. There will be a community birthday party followed the next day by a fun gala where people are invited to dress up and wear period clothes. To celebrate this milestone, the city — under the direction of its centennial coordinator, Erin Mark, and its community partners — has been busy planning a year of celebratory events.

Pitt Meadows has grown from a small, isolated farming community with less than 500 residents to a vibrant community of almost 19,000 people today. While the community has experienced tremendous growth and change, it still maintains the great attributes and friendliness of a small town.

To make the celebrations accessible to current and former Pitt Meadows residents, special centennial festivities will be added to the existing popular events, including Pitt Meadows Day, Canada Day and Pitt Meadows Christmas.

Plans for community art projects and commemorative projects are also underway. A committee will manage the festivities held throughout the year to bring increased awareness of the city's history and also to commemorate this special milestone.

Anticipation is building. It is exciting to see a huge number of volunteers coming forward. Pitt Meadows is a very welcoming community, and we would love to have you come to visit.

ADVOCACY FOR SENIORS CENTRE

IN SOUTHEAST VANCOUVER

M. Elmore: It was once said that we all have dreams. But in order to make dreams come into reality, it takes an awful lot of determination, dedication, self-discipline and effort.

[1400]

Madame Speaker, I rise today to introduce you to folks I've met who have an awful lot of this determination and dedication. Lorna Gibbs, president of the Southeast Vancouver Seniors Arts and Cultural Centre Society, Keith Jacobson, past president of the Killarney Community Centre Society, and many, many others — too many to mention — from my constituency in southeast Vancouver have been fighting since the mid-1990s for a dedicated seniors centre in their area.

Recently various levels of government have committed the amounts needed to fund the estimated costs of the project. For this I congratulate and recognize the perseverance of these dedicated community members, because while this part of the city is home to about one-third of the seniors in Vancouver, there are no seniors centres to serve them.

A dedicated centre is important for seniors' wellness, recreation and socialization. It will let them have access to reasonably priced nutritious meals, help them get peer support and allow them to stay connected and be appreciated by those around them. Without the opportunity for all of these things and more, which a seniors centre could provide, the barrier for seniors to contribute to and be part of the community is made even higher. Some have expressed that this loss of the ability to contribute is a loss of their dignity.

To conclude, I congratulate again the great vision and perseverance of Lorna, Keith and many others to advocate for their centre. I hope that, moving forward, all levels of government will continue to work with them to ensure that the day when they can finally open the doors and welcome seniors into their centre will indeed come. I believe that their amazing efforts and achievements so far are indeed Olympian and worthy of a gold medal.

Oral Questions

BUDGET AND JOB CREATION

M. Farnworth: Yesterday British Columbians saw a budget revealed that will make life less affordable for them, and they saw a clear demonstration of the mismanagement of this government when it comes to Hydro, to skills training and to job creation.

We've had 29 months of hype from the Premier since she put a plan in front of British Columbians that has not done what she claimed it would do. The Premier said B.C. will be "top two in new job growth in Canada by 2015." By October of the next year the Premier was wrongly proclaiming that B.C. was "No. 1 in job creation."

Can the Premier point to where the budget backs up their claims about B.C.'s job creation record?

Hon. M. de Jong: I predict that over the course of the next 30 minutes and probably the next number of days, in the course of the criticism that the opposition is going to levy at this budget…. Did I mention it's the second successive balanced budget?

We are going to hear — as we have begun to hear yesterday from the critic and, I expect, his colleagues — about all of the additional spending, all of the additional expenditures that they believe the government should have added into this budget. After all, they made a choice. They have, some time ago, liberated themselves from any sense of fiscal responsibility. They are unconcerned with that fundamental principle that says you can't spend more and you shouldn't spend more than you receive from the taxpayers of British Columbia.

The foundation for a strong economy that will attract private sector investment and create jobs in the province of British Columbia is a government that can demonstrate that it has its hand on the tiller and is responsibly managing the people's finances. That's what this government has demonstrated yet again in balanced budget

[ Page 1392 ]

Madame Speaker: The member for Port Coquitlam on a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: Well, I can see why the Minister of Finance didn't want to address the Premier's claims over the last 29 months, because when it comes to job creation, they've been a total failure.

In fact, the minister's own documents on page 68 of the budget, the fiscal plan, says it: "Employment activity in B.C. stalled in 2013." It also says: "B.C.'s labour market performed poorly last year compared to other provinces." That's this government's record on job creation.

[1405]

How can this government say on one hand that we're going to be No. 1 in job creation by 2015, when after 24 months the record has put us worst in the country?

Hon. M. de Jong: I expect, Madame Speaker, and predict that we are going to experience a lot of very selective references to the budget documents. But I'm here to help. I am here to help and intend to do so.

I hope the member didn't wait and rely exclusively on the budget documents…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Order.

Hon. M. de Jong: …to make the observation that I have shared — the minister has shared — with this House. We intend to do better. We intend to achieve….

Interjections.

Hon. M. de Jong: It's an interesting observation from a group that used to celebrate unemployment in British Columbia dipping below double digits, and it rarely did. It rarely did.

In British Columbia today, we have unemployment in the 6.6 percent range. In some places in British Columbia that were beset by chronically high unemployment rates over decades, we have what is now approaching full employment. That is a testament to the partnership that has been created between government and the private sector, and a vision for building a strong economy, and a balanced budget is a key part of that vision.

Madame Speaker: Member for Port Coquitlam on a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: Hon. Speaker, I notice in his answers and his budget speech yesterday that the Minister of Finance has used a number of nautical references. Well, I'd like to use one for him right now.

More than 12,500 people have left this province than have come here from other provinces, to seek opportunities elsewhere. Other provinces such as Alberta and Saskatchewan and Manitoba are being the lifeboats for people leaving this province seeking opportunity elsewhere.

The Minister of Finance also says: "Well, don't believe everything you read in the budget documents." Well, here's a real important issue. In the budget documents it says, again in black and white, on page 68 that B.C.'s unemployment rate is set to rise next year and the year after that and stay high over the medium term.

So my question, again, to the minister is this. Who are we supposed to believe — the budget documents that say high unemployment for the following two years and after that or a Premier's rhetoric which, after 29 months, has shown this province to have the worst record of private sector job creation in the country?

Hon. M. de Jong: Madame Speaker, I must confess I am flattered by the degree of reliance that the hon. opposition Finance critic places in the budget document. I don't recall that same degree of confidence one year ago when every single member of that opposition said the budget wasn't balanced when we now know, in fact, it is.

[1410]

But since we are referring to the budget document, let me help the hon. member by taking him one or two lines further down the page where it says: "The ministry forecasts employment in B.C. to increase by 1 percent in 2014, or approximately 23,000 jobs. The pace of employment growth is expected to improve in 2015, with a projected gain of 1.3 percent, or about 29,000 jobs."

BUDGET AND

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON POVERTY

M. Mungall: In all of the Premier and the Finance Minister's talk of B.C.'s membership in exclusive clubs, they conveniently forget to mention the other ones they've signed B.C. up for: highest child poverty in Canada for ten years; highest overall poverty in Canada for 12 years, the entire time they've been in government; largest gap between rich and poor families.

British Columbians are not proud of these clubs; they are embarrassed. To the Minister of Finance: why does this budget absolutely fail to cancel B.C.'s memberships in these exclusive clubs?

Hon. M. de Jong: On the contrary, actually. I disagree profoundly with the hon. member. The budget…. Now we are in a position, through a balance, through a modest surplus, to take admittedly modest additional resources and devote them to those areas and those people and families who need it most. That's the power of properly managing your fiscal situation. When the members re-

[ Page 1393 ]

view the document, they will see additional funding for children who are vulnerable and in need. They will see additional funding embedded in the budget for community living.

Again, this is the part that seems to elude members of the opposition. Your ability to do what I actually believe most members, all members, of this assembly wish to do — and that is to assist those who are in greatest need — is ultimately enhanced by balancing the budget, and you are able to do it without imposing debt on the future generations that you're trying to help.

M. Mungall: The reality is that the minister can talk all he wants about a balanced budget as being the best possible situation for the future, but today B.C. for ten years has had the highest child poverty rate in the entire country, and they haven't done a single thing to address this.

People are fleeing B.C. right now. They can't afford to live in a province that's the last place for private sector job creation, has the highest student debt levels, has the second-lowest wage growth and is the least affordable in the entire country.

Minister, British Columbians aren't proud of this. They just are not proud of this, so why do you fail to address these real issues…

Madame Speaker: Member, through the Chair.

M. Mungall: …that they face every day in this budget?

Hon. M. de Jong: Madame Speaker, I say this sincerely. I in no way question the strength of the hon. member's commitment to address a situation where poverty exists. It's why I am absolutely certain that when it comes her time to stand in this chamber, she will do so and she will applaud the child tax credit that will provide families with an additional $650 a year to assist….

Interjections.

Hon. M. de Jong: I am certain that she will do so.

[1415]

I am certain as well that she will stand and take advantage of the opportunity to support and applaud an initiative that beginning next fiscal year will see $1,200 invested in a family's RESP for their child to ensure that they will have an educational opportunity.

No one — certainly on this side of the House, in the government — is challenging the struggles that families face in terms of raising their children. But part of the strength and advantage of balancing the budget is to be able to make modest improvements and offer modest assistance without imposing an additional obligation on future generations.

BUDGET PROVISIONS FOR

EDUCATION AND SKILLS TRAINING

A. Dix: That's pretty cold comfort for B.C. families facing higher MSP premiums, higher hydro rates, higher ferry rates.

According to the government's new job plan, jobs plan 5.0, unemployment is going to go up. That's not the only negative thing here. There are many jobs in B.C. that people from B.C. can't take because they don't have the training required. Despite all of the slogans and all of the TV ads over the last couple of years, the government is again cutting skills training in this budget. Just eight days ago — and this is not a record for the Premier — the Premier was making big promises around skills training, and she's already cutting the programs that are critical to young people getting skills now.

Why has the Liberal government accepted, why do they believe, that B.C. should become a place where there are jobs without people from B.C. to take those jobs — people without jobs?

Hon. M. de Jong: The Leader of the Opposition, I take it from his comments, is offended by the fact that the government would seek to find and capitalize on efficiencies and savings in the administrative side of the Advanced Education budget, to identify savings that can be reallocated and devoted to front-line education services.

He purposely — I think purposely — dismisses as insignificant in excess of $1 billion in investment in creating the skills-training facilities that we will need as a province going forward. He dismisses as insignificant the investments that are being made as we speak in Camosun around skills services. He dismisses as insignificant the investments that are being made at Okanagan College to dramatically increase the capacity to provide trades training.

I understand that for a leader and a party who had their approach, to the extent that people could discern what it was, utterly rejected by the people of British Columbia, it is difficult to accept the fact that there is a way to responsibly manage the people's money and also responsibly provide the services that we will need as a province. That is the approach we are taking, and that is the approach we will continue to take.

Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental.

A. Dix: I'm offended and the people of B.C. are offended that 12 years after they dismantled our apprenticeship system in B.C., we have a 33 percent completion rate in our province. I'm offended that people are leaving B.C. to get jobs because they do not have the qualifications or the trades training for jobs in B.C. I'm offended that a Premier would spend tens of millions of dollars

[ Page 1394 ]

on advertising and then cut skills training in British Columbia.

Fewer completions, lower apprenticeship completion rates — that's the record of this government. They did it. It wasn't someone else. They dismantled the system. Why is the government flatlining skills training when there is a significant skills shortage in British Columbia?

[1420]

Hon. M. de Jong: You would have to be the leader of the New Democratic Party to dismiss as flatlining an investment that exceeds $1 billion in facilitating skills training in British Columbia. It is astounding that….

Interjections.

Hon. M. de Jong: The Leader of the Opposition, of course, is referring to something that appeared not just one budget ago but two budgets ago in terms of finding efficiencies on the administrative front that we can utilize to create additional training opportunities to work in partnership with the private sector.

Look, I get it. For the Leader of the Opposition, this is a theme we are going to hear over and over and over again. Unrestrained by any notion of fiscal responsibility, he will stand, over and over and over again, and urge unbridled spending. The balanced-budget ship has sailed, and the Leader of the Opposition has been left on the shore to stomp his feet and hold his breath. But British Columbians want a government that will responsibly manage their tax dollars.

D. Routley: British Columbians may have wanted that, but what they got is a government that's adding debt at a record rate of any government in British Columbia's history. That's what they got.

At the same time, that same government…. Just as companies are openly admitting a reluctance to invest in B.C. because we don't have enough skilled workers, the Premier and her higher education minister are cutting skills training. This is a bitter dose of reality for British Columbians.

Under this Premier's watch, B.C.'s apprenticeship completion rate has fallen to a dismal 33 percent. That compares to over 65 percent in neighbouring Alberta. Instead of making the investments needed to improve apprenticeship numbers, this government is flatlining trades training budgets. Jobs without people, people without jobs — that's mismanagement at its worst. The only expansion in this province is the gap between the Liberal promises and the reality British Columbians face.

To the Minister of Advanced Education, why are he and his Premier shutting out British Columbians from high-paying jobs and putting economic development in jeopardy by not expanding skills training in B.C. for British Columbians?

Hon. S. Bond: The member opposite couldn't be more incorrect. Let's actually look at the numbers. Maybe the member opposite should spend a few minutes actually looking at the numbers.

One of the things we're most proud of is that aboriginal participation in apprenticeship has doubled since 2006. The number of women who are involved in apprenticeships in British Columbia is now over 3,000. That's 10 percent of all registered apprentices and up from 8.5 percent in 2009.

We have invested…. To suggest…. What's really ironic is that the members opposite presented no discernible plan, no discernible plan to the voters in May — not one thing. The only thing they did was rush to say no to every single project that would create jobs in British Columbia. That is shameful.

Madame Speaker: The member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan on a supplemental.

[1425]

D. Routley: Yeah, we'll look at some numbers. We're ninth in job creation, tenth in private sector job creation. Those are numbers that are another bitter dose of reality for this government. An uncomfortable fact for this Premier: 29 months after the start of the Premier's jobs plan the number of people receiving trades accreditation has hit a five-year low. This is an uncomfortable fact for the Premier, yes. But it's an economic and social crisis for the workers and companies of British Columbia.

Again to the Minister of Advanced Education, why is this government still refusing to make the necessary investment in skills training to even remotely live up to the rhetoric of the Premier and this government?

Hon. S. Bond: Well, the most uncomfortable fact for the members opposite is that, in fact, we laid out a plan for British Columbians and they chose our plan in May. It's really unfortunate. It is very unfortunate that the members opposite trivialize the fact that we invest almost half a billion dollars in skills-training programs every single year — half a billion dollars of taxpayers' money.

An Hon. Member: Where's the outcome?

Hon. S. Bond: In fact, the outcomes are this. We have more women in apprenticeships. We have more First Nations individuals in apprenticeships. In fact, to correct the member opposite regarding trade certificates, we issued 8,042 certificates of qualification — almost triple the number that happened in 2004.

D. Eby: We've heard a lot of rhetoric today. Here's a little bit more. The Premier said: "We want to make…."

Interjections.

[ Page 1395 ]

Madame Speaker: Members, the Chair needs to hear the question and the answer.

Please continue.

D. Eby: From our Premier: "We want to make sure that British Columbians are first in line for the jobs of today and tomorrow." We've heard from the Minister of Finance that apparently the cuts to post-secondary education, $104 million in cuts, are purely administrative in nature and won't affect students. But in fact we have a letter from 25 university presidents, all of them, who agree: "We must be clear that it is unrealistic to assume that the reductions contemplated by Budget 2012 can be achieved without implications for service levels."

My question is to the Minister of Advanced Education. Why are he and the Premier undercutting British Columbians' chances to get the jobs of today and tomorrow?

Hon. A. Virk: I find it quite remarkable that on that side of the House we're promoting inefficiencies, but on this side of the House we're promoting efficiencies. We're asking all post-secondary institutions, and they're all working with the ministry. All post-secondary institutions are working with the ministry to ensure efficiencies, to make sure that the hard-earned dollar of the taxpayer is used in the best way possible.

Shared procurement is common purchasing of laptops, desktops, standardized network. The opposition certainly doesn't promote efficiencies. This side of the House promotes efficiencies.

D. Eby: It's clear to me that the Minister of Advanced Education has not visited a single university or talked to a single parent or student, because he would not be disagreeing with the university presidents. This is not administrative.

[1430]

I urge him to explain how he can cut the budget for the education British Columbians will need to succeed in the economy of the future. How can he explain that?

Hon. A. Virk: With respect, the member of the opposition is wrong. I have been at every post-secondary institution in British Columbia. I have spoken to every board in British Columbia. I have spoken to presidents in every university in British Columbia and have met with students and faculty of every university in British Columbia. It's somewhat disrespectful to suggest that. We have a world-class university education system that the opposition just doesn't want to acknowledge.

ELECTRICITY RATES AND

B.C. HYDRO MANAGEMENT

J. Horgan: June 2013, three-year fiscal plan with respect to B.C. Hydro: "The annual dividend payment is forecast to average $243 million." Eight months later, February 2014, three-year fiscal plan, the same document: "The annual dividend payment is forecast to average $410 million."

What happened between those two events? The Minister of Energy got before a podium and said that he was going to put a crushing 28 percent rate increase on the backs of businesses and ratepayers right across British Columbia. He announced about another billion and a half dollars in deferred debt. He shot the overall debt of the corporation up by $2 billion, and somehow, hon. Speaker, that's good fiscal management.

Madame Speaker: Your question.

J. Horgan: My question is to the Minister of Energy. Will he stand in this place and thank the good ratepayers of British Columbia for digging even deeper into their pockets to pay for your mismanagement?

Hon. B. Bennett: In November we announced a ten-year plan that was both balanced and responsible. It included keeping rates down as low as possible. It also included enabling B.C. Hydro to continue to invest in critical infrastructure — both the older assets, many of which…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. B. Bennett: …were built 50, 60, sometimes 70 years ago…. We need to invest in those assets.

When these folks on the other side of the House were in government, do you know how much they invested in infrastructure? The Leader of the Opposition was there, the Energy critic was there, and the next leader of the NDP — he was there too. They were all there, and they invested zero.

[End of question period.]

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members. Members.

Ministerial Statements

MINING DAY

Hon. B. Bennett: As Minister of Energy and Mines, it gives me great pleasure to recognize today, Wednesday, February 19, as Mining Day at the Legislature. I want to thank the Mining Association of British Columbia for their constructive collaborations with my ministry in

[ Page 1396 ]

the mining sector.

[1435]

Today, after diminished opportunities a decade ago, British Columbia has earned its way back and re-established itself as one of the most reliable places to invest in mining worldwide. That's what the mining industry tells us. We have gone from a meagre exploration investment in 2001 of $29 million to record investments of $680 million in 2012 and $476 million in 2013.

For more than 100 years, B.C.'s vast mineral resources have contributed to our growth and development as a province. The Hudson's Bay Company first started producing coal on Vancouver Island in the 1840s, and the discovery of gold along the Fraser River in the 1850s sparked a major gold rush which was ultimately responsible for the settlement of many parts of that region and beyond. Today British Columbia has 19 operating metal and coal mines, and more than 800 mineral exploration and mining companies that call Vancouver home. We're a world centre of excellence in mining.

I can say, with firsthand knowledge from my riding of Kootenay East, that mining sustains families and strengthens our communities, with more than 30,000 jobs in 50 communities all over the province with average salaries exceeding well over $100,000.

Very importantly, mining employs more First Nations than any other industry in B.C.; mining is the safest heavy industry in B.C.; and mining, a $9 billion industry, uses less of our land base than the shopping mall parking lots in our province.

Mining is a key part of the B.C. jobs plan announced in 2011. We committed to opening eight new mines and expanding nine existing mines by 2015. We're more than halfway there.

Today mining is all about partnerships — industry, government, communities and First Nations. We are the first province in the country where we are sharing our provincial royalties from mining with First Nations: 37½ percent of every provincial royalty dollar from a mine goes to the surrounding First Nations.

It is fostering these partnerships and continuing to improve permitting processes that will continue to make B.C. a mining success story now and into the future. I encourage all members of this House to make time to meet with the delegates who are here today. I understand both sides of the House have been doing that already, and I congratulate everyone who has met with the mining folks today. We will look forward to working more with them as we go along.

Again, I want to thank the Mining Association of B.C. for putting on Mining Day at the Legislature. I also want to thank the Association for Mineral Exploration B.C. — I know they're here today and participated — for also being constructive partners. I hope that all members will join me in celebrating mining and what it means to our communities, not just today but every day.

S. Fraser: As the critic for mining for the official opposition, on behalf of the official opposition, I, too, would like to make a non-ministerial statement about the importance of this day. I think it was seven years ago, I heard, that the last such event happened, and I applaud the members for setting this up. They've met with all sides of the House, as the minister has said. This relationship needs to continue.

Mining has been, of course, fundamental to building the economy of this province. This association, the Mining Association of British Columbia, is a venerable association. It was formed in 1901 or 1902, so it makes it, I think, the oldest such association of its kind anywhere in the province.

There are over 50 members, and we've had many, many of their members here today to meet with us and, I know, government members and the minister. We are hoping that will build strong relationships, and we need that policy and that relationship to continue.

We as the opposition play a strong role, as it was pointed out by association members today. They recognize that the jousting that happens in here is actually an important part of the parliamentary system. So if we see a need….

If government decision are…. We need to make sure that they're informed and that they're consistent. If they're not, we need to push back from the opposition. If the members of the association blow the warning bells about a looming, and now an existing, skills shortage, we on this side need to push so that their concerns are met, so that they are not hampered by permitting back loads because of failure to resource ministries properly.

We push back when the ship of state founders, to some extent. We try to put the wind back in the sails of government, to help the members of the Mining Association of British Columbia, and we will continue to do that.

[1440]

J. Horgan: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

J. Horgan: Joining us in the gallery is Pierre Lebel, the chair of the board of Imperial Metals. This is an important thing to note here on Mining Day, with the minister and the critic. Imperial Metals opened the Mount Polley mine and the Huckleberry mine in the 1990s. Then there was a long gap between that, and they're now looking forward to opening Red Chris — the longest gap between new mines in the history of B.C. Would the House please make him very welcome.

Orders of the Day

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

[ Page 1397 ]

budget.

[1445]

[D. Horne in the chair.]

Budget Debate

(continued)

M. Farnworth: It's my pleasure to continue debate on B.C. Budget 2014 and the response from the official opposition around the budget that was tabled yesterday. I have some comments to make that I know the Minister of Finance will be looking forward to hearing, but I just want to say at the outset that nowhere in my remarks will I be throwing dirt at the minister or the government. I may throw some well-timed rocks and lobs, but I will not be throwing any dirt, and I want the minister to understand that.

I think perhaps the most telling issue out of yesterday's budget, as I said at the beginning of my remarks, was that British Columbians are going to pay more and get less. I think it's important that we focus on the issue of paying more so that British Columbians really understand and members of the government side really have an understanding of what this budget will do to their constituents back in their communities when they return home.

[Slide presentation begins.]

I think it's important that the opposition enlighten them, because when you look at what this budget does…. For example, hydro rates for the average customer over the next three years are going to rise by around $477; MSP premiums will be up by some $400 — again, for an average family in British Columbia; ferry fares up around $32 per round trip; and ICBC rates to increase by upwards of $100. Nowhere is that making life more affordable for British Columbia families, and it puts paid to the Premier's oft-used slogan of "Families first."

Let's look a little more closely. It's not just what's happened in this particular budget, but it's been in previous budgets as well. I started off with hydro rates. Hydro rates will increase by 20 percent at the end of three years, as I've said, costing the average consumer $477, or $215 a year by the end of the third year.

[1450]

Those rate increases will bring in an extra $2 billion to Hydro — $2 billion. But does the public see a benefit from that? No. What they will see is a 28 percent rate increase on top of hydro rate increases that have gone up year after year since this government has been in power, and that has done nothing to make life more affordable for families in British Columbia.

MSP rates, Medical Services premiums — or, as many people are now calling it, the MST, the medical services tax, because that is increasingly what it is being seen as by British Columbians right across this province. The government now takes almost $2 billion in revenue from MSP premiums. It's a significant amount of money.

MSP premiums have doubled since 2001, yet family wages and incomes have not doubled since that time. They have remained, by and large, stagnant. B.C. lags this country in terms of wage growth. Yet again and again, year after year after year, this government raises MSP premiums that come right out of the pockets of hard-working families in this province. That is not families first. That is not families first by any means.

What's particularly interesting, and particularly cynical, is that when the government made its last announcement on how they were going to increase MSP rates and that they were going to go up by 4 percent and that they were going to go up by the rate of increase that the health care budget went up…. So with a 4 percent rate increase, you would have expected, if the government was to abide by its promise, that health care spending would go up by 4 percent. In fact, it does not; it goes up 2.6 percent. That will not meet population growth, health care inflation and the demands of an aging population on the health care system.

But just as importantly, it's a broken promise. They said that your MSP premiums would go up by the same amount as the health care budget, and in fact, it's going up more. Again, that's not families first. That's not family-friendly. The only family that's benefiting from this is the B.C. Liberals, and their friends are the only ones this government really pays attention to when it comes to talking about families first.

Ferry fares — $32 a round trip. At the same time, we're seeing reductions in service, reductions to the lifeline that many communities depend on, and there is no end in sight. This is on top of increases that have been going on year after year after year under this government.

When you look at the decisions they're taking in terms of how they do that and you ask questions as to why they're doing that, you're not getting a rational explanation. In fact, my colleague the member from Saanich North asked the other day and used a quote that said, "Well, go ask B.C. Ferries," because the Minister of Transportation didn't know the answer.

You're making decisions on cutting ferry routes, cutting service to ferries, and you're not doing any economic analysis on why that's taking place. Not only are you hurting families, not only are you making life more expensive for individuals, but you're also making decisions that impact on the economy, on small communities.

As we're finding out now in question period and as we dig deeper into this budget, the impact that is having on places like Bella Bella and a riding represented on the government side…. Tourism operators from outside this country are saying to the government: "Have you really thought through what it is you're doing? Do you really know what it is you're doing?"

[ Page 1398 ]

You will see that time and time again in this budget — a government that has made decisions in the pursuit of a number without regard for the impact on families, without regard for the impact on communities and on the long-term economic future of the province.

[1455]

ICBC's basic insurance rates increased 4.9 percent last November, costing the average customer an additional $34 for their basic coverage. We know that more is to come. Drivers in this province — families that have their cars to take their kids to school, to hockey practice, to soccer practice, to figure skating, you name it…. To insure their vehicle, they're going to see increases again.

According to the formula that the government has in place to deal with those increases, they will be anywhere from 3.4 to 6.4 percent in the coming years — again, an additional expense on families of British Columbia and an example of how people will be paying more, and they will be getting less. I will come to the "getting less"

part in a moment.

Bridge tolls. Again, another example of how this government makes its financial decisions and really doesn't think through the long-term consequences — $1,500 for a regular commuter on the Port Mann Bridge, and traffic is 20 percent lower. If you live on the south side of the Fraser, not only are you having to deal with all these increases in terms of fees, in terms of MSP premiums, in terms of hydro rate increases and ICBC rate increases; you also have to deal with $1,500 in tolls. That's an annual basis.

By the government's own projections, traffic is down 20 percent. The Port Mann corporation will show a deficit to at least 2017, as my colleague from Surrey-Whalley puts it, yet again. That is not sound fiscal financial management.

And who pays the price? Hard-working taxpayers and families right across this province. The ones south of the Fraser in Surrey and Langley and in the Tri-Cities in my neck of the woods, because a third of the traffic goes over the Port Mann Bridge out of the Tri-Cities, are doubly punished by the actions of this government. But the government seems quite happy and satisfied that they've achieved their number, that people will pay more. At the end of the day, their attitude is: "Well, they'll just learn to live with it." Well, people are not willing to accept those kinds of increases.

Let's look at how individuals are going to be getting less, because this is also just as enlightening. Whether it's health care, the justice system, employment programs or forest health, this budget will not meet the needs and the expectations of the people of this province.

Let's look at justice.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: My colleague from Cowichan Valley says: "Finally."

I guess it is up to the opposition to try and raise this issue in the budget debate, because we know that the government raised an element of it in the throne speech debate. I think the slogan that they have in place is "violence-free B.C." Yet when you look at the budget, there is no money there. There is no line item to fund violence-free B.C. It is just, once more, hollow rhetoric from a government that, at the end of the day, believes that's the priority and is not actually really doing something. It isn't about following through on their commitments.

[1500]

Court delays for family law cases. In 2014 the Justice Ministry service plan shows it takes longer to get an order in Provincial Court on family law issues such as maintenance, child custody and access. In 2012-2013 it took a median of 105 days, and this year that median will be 128 days.

In this budget, targets aren't met. Targets continue to slip. That's just unacceptable when we already know how important it is for families, particularly under family law, to have access to justice. Yet this government just carries on as though it doesn't matter. They're satisfied with declining standards and happy to pick British Columbians' pockets more by making them pay more.

British Columbians have said time and time again that they want jobs. They want jobs for themselves, and they want jobs for their future, for their kids. Yet the record of this government, as we have seen, has been the worst in the country in terms of job creation. The budget talks about how unemployment is going to increase in each of the following two years of this fiscal plan and then remain high over the medium term.

You would think that a government that's concerned about job creation and the employment prospects of the adult population and of young people wanting to enter the workforce would fund employment programs. Yet they've cut employment programs by 46 percent, with a decrease of $25½ million, despite the fact that unemployment is going to increase over the next couple of years and remain high over the medium term.

How on earth is cutting employment programs going to help people get back into the workforce? How is it going to give confidence to young people that there will be a job there for them? How is it going to help a displaced worker? How on earth do you put forward an economic plan and cut employment programs? That is just unbelievable.

It is another example of a misplaced priority. It's another example of the Premier's rhetoric before the election — of jobs for all; a debt-free B.C.; a chicken in every pot, to paraphrase one of my colleagues; a pony in every yard; and a rainbow after every shower. It reminds me of a Premier we once had in this province who lived in a castle, and it was called Fantasyland.

Resources play a big

part in the economy of this prov-

[ Page 1399 ]

ince. The natural resource wealth of this province is part of every British Columbian's birthright. You would think that this government would want to be a strong steward of that birthright, to ensure that it serves us not just today but for generations into the future.

Nowhere is that more evident than in our forests. Those forests, when we go outside our houses or we drive around this province, stand as a testament to the natural bounty of this land. Yet given all the challenges that we have in this province from the pine beetle, given the challenges we overcame in the '90s around battles around land use and how we brought people together to create a land use plan that would protect our forests, create jobs and ensure long-term viability and sustainability, you would think that a government would make that a priority in its budget.

[1505]

Following repeated cuts since 2001, the 2013 budget for forest health was cut by $35 million. That's the budget that covers land-based investments in forest industry and silviculture. In 2014 it has $12 million for land-based investment strategy for increased silviculture. But you know what? It's really not going to come into effect until 2016-2017.

That's another thing that this budget and this government are very fond of. They're saying: "Aren't we great? Aren't we doing all these wonderful things? We make all these great announcements." Then the reality is, when you go and look behind those announcements: oh, it's 2017. It's after the next election. It's at the end of after this fiscal year. That's when you might start to see something.

It's like their jobs plan — if you can call it that — where it's like: "Oh well, you shouldn't judge it on a one-month basis, because they go up and down." I get that. But at some point, after month after month, a trend starts to develop. Instead of, "Well, just wait till next time. Just wait till next month. Wait till next year," you see a pattern. As I said earlier, after 29 months we've seen a pattern of job creation in this province, and that is a failed plan — a plan that's bust.

At the same time, when we could be creating jobs, when we could be working on the longtime economic future of this province and addressing some of the issues around one of the most important resources in this province — our forests — this budget is failing to do that. Just to understand how important that is, in 2012 the Forest Practices Board estimated that the total land area in need of replanting is as much as one million hectares. For those who prefer their measurements in the old system — the one that I grew up with — that's more than 2½ million acres.

Imagine that — 2½ million acres of productive forest land needing to be reforested to grow trees for the future of this province so that 100 years from now people can still cut them down, replant them and grow them again. And this government is neglecting that once again, as they have done every year since 2001. That is shameful. That is not looking after the long-term economic interests of this province, and that's what people expect of us here.

As I said a moment ago around the breaking of promises…. One could almost just go: the breaking of trust. But the breaking of promises — let's look further at some of those broken promises.

In the throne speech, the government said "violence-free B.C." They said: "…to move towards a violence-free B.C. and ensure women, including aboriginal and vulnerable women, have the supports they need to help prevent violence, to escape from violent situations and to recover if they have been victims of crime."

One, there is not a mention of violence-free B.C. in this budget. Eight days after the throne speech we are in this House debating this budget, and there has not been a mention of violence-free B.C. in that budget. If you look at the budget, it actually cuts funding for victim services and crime. No increase. There's a cut. It's not a large cut, but it is still a cut.

There is no dedicated funding for the implementation of the recommendation from the Missing Women Commission's inquiry. In addition, the budget line in the Ministry of Children and Family Development, which includes the provincial office of domestic violence, has been cut by $2½ million, from $120 million in 2013-14 to $117 million in 2014-15.

[1510]

How can a government stand and deliver a throne speech, write a throne speech where they say that one of their priorities is to tackle the unacceptable incidence of violence against women in this province and then go and make cuts in those very areas where those programs are needed and can do some good?

Again, the reality of the budget fails to meet the rhetoric of the Premier or the commitments made in the throne speech. Other budgets in the area of justice have been flatlined. It is a good thing they are not relying on the health care system, because that's not going to bring them back. This government is quite happy to see them continue to flatline.

In terms of the Ministry of Justice, the following program areas will see their budgets flatline for the coming year: prosecution services, emergency management, crime prevention, the judiciary and legal services. We already know that we have significant shortfalls when it comes to judiciary. We are seeing increased court wait times.

As we go into the budget estimates, it will be really interesting to see how the government responds in terms of cases that potentially get tossed because of delays in court time. It's going to be really interesting to see how that goes.

There are no new resources for the ten-year skills-training plan. There are cuts to post-secondary education institutions. Again, one is almost speechless at the

[ Page 1400 ]

arrogance of this government when you look at the rhetoric of the last 29 months, since the Premier became the leader of the B.C. Liberal Party, and what was laid out in the throne speech.

"It is jobs," she said, and that there is nothing more important to our future than our young people getting educational opportunity, to get a job that will serve them well, that they can raise a family on. That's what her message was all about. People believed that.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: They expected it, as my colleague from Stikine says.

They expected a government would live up to its promises and its commitments, because as the Premier would say, there is nothing more important than family. You want to make sure you have a job so that you can provide for your family, and you want to make sure that your kids have that same opportunity. You would think that a government with that as their priority, with that as their sole objective, would want to invest in post-secondary education, where 80 percent of new jobs are going to require some sort of post-secondary education. You would think that they would invest in skills training.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: But as my colleague from North Cowichan says, you would be wrong.

You would be more than wrong. You would be unbelievably wrong, because in this year's budget the budget for post-secondary institutions over the next three years is cut by $109 million. That is absolutely shameful.

At a time when BCIT is already dealing with a deficit, when they have two-year wait-lists for many of the key apprenticeship programs that are needed to do the jobs that are required in this province, this government is shortchanging our post-secondary education institutions. You are going to see less opportunity, not more. This government can brag all it wants about how much they are putting into capital on projects that were started, in many cases, a number of years ago.

[1515]

The reality is that if you don't have the operational funds, if you don't have the teachers in place, if you don't have the instructors in place, you are not going to be able to achieve your goals of training more young people to meet the needs of the future of British Columbia.

One of the things that I most noticed during…. Two years ago my colleagues from Kingsway and from Juan de Fuca and from Powell River–Sunshine Coast engaged in an exercise of democracy. All of us at that time raised an issue which had not been raised in this province or spoken about publicly. We talked about shipbuilding and the opportunities it presented for this province.

The federal government…. I'm very often critical of Stephen Harper, but he'd done something right. He said: "We are going to be needing ships in this country — Coast Guard vessels and vessels for our navy." We wanted to make sure we'd get the greatest opportunity we could out of this procurement of some $26 billion of taxpayers' money.

We got one of those contracts on this west coast because it was raised by the opposition. The government had not done much work on that file, and the Premier, all of a sudden, got religion on it. Photo op, some might say, but she got religion on shipbuilding. It was off to Ottawa, and: "We're going to get those ship contracts here, and we're going to build those ships here." Never mind B.C. Ferries; that's another story. But we're going to build those ships.

Why is it so important? What those contracts would do would create a long-term, sustainable shipbuilding industry in this province that creates family-supporting jobs — the kinds of jobs that you can buy a house, raise your kids and take them on a holiday at least once a year. Is that too much to ask?

Yet the institute, BCIT, which offers many of those programs for young people who want to take advantage of that opportunity and stay here in the province…. Instead of having to go to Fort McMoney or to Saskatchewan or Manitoba or Ontario or Quebec or wherever, they could stay here. But the reality is this budget hamstrings BCIT in its ability to provide those courses so that young British Columbians can take advantage of it, and that is just another example of the shortsightedness of this government towards the long-term needs of this province and its people.

D. Routley: Families first.

M. Farnworth: As my colleague said, families first.

It's hard to understand. Why is the government like this? Why is it they are fixated on one thing one day, and then they move off that. They're like a bee on a flower. The Premier is on this flower this day and this flower the next day. I don't know whether it's just an inability to really focus and pay attention to what's going on at one particular point in time. It's like: okay, let's go on to the next shiny thing.

That leads me to, I think, the next item I want to talk about when it comes to this budget and how it relates to what I've been talking about so far. That is the issue of LNG.

The Premier ran an election campaign on LNG. She said: "There will be five" — count 'em, five — "LNG plants in British Columbia." Since the election it was almost, for the longest time: now there's another one. There are six. There're seven. There're eight. No, there're 11. There are 12 of these, all looking at British Columbia. It was done in a way of hype and boosterism, as though we're the only

[ Page 1401 ]

place on the planet where they're looking. The Premier promised that we would have debt-free B.C. and to imagine no sales tax.

[1520]

Again, it comes back to rainbows and ponies and unicorns. The reality is somewhat different.

This is where I'm particularly concerned, because the whole focus in this budget and the whole focus in the government's economic agenda has been on one thing. It has been on LNG. One thing does not make a provincial economy. LNG by itself does not make the provincial economy. What makes a provincial economy is government paying attention to the diversity that's needed to create a provincial economy, to pay attention to the strengths and challenges in all sectors of B.C.'s economy.

That is not happening with this budget or under this government. It's not working to take advantage of all the opportunities in the different regions and the strengths and challenges that they face.

I want to talk specifically about LNG because LNG does represent an opportunity for this province. But what's needed instead of the hype and boosterism is a frank and honest discussion around LNG, about the opportunities — the opportunities in terms of jobs, the opportunities in terms of communities, particularly northern British Columbia — realistic projections around what the revenue will be, an honest discussion with British Columbians on what that revenue could be used for and a realistic and honest discussion on the time frames that British Columbians can expect.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: A serious discussion, says my colleague from Stikine.

That also includes a discussion on the impacts on our climate change regulations and targets. But there is none of that. What's particularly concerning…. For a government that has hung its hat on the LNG file, you would think when they say, "We have a target," that they would meet that target.

Last summer the Minister of Finance asked a question that I put to him, which was: "When can we expect the framework?" We were told one, it's not a negotiation, and two, it would be in place by the end of the calendar year.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: My friend the member for Vancouver-Kingsway just anticipated my next comment. I will take some responsibility for that, because I think I failed to ask the question: which calendar year? At the end of the calendar year, hon. Speaker, it was not there.

What kind of message does that send to British Columbians? In fact, what kind of message does it send outside the world? Was the government…? Did they not fully understand the complexity around LNG and the tax framework? Did they not understand the competition we faced from other jurisdictions around LNG? So they didn't realize that — you know what? — they weren't going to be able to meet that timeline, in which case they should have set a realistic timeline. Or were they continuing what they did during the election campaign — to spin and boost and hype the issue of LNG?

The Premier's comments, for example, on the strength of the B.C. resource. Yes, we have a lot of natural gas in this province, and the Premier went out and said: "We have enough for 150 years." Some people dispute that, but that's the figure and the number that she used. She hyped it in such a way as though to make: "Oh my god, British Columbia has a monopoly on this resource, and the rest of the world wants it. They can't wait to get here, and we're going to be able to name our own price."

[1525]

Well, while she said that this past summer, other jurisdictions were coming out with their assessments of their natural gas resources as well. In the United Kingdom, for example, their geological survey and the gas companies came out and said: "Our reserves of natural gas are expanded, and they will last at least another 100 years." Never mind what is also happening in China and Russia and Malaysia and other places around the world — or the United States.

Yes, LNG is an opportunity for us. But guess what. We're not the only ones in the game, and unfortunately, the government has neglected too often to tell British Columbians that. That's a big mistake, because they are raising expectations in a way….

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: I hear the member from Energy mumbling something under his breath.

That's one aspect of the Premier's hype. The other is also concerning, and that is on the price that we will get. We already are aware, we have already been warned by the natural gas producers, those who make LNG, that the price is narrowing, that the spread is narrowing. That means less potential revenue.

That impacts. That impacts the Premier's ability to say we're paying off the debt in 11 years. She said 15 years, but there'll be no revenue for the first four. That leaves 11 years. That means $6.3 billion a year that they want to get from this tax regime that we started to see the first inklings of in the budget but, again, won't be finalized until later this fall.

Again, given how they missed their previous targets, I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for them to meet the next set of targets. That's just how much money they want. And they have said it is…. We already know that the price is decreasing. The gap is closing.

It brings up two more points in the LNG file that I

[ Page 1402 ]

think the Premier needs to take into serious consideration and talk to British Columbians about. One is the amount of money that's being invested. I know the Minister of Energy likes to talk about this.

The Minister of Energy and others on the government side are quite happy to stand up in this House and issue press releases and say that Suncor is investing hundreds of millions of dollars, that BP is investing hundreds of millions of dollars, that we've got activity up in Kitimat, that we've got activity on the north coast. There is, and that's good. It's great to see that investment.

It makes you wonder why this investment is taking place and unemployment is still projected to go up next year and the year after that and remain high in this province. But then I guess when you see the cuts in post-secondary education and the flatlining in skills training, perhaps that's understandable. But the point is the government is bragging about the amount of money that's being spent, and they say this is a sign of how strong things are and how great the economy is.

The reality, what they don't want to talk about, is that these companies, Shell and BP and Suncor — well, Suncor has pulled out now — are making similar investments in other parts of the world. They are quite happy to spend $800 million, $900 million on a particular site and then evaluate each of the areas where they've spent that money, and they will walk away — like that — from the ones that they say no to.

They will walk away. That is the cost of doing business. That is how much money is being invested that they can afford to do that. We're not alone. That's why I hope…. LNG, as I said: great opportunity. But we need to have a forthright and honest discussion about what it means and on their potential revenues and not the hype and the boosterism that we've heard from the Premier.

[1530]

There are other areas of concern within this budget. I note by the clock that…. I am mindful of that time. But as I said, ignoring other sectors of the economy at the expense of LNG…. I've talked about forestry and the need for investments in the land base. I've talked about the dangers of focusing just on LNG.

In mining, what we've seen is an increase, over the years of this government, in the amount of time it takes to get a permit. The government tried to address that. Part of that issue is ensuring that we have the staff in the resource ministries to be able to do that work. The reality is that we're falling back into the same cycle that we have seen before, which is that they scramble to fix something, and then they take resources away. That's shortsightedness. That is not going to help create long-term certainty or deal with some of those issues that occur in those key sectors of the B.C. economy, such as mining.

Mining is one of those resource industries in B.C. that has built this province and can continue to build this province well into the future. The average salary in mining is $120,000 a year. If you're in a community like Kamloops, for example, or Cranbrook or Invermere or Ashcroft — any one of a number of rural communities in this province — that's a significant amount of money. You'd think that a government would want to encourage people to get into that field.

I'm reminded that a couple of years ago I attended a mining conference. The view of mining is that it's very much a traditionally male occupation. The thing that struck me during my visit there was just how many women were in that field as geologists, as engineers. It was really remarkable. It is no longer the male-dominated profession that it used to be.

Yet you would think that a government would want to encourage that. How would you encourage that? You'd encourage it by investing in skills and training and funding in post-secondary education opportunities. As I stated earlier, this budget does not do that. That is an area of B.C.'s economy that needs attention, yet the decisions of this government in this budget are going to ensure that we are not going to optimize that potential. That is a shame.

Tourism. I was in the Kootenays recently — in Kimberley, in Castlegar, in Trail. I was even in Cranbrook, which is a wonderful community. There I met with people from all sectors of the economy: small business owners, hotel owners, workers, community organizations. It was really interesting to hear what they have to say.

I was in Nelson. I remember a conversation that I had in Nelson that was particularly striking on two fronts: (1) because it dealt with tourism, and (2) because it dealt with technology. We had Expo 86, and after Expo 86 tourism really started to boom in this province. We had the Olympics in 2010. The government's key objective on that was for us to capitalize on tourism coming out of the 2010 Olympics. What I heard in Nelson was that we have failed. This province, this government has failed to do that.

When you look at how this government has been making decisions, you can start to understand why. I'll give the two examples that I think are most telling. One is the elimination of the ferry route, the coastal circuit route, the one that goes from Vancouver Island up to Bella Coola, parts of the Inside Passage — a part of this province that people from Europe and, increasingly, Asia pay thousands of dollars to come and see because they don't have it. They don't have it here.

[1535]

There are communities and tourism operators who have invested dollars, invested their hard work on the belief that they have something to make a business opportunity out of, something to capitalize on the beauty of this province. You would think that the government would be supportive or, if they were not supportive, at least would have done an analysis to say: "Guess what? We don't believe that your business is viable, and that's

[ Page 1403 ]

why we're cancelling this ferry route. We don't believe your business is important to the province of British Columbia or to your region of the province."

That's exactly what's happened. They did not do the analysis. They did not do the analysis on what it would mean to the local economies. They talk a good game about wanting to help small business people, but guess what? Small businesses in communities like Bella Bella or Bella Coola — when decisions like this are made, they don't see that. They don't see that at all.

I think the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin will know that probably better than anybody. I know that member is hearing loud and clear from angry business owners and angry tourism operators from not only within her riding but outside her riding and outside this province. It's shortsightedness at its worst.

The other example in that regard is the businessman I spoke to in Nelson who talked to me about the hotel that they were operating, how proud they were, how much they liked Nelson. It's their community that they grew up in. They wanted to do some expansions. They wanted to improve their reservation system. They wanted to improve their marketing system. They wanted to invest and improve their business to capitalize on the beauty of their region and the opportunities that are there, and they can't. Why? They don't have the broadband capacity to do it.

The government talks about things down the road. Well, paying attention to some things that they could be doing right now…. What we heard, and what I heard, was: "You know what? Improve the broadband capacity in Nelson and the surrounding area, and I will be investing money in my business. I will be growing money in my business. I will be creating jobs and employment and opportunity in my business."

One would think that that's what the government wants to encourage. At the same time, in doing that it would help facilitate a growth in another area of this province's economy, technology, which produces almost 7 percent of the GDP of this province and is concentrated right now primarily in the Lower Mainland, southern Vancouver Island, greater Victoria and some in the Okanagan.

The reality is that technology should allow us to expand opportunities right across the province and should allow the different regions of the province to take better and greater advantage of their economic strengths. That was the message that I found particularly interesting, talking to a business person in Nelson.

I guess the final area, while we're on other sectors of the economy, that is concerning is just the government's whole attitude to either criticism or reports in that area. We used to have something in this province, the B.C. Jobs and Investment Board. They would do a report on opportunities and challenges facing B.C.'s economy. Lots of times there were good things in those reports. Other times there were things not quite so good. But what they did was they had their pulse on what was happening in different key sectors of the economy, which is something this government is failing to do in its single-minded pursuit of LNG at the expense of other areas of B.C.'s economy.

[1540]

The B.C. Jobs and Investment Board report was released on the 18th of January. No press release was issued from the government. There was no acknowledgment of the work that had been done. I can understand why, after you start to read it.

It exposed a record of weaknesses. Growing skills shortage in remote sites; in agrifoods, mining, forestry, natural gas, LNG and marine transportation industries. Increasing hydroelectricity costs a threat to mining. Lengthy permitting approvals a threat to mining. A rail monopoly that is hurting forest manufacturers. Conflict with the forestry sector over the land base is holding back adventure tourism. Lack of capital investment in fishing fleets because quotas are expensive.

What was the government's response to that? Disband it. As my colleague from Saanich North says, the truth hurts. Well, that brings us to some uncomfortable truths about this budget.

I just want to check how much time I have left.

Deputy Speaker: An hour.

M. Farnworth: We've got lots of time, and there's plenty still to go through.

Let's look at the forecasted increase to unemployment. Everything about this government in its budgets has been around jobs, jobs, jobs, and we know that it's not worked. After 29 months it has not worked, and in this budget it continues.

Unemployment is forecast to increase in 2014 and 2015 and remain high in the medium term. That is just unacceptable. We already have the highest unemployment rate in western Canada. It's worse than Alberta, it's worse than Saskatchewan, and it's worse than Manitoba.

The Premier said: "We're going to be No. 1." Well, first she started saying: "We're No. 2." Then she said: "We're No. 1." The reality is we're nowhere near that. To use a quote that I had from yesterday: if Alberta is gold, Saskatchewan is silver, Manitoba is bronze, we don't even make the qualifying round when it comes to unemployment. That is so unacceptable to the people of this province, and it's something that this government should not be proud of and in fact should be embarrassed by.

Let's look at some slides around job creation. I think that's what's next on the slide profile. Actually, let's go back a slide to the rising provincial debt, and then we'll get on to the employment. We've seen how this government has cost people more, is going to give them less, is not investing in the broader economy in terms of creat-

[ Page 1404 ]

ing jobs and opportunity. They have focused all on one sector of the economy in this budget, and the Premier still likes to talk about "Debt-free B.C."

Let's look at that claim from this government about debt-free B.C. We've already seen how unrealistic it is in terms of LNG revenue projections that they ran on — paying off almost $70 billion worth of debt in 15 years. But let's look at the current record within this budget and this fiscal plan. Does the debt go down? No. Is this debt increase still the fastest or the highest debt increase in the history of this province? Yes.

[1545]

In other words, for the elucidation of the members opposite, debt-spree B.C. continues. The provincial debt will rise in each year of this fiscal plan — in 2014, in 2015, in 2016 and in 2017.

That is clearly a record that they do not like to put before the public. Perhaps it explains why they like to dangle out: "Oh, just wait. We've got all this revenue from LNG coming in." And as each month goes by and each year goes by, it becomes more and more apparent to people, to the public, to the hard-working taxpayers of this province, that it is simply unrealistic, and it is simply more of the Premier's hype and boosterism. Fiction, as my colleagues say.

Again, that's unfortunate, because the people of this province expect better. They expect better. This government promised better, and it has failed on just about every count. So that's the debt. They've failed on that.

Well, let's take a look at their jobs plan. This is particularly interesting.

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: Oh, I am really glad my colleague from Saanich South said these slides show a lot. Absolutely. They just confirm that old adage that a picture tells a thousand words. In this case, it tells of thousands and thousands and thousands of lost jobs compared to every other province in the country. Look at it: "Last in private sector job growth."

If you really want to know how damning this is, how damning an indictment it is on this government's strategy over the last 29 months, just look at the figures. In particular, let's look at the figures of Saskatchewan, Atlantic Canada and Manitoba.

In B.C., 6,900 jobs. We have 4½ million people. We are 4½ times larger than Saskatchewan or Manitoba. They're have-not provinces. That's the equivalent…. If you just look at it proportionately, in Saskatchewan that would be like them creating not just 17,400 jobs. That would be like them creating almost 90,000 jobs.

That was from a time when we had a well-funded education system in this province. That was when we had class size and composition that allowed teachers to spend time with people who….

Interjection.

M. Farnworth: Teaching math.

Let's look at Manitoba — same thing. Atlantic Canada, which I hate to say…. At certain times in the last 12 years previous ministers in this government have often used Atlantic Canada as a whipping boy, as a bit of a laughingstock. "We're in British Columbia. We're great here — not like Atlantic Canada, where they've got real problems." That was something that you often heard from some former ministers in this House.

Yet when you look at the graphs up there, Atlantic Canada's record…. Never mind the fact that they are a quarter — well, not quite a quarter but significantly smaller collectively. They're about half the size of British Columbia, population-wise. They generated four times as many jobs as we did here in British Columbia — four times as many private sector jobs created in Atlantic Canada than here in British Columbia. That's in the period from September 2011 to January 2014.

[1550]

Even Ontario. Members of this House on the government side have often said: "Oh hey, they have real problems in Ontario." No one is disputing that they've had challenges, particularly in their manufacturing sector. Now, during this time, they created almost 150,000 jobs. Compare to us here: 6,900 jobs in the private sector. That is an abysmal record.

Yet the Premier went through an election campaign, and the Premier stood and said: "We're No. 2. We're No. 1. They're all coming to British Columbia. It's a million new jobs by 2020, and it's 100,000 this year." The numbers are thrown around like nobody's business. But when you look at the actual statistics, they tell a completely different story.

I said, and we're almost at the end of my remarks….

Interjections.

M. Farnworth: My colleague from Surrey-Whalley says: "More."

Interjections.

M. Farnworth: Oh well, okay. In that case….

You know what? I am encouraged. I have just heard a voice from the government side saying they want more. They want more pointing-out of the errors of their ways. There may yet be hope that they see how bad this budget is, how over the last 29 months, they have failed British Columbians in one of the key things the Premier talked about, which was job growth and opportunities for the people of British Columbia.

When you look at this and you see these numbers, you can understand why many British Columbians feel that the Premier's jobs plan has been more about tem-

[ Page 1405 ]

porary foreign workers than it has been for homegrown British Columbians. You can see why, when they see a skills-training budget flatline, when the post-secondary budget has been cut, when you have 18-month to two-year waiting lists for apprenticeship programs in places like BCIT….

This government is more concerned about temporary foreign workers and is forgetting about the people who built this province, which are homegrown British Columbians right here, who are the ones who should be able to get jobs, the ones who should be able to get skills training. And that is not happening.

A 33 percent completion of apprenticeships in this province is simply not acceptable. It is wrong, and it is no way to build a long-term economy in the province of British Columbia.

Finally, I think it's time to look at the effect of this government's policies and the effect that it will continue to have with the measures that are in this budget and the lack of the focus on the key priorities that British Columbians are concerned about, and that is that people are leaving this province.

Interprovincial migration since the Premier became the leader of the B.C. Liberals is negative. Almost 13,000 people have left this province. I'm being kind when I say left, because the Premier's own language, the Premier's own words are that people are fleeing this province or have fled this province to seek opportunity elsewhere. I don't need to add additional words. I don't need to colour the commentary, because the Premier herself used this exact phrase, which is: "That is families being torn apart."

[1555]

When you put families first, if that's your motto, what could be worse than families being forced apart or people being forced to flee to other provinces because of a lack of opportunity, either employment-wise or skills training and development–wise?

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

That is another damning statistic about the failure of this government's agenda, its economic plan and its budget.

I know yesterday the Minister of Finance started his remarks with a nautical theme about the ship of state. I was tempted to work in some phrases of my own — the Flying Dutchman , which used to be a famous ghost ship or, some would say, a portent of doom. I don't need to. I will not do that.

Instead, I will just look at that slide and ask the capable technician who's managing the slides to go back one slide to show the job creation numbers in other provinces. As I said in question period, those other provinces are the lifeboats for too many people seeing opportunity outside this province, because they don't get it in this province, and that is unacceptable.

[Slide presentation concludes.]

In closing, I want to say a few final remarks about Budget 2014-15. And that is, as I said at the beginning, that British Columbians will pay more, at least $900 a year more, over the life of this fiscal plan. They will receive less in the way of services, both in immediate services that they depend on and, just as importantly, in the long-term services, the long-term investments and the long-term strategies that this government should be looking at in key sectors of the economy.

While LNG is an opportunity for this province, this government needs to have an honest and realistic discussion about it, which it has not done to this day. This budget continues the hype around that. People expect other sectors of the economy to get attention and to get the public-policy work that is required.

Hydro continues to be used as a cash cow — the creation of deferral account after deferral account, which the Auditor General has talked about and will no doubt have more to say about. Mismanagement and unaffordability continue to be hallmarks of this government.

This government does not meet the needs of the province as a whole. It does not meet the needs of its regions. It does not meet the needs of its communities, and it most certainly does not meet the needs of the everyday families who work hard and pay their taxes and expected something better — not to see their costs increase. That is why I will stand proudly and vote against this budget, as will my colleagues on our side of the House.

Tabling Documents

M. Farnworth: Hon. Speaker, I ask leave to table the slides that were used in my presentation.

Leave granted.

Debate Continued

D. Ashton: Good afternoon, hon. Speaker. It's my pleasure to rise in response and support our government's balanced budget.

[1600]

This budget is precisely what British Columbians elected us to deliver — a promise made and a promise kept. During the election we committed to fiscal discipline, to respect hard-earned taxpayer dollars and not to spend more than we could afford. Yesterday we delivered on that. A balanced budget is the first step to create a debt-free British Columbia, a strong economy and unprecedented opportunities for future generations.

I would at this time like to thank the opposition Finance critic, the member for Port Coquitlam, for his comments and, particularly, for his passion and service to his constituents and to this province. But it seems

[ Page 1406 ]

that the opposition has already forgotten what British Columbians told our bipartisan committee during the budget consultation tour.

In the lead-up to this budget we toured the province, with members from both sides of the House — I'll repeat that, both sides of the House — working together, which I found incredibly uplifting, visiting 17 communities for hearings and conducting video conference sessions in an additional five communities. We received more than 600 submissions from individuals and stakeholders over a five-week consultation process.

We heard the same message in every corner of this province. British Columbians want a government that is fiscally responsible, and British Columbians want a balanced budget. Yes, we did hear that they would like government to help out more, but only when we could afford it.

Of the 73 recommendations made by our committee — I'll ask the opposition to remember that our recommendations were unanimously endorsed by committee members from both parties — our top recommendation was one of fiscal restraint. Our top recommendation was not to spend more than our province can afford. Our top recommendation was a balanced budget.

That promise we made. The commitment that British Columbians sent us here to keep is what we are now delivering.

I would encourage the members opposite to reflect on our bipartisan committee's recommendations and join me and the majority of British Columbians we represent in supporting this budget.

I'm a fiscal conservative. I'm very financially responsible, something that was instilled in me by my parents, by being involved in a small business and by many years of participating at the local level in municipal and regional levels of government. These are the values that are shared by British Columbians.

As the newly elected mayor of Penticton in late 2008, right after the collapse of the financial markets of the world, our council faced a very difficult challenge to balance the city books at a time when the last thing the citizens needed were new and onerous obligations. We worked together — council, management, staff — and we made some incredibly difficult choices, but we were able to deliver to the citizens we represented three years of budgets that did not add any additional stress to their own financial challenges.

As a matter of fact, in the eyes of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, Penticton went from being one of the worst- to one of the best-performing municipalities. We accomplished that by being fiscally disciplined and financially responsible. But more importantly, we accomplished it by working together, something that our provincial Finance Committee showed we could do and something I personally think the citizens of British Columbia want us collectively to do.

My colleague the Minister of Finance reminded the House that this is one of only two balanced budgets in Canada. That is something British Columbians, our government and all members of this House can be proud of. A balanced budget is the first step to paying down debt and is an important step to maintaining our province's triple-A credit rating. Our credit rating is more than just an independent validation of our strong fiscal footing. It determines our borrowing costs and the money that we have available to invest in our province's future.

Around the world there are many examples of what can happen when governments overreach and spend more than they can afford and what happens to those governments when their credit ratings are downgraded. Even within Canada there are provinces that pay more than twice on the debt-servicing costs that B.C. has. That means substantially less dollars available to address the needs of their citizens.

[1605]

Balancing the budget isn't easy, but the tough decisions we are making are decisions that British Columbians understand, because every day families in British Columbia have to make the same tough decisions with their household budgets. They need to decide how each dollar is spent, and they know that when they look after the pennies, the dollars will follow. They know that you can't pay down debt if you're spending more than you take in. They elected us to balance our budget the way they balance theirs — by making tough but right decisions.

This budget is the first step to a debt-free B.C., and we're already in good shape, especially compared to many other jurisdictions in Canada. Our debt-to-GDP ratio is among the lowest in the country, lower than the national numbers and less than half of what we see in some other provinces. By the 2016-2017 fiscal year we will already be reducing our debt-to-GDP ratio, helping us to maintain a triple-A credit rating and to spend on direct services rather than on debt-servicing costs.

This budget provides targeted measures to make life more affordable for British Columbians, and we have the means to do this because of fiscal discipline. We are increasing the threshold for the first-time-homeowner buyers in the program to $475,000 from $450,000, an exemption that will save up to $7,500 on their property transfer tax.

We have extended the transitional tax relief for credit unions — credit unions that many of us use — levelling the playing field with the big banks and rewarding investment in our province. We all know how credit unions invest in their communities and their regional areas and in this province.

We have extended the scientific research and experimental development tax credit by three years, encouraging R and D and high-quality jobs in British Columbia.

Controlling spending isn't about cutting programs; it's

[ Page 1407 ]

about finding more efficient ways to deliver the services that British Columbians expect and need. My colleague Minister Bennett and I have been tasked with controlling government spending, ensuring that we make the best use of government resources through a core review.

Deputy Speaker: Member, no names, please.

D. Ashton: I apologize.

We've done a lot more to improve the efficiency and the effectiveness of government. That being said, we know we can always do more.

To date, the core review process has identified $7.1 million in annual savings. The government will dissolve the Provincial Capital Commission but will maintain its community outreach program, which includes education and cultural services, within government. This will reduce the administrative costs, with savings to the taxpayers of approximately $1.5 million annually.

The core review process also determined that the Pacific Carbon Trust could be transitioned into a new model and brought within government, saving the taxpayers $5.6 million annually. The new model will require five staff compared to the previous model, which required 18. Impacted staff — this is important — will have the opportunity to join other parts of the public service and to use their talents and their experience to continue to help the citizens of British Columbia.

Fiscal restraint also means focusing on our priorities. We will continue to stand up for the services and programs that British Columbians rely on, especially for the most vulnerable in our province. The core review process will not make recommendations on services provided to the most vulnerable citizens, except to the extent where they are not achieving their intended results. Core review will find savings of $50 million in 2014 and 2015 and $50 million additional in the 2015-16 fiscal year.

This diverse and resource-rich land provides our province with unprecedented opportunities to work together with First Nations, but we have to recognize and understand each other's beliefs and traditions, and we have to learn to work together to succeed together. There are many examples provincewide where this is happening and where success brings additional opportunities for all.

Look at the successes in the Okanagan, where I'm from — at the Osoyoos Indian Band with Chief Clarence Louie, at the Westbank First Nation and their commercial leasing success and residential developments with thousands and thousands of non–First Nation families living and working on bands' traditional lands.

[1610]

Look at the advances the Penticton Indian Band has made with Chief Jonathan Kruger and his very progressive council and the infrastructure partnerships that have recently been created between the city of Penticton, which will benefit the economy and, as importantly, the environment, which we all share.

Our fiscal discipline has also given us the means to invest in the things that matter most to British Columbians, like health care. In the riding I represent, a new patient tower at Penticton hospital is a priority for our communities, and that makes it a priority for this government. By working together with the Okanagan-Similkameen hospital district, the government and Interior Health we were able to expedite the concept plan and the business case.

The business case is quickly moving ahead and will determine the schedule, scope and costs of a new patient tower. This is good news for patients and their families, as well as the hundreds and hundreds of health care professionals who deliver such incredibly good care throughout the South Okanagan and Similkameen.

Following approval of the plan, we will move to procure a contractor to construct a new patient care tower, delivering on our promises to the citizens of Penticton, to the citizens of the South Okanagan and to the citizens of the Similkameen.

The new patient care tower will bring the hospital up to modern standards, facilitating the requests of doctors, nurses and health care professionals — all incredibly important in our own towns and our own society — while ensuring that patient demand is met for the future. It is an investment in our communities and an investment for our children.

Fiscal discipline means that we have been able to balance the budget, but it also means that we are able to invest in our communities and the health of our citizens. Since 2001 the regional hospital districts have invested $1.5 million on new and renovated health care facilities in the Interior. This means new and renovated facilities in our communities — facilities that help serve the entire Interior Health population.

It also means that people receive care closer to home, and that is incredibly important to families — where they don't have to travel to health institutions in the Lower Mainland, where they can be close to their loved ones and have that opportunity, and the loved ones have the opportunity, of having family close by, which makes a huge difference in the healing process.

We've recently completed a significant expansion at the Kelowna General Hospital, for example. In December 2012 Kelowna hospital performed the first-ever open-heart surgery that was done outside the Lower Mainland or Victoria, and it was on a patient from Penticton, who otherwise would have had to travel to Vancouver or Victoria.

Our province leads in outcomes while keeping spending per capita to the second-lowest in the country. We're always looking for opportunities to create healthier communities while saving taxpayer dollars.

This budget introduces a tax on smoking that will directly go to research on cancer and smoking cessation. In

[ Page 1408 ]

addition, it contains funding for our successful smoking cessation program, where our government helps to cover the costs and overcome the challenges of quitting. It's a terrible addiction — a terrible addiction — but it's something that we are trying to address.

Every member and every British Columbian who quits smoking, in addition to reducing an overwhelming number of health risks, saves our province dollars and reduces strain on our system. We know this, and that is why we want to do everything in our power to encourage and support British Columbians who want to quit smoking.

Another way we're improving outcomes and reducing costs is through access to primary health care. Access to primary health care saves lives, prevents more serious conditions and frees space in our ever-challenged emergency rooms for those who need it.

At Kelowna General Hospital we have invested $254 million in a new out-patient hospital, acute care bed capacity and new emergency room and medical training school. This renovated hospital also includes the new UBC Faculty of Medicine and Interior Health Clinical Academic Campus that is helping train new physicians who will soon help support communities right across the Interior, including in my riding of Penticton, and the Similkameen, where the citizens have been very innovative at trying to attract physicians.

It's something that is faced by many communities above Hope in the interior of this province: trying to get physicians into those areas that can help the citizens that need those physicians.

We are investing in the future of health care in the Okanagan and training more doctors in our community. Fiscal discipline is about controlling spending, but it's also about smart investments in doctors, in preventative health measures and in education and skills training.

[1615]

We are investing in B.C.'s future, but we are also giving new parents the means and opportunity to save for their children's future. Starting in April of this year, parents with children under the age of six will receive a tax benefit of up to $55 a month per child. That's $650 to making life a little bit easier.

We're also giving new parents support with the B.C. training and education savings grant. The opposition ran on taking this grant away from parents, but we trust parents to make the right decision for their children and for their families. Every child born after July 1, 2007, is provided with the opportunity of $1,200 towards a registered education savings plan after the child turns six.

If parents contribute to this fund, even at $10 or $15 per month, it will mean a significant fund in place by the time that child turns 17 and wants to further his or her education. This is support for families, and it will help facilitate these children's educational future.

We've heard a lot from the opposition about B.C.'s education recently, and I want to use this opportunity to highlight some facts for my friends on the other side. Operating funding for public K-to-12 is at record-high levels — $4.725 billion this year. The average per-pupil funding is $8,654 — our highest level ever.

We have increased operating grants by approximately 26 percent over our 2000 and 2001 funding despite a decrease of 70,000 students in the province. Over the next four years we have committed $470 million on 27 capital projects. Since 2001 the government has spent or committed $2.2 billion on seismic upgrades or replaced 213 high-risk schools.

We have created 326 StrongStart centres across B.C., and B.C. is the only province in Canada to commit to and fully deliver a full-day kindergarten program. Our government knows that education is an investment in the future and is a foundation of our future, and that is why we'll continue to build on these accomplishments.

We're also investing in post-secondary education and skills training to prepare our kids for the jobs and the opportunities of tomorrow. In the Okanagan we are investing in skills training through post-secondary institutions like Okanagan College.

The Ministry of Advanced Education has provided more than $69 million in capital projects at Okanagan College since 2001 — more than $28 million to replace a trades building at Kelowna campus, more than $24 million towards the expansion of the Centre for Learning at the Kelowna campus.

In my area of Penticton, a substantial investment was made at Okanagan College's Jim Pattison Centre of Excellence. Funding for skills-training equipment, heavy-duty mechanics, electrical, welding and the plumbing program's equipment is taking place at many of the campus sites.

This budget delivers on all those priorities, funding it for Okanagan College, which will double the size of the current trades training in their complexes by 2016. We're proud to be investing in the opportunities that will lead to a strong economy and a bright future for our province.

I am fortunate enough to live in and represent one of the more beautiful regions of the province, and that's not to say that…. On both sides of the House we represent many areas that are very favourable to each and every one of us. It is no surprise that in my riding, Penticton has continued to boom in the tourist industry. Visitors from all across the country and all around the world visit every year.

Our government continues to invest in the tourism industry, both directly, by creating the environment for small businesses to succeed, create jobs and contribute to the strong economy…. A significant portion of the tourism industry is represented by small business. I was one of those individuals. The small businesses are at the heart and soul of every one of our communities and are a driver for economic growth. In addition, we created Destination B.C. to promote British Columbia as a tourism destination in the highly competitive global market.

[ Page 1409 ]

[1620]

In 2013 we invested more than $48 million in Destination B.C. It is this funding that will allow our partners in industry and this new Crown corporation to attract tourists to all of the regions of the province, including Penticton; Peachland, in the South Okanagan; and the Similkameen.

Wine tourism in the Okanagan creates jobs and generates hundreds of millions of dollars of economic input. As I politely say, we've been very fortunate to liquefy sunshine and put it into a bottle that all can enjoy.

Our Premier has also worked hard to reduce the barriers for the B.C. wine industry, both in Canada and internationally. After consultations throughout B.C. with individual stakeholders and organizations, we announced commonsense changes to the B.C. liquor laws that will support the Okanagan wine industry and promote wine tourism.

We're cutting the red tape, and we'll be allowing the sale of wine, craft brewery and craft distillery products at locations like farmers markets and secondary tasting rooms. Just as a note of interest, do you know that in Penticton there are over 5,000 to 7,000 people on Saturday mornings that walk down Main Street because of our incredibly popular farmers market?

These changes encourage visitors and tourists to taste-test and purchase local products, contributing to our local and provincial economy. They also encourage people like John Skinner from Painted Rock and Dr. Tony Holler from Poplar Grove, whose wines are garnering international acclaim, to continue to seek new markets for their wonderful Okanagan wines.

Our liquor review made further recommendations to support B.C.'s wine industry. It recommended that the Liquor Distribution Branch should work with industry and tourism associations to develop promotional materials such as maps, apps and brochures on B.C. wineries. We're looking at allowing patrons to buy and take home bottles of wine, showcased at festivals and competitions throughout the region.

It was also recommended that our government work with other Canadian wine-producing jurisdictions to jointly develop thematic wine promotions in each jurisdiction's liquor stores to promote Canadian wine. That's all about expanding markets — expanding markets for Canadian products, creating jobs and growing our economy — so we can afford to invest in B.C.'s future while still practising fiscal discipline.

Our Pre