[ Page 17117 ]

The House met at 10:08 a.m.

Prayers.

Interjections.

The Speaker: These are introductions, hon. members. Is the member rising on a point of order?

M. de Jong: Hon. Speaker, I understood that to be a ministerial statement.

The Speaker: Thank you, hon. member. That's admissible. That's perhaps what you could call it; that's right.

M. de Jong: This, then, would be my response to the ministerial statement, hon. Speaker.

The Speaker: Hon. member, there is no need for a response. It was clarifying an error made. So I would ask the hon. member, in deference to the day in which we are bringing forward. . . . Would the member please refrain from making it difficult for the Speaker. [Applause.]

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. J. Cashore: Hon. Speaker, the province is saddened to learn of the death of a tireless prisoners' rights advocate, Claire Culhane. Claire Culhane's name is synonymous with prisoners' rights. She was a fearless advocate for the human rights of the least in our society. She took on an unpopular cause with courage and tenacity. She was also an excellent writer. In 1995 she received the Order of Canada for her tireless commitment to social justice. While she rejected the cult of personality, I think she would be bemused to know that today we express together a thank-you for her life.

D. Lovick: On another sad note, a longtime good friend of the House passed away this winter. I don't think there is anybody in this chamber or its precincts who will not be affected by the sudden death of Mr. Alan Nicholls. We often think of lobbyists in less than complimentary terms, but if there were ever a gentleman in the true sense of that word, who held the institution of parliament and all of its members in this House in the highest regard, it was certainly Alan.

For many, many years, going back well before most of us ever saw the inside of this chamber, Allan's familiar figure was a regular fixture in the corridors surrounding this chamber. He was an advocate par excellence for public education. He was also an expert, Mr. Speaker -- and I know this will mean something to you, as it does to me -- on parliamentary process and its traditions. He was, as I said, a friend of this House, and I would ask all members to please join me in expressing our deepest condolences to his wife, Margaret, and to their children, Catherine and David.

T. Perry: Hon. Speaker, I'm going to take advantage of my annual welcome to those who have not previously been welcomed to the gallery to extend my thanks to you and to all the other people here who may not be speaking in this Legislature again after the election, which is expected sometime this year. I'd just like to say how much I've appreciated the privilege to have been here and to have occasionally welcomed people to the gallery and worked with so many other good people. I'd like to say that on behalf of many of the others who are not going to be returning here after the election. Thank you.

L. Reid: I'm pleased to welcome to the gallery this morning Mr. Floyd Sully, a dear friend. I would ask the House to please join me in making him welcome.

J. Tyabji: I'd like to welcome today Mr. Gordon Henderson, the candidate for the PDA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head, and Mr. Ron Whims, the candidate for Esquimalt-Metchosin. Would the House please make them welcome.

Hon. J. MacPhail: Hon. Speaker, it is with a great deal of sadness but a great deal of honour that I rise today on behalf of each and every one of the members of the Legislature to give recognition to you as the very wonderful Speaker that you've been. You've brought to this House a great deal of decorum, which is often very hard to keep; you've brought a sense of humour; you've brought the largest handshake ever known to all of us. You have managed to walk into this chamber each and every day and bring with you a sense of dignity and, at the same time, warmth. I must say that I know that on every side, in all corners of this House, we give you the greatest of recognition, and we'll miss you terribly.

[10:15]

The Speaker: Thank you. [Applause.] Order, please. [Laughter.] The Government. . .Opposition House Leader.

G. Farrell-Collins: Hopeful, hon. Speaker.

Hon. Speaker, I just wanted to add the words of the opposition to the congratulations and the thanks. I know that there are probably hundreds of other House Leaders out there who have come and gone from governments and opposition over the last 20 years, who, if they could be here today, would do the same.

I remember, shortly after you were elected Speaker, that someone from the Oregonian newspaper came up to interview many of us in this House. At that time, I said that if there were to be an election and we were to be in government, and should you run again and be elected again as an MLA, I thought you would have no trouble winning election to the Speaker's chair as a member of the opposition.

The Speaker: Now he tells me. [Laughter.]

G. Farrell-Collins: I meant that with all sincerity when I said it. [Laughter.]

Unfortunately, the media doesn't always print what we say, and I'm sure that if they had, your name would be on 

[ Page 17118 ]

lawn signs tomorrow. I just want to add to the words of the Government House Leader our thanks and appreciation for the many years you've put in in this chamber and for the last few, where you have had a profound effect on the way the House works, sitting in that chair. You're one of the larger members of the House, but probably one of the most gentle. Every once in a while, though, those eyes look over with a sharp glare in them, and we all know exactly what you mean, and that's about all it takes.

I wish you the best in your future, and on behalf of our caucus -- and indeed all people in British Columbia -- thank you for your many years of contribution to this province.

The Speaker: Thank you very much.

Hon. J. MacPhail: I would also like to rise, because I think this is the last budget day for many people who are in this House, as well. Many of our colleagues are retiring, and it is the last day that you will have to be able to experience the budget. So I want to bring, again I hope on behalf of everyone. . . . Because all parties and all people sitting here will be losing many valued members of their caucuses to retirement. As a rookie MLA, I know that the life is much more difficult than anyone could have possibly told us. On behalf of the entire Legislature, I wish all retiring MLAs well.

The Speaker: Before I call on the Clerk, hon. members, I hope that I have your approval to attempt a very brief response because of the occasion and the unexpected, very glowing comments that you've bestowed upon me.

I'm almost in tears, believe it or not. I really am touched by this, because it doesn't happen every day that you can get your colleagues in an environment such as this to be almost unanimously saying you're an okay person. That's a head-shaker if there ever was one.

I just want to say that when I came to this country as a 26-year-old football player, I had no idea that I would end up. . . . Football is nothing compared to this. All I did was come up here to look for a job and make a few bucks to raise my family, and 40 years later, here I am sitting in the bear pit with some very important and special British Columbians, trying to do the people's business. I'm deeply honoured.

I'll talk much later, at some other time, but I just want you to know that this is really almost indescribable. It's one of those things you just feel good about. It's a wonderful day for me, and it's a wonderful day for British Columbians -- that we still have our democratic system intact, that we can come here without baseball bats and have our differences on behalf of our various constituents.

Even though we have far more than a sword's length between us, we really don't need it. It's all symbolic, and that's nice. We've come a long way in this province, and I think we're going to be going a long way together, as long as we can respect this place and listen to the Speaker every now and then. [Laughter.]

Motion approved.

Hon E. Cull tabled the comptroller general's report of interim financial statements for the ten-month period ending January 31, 1996.

Hon E. Cull moved that the said message and the estimates accompanying the same be referred to Committee of Supply.

Motion approved.

Hon. E. Cull: Hon. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Minister of Health, Minister Responsible for Seniors and Minister Responsible for Intergovernmental Relations, that the hon. Speaker do now leave the chair for the House to go into Committee of Supply.

Motion approved.

This year I'm pleased to announce a second consecutive surplus budget. Indeed, we will have a surplus of $87 million in this fiscal year. We will be reducing total government debt by $99 million, and this budget will ensure that B.C. continues to have the top provincial credit rating, the lowest debt-servicing costs and the lowest per capita debt in the country.

Our budget reflects the priorities of British Columbians: protecting and creating jobs -- we're investing in new training and job opportunities for young people, and we're forecasting 40,000 new jobs in B.C. in 1996; protecting health care -- we're increasing funding for hospitals in order to ensure quality services that all B.C. families and seniors can count on; protecting education -- we're increasing school funding to protect services in the classroom, and we're increasing access to post-secondary education and skills training; making our communities safer -- we're giving police new resources to fight violent crime; balancing the budget and managing the debt -- we've eliminated the $2.4 billion deficit we inherited from the previous government in 1991, and our debt management plan will eliminate B.C.'s direct debt within two decades.

As I've travelled throughout the province in the past few months, I've asked British Columbians what they'd like to see the government do, now that the government's budget is in surplus. The Premier has asked that same question as he's visited communities around our province, listening to the concerns of middle-class and working people.

People have said to us consistently: "Protect services, invest in jobs, control the debt and, if at all possible, cut taxes for our families."

We're listening. In 1994 I introduced a three-year freeze on all taxes; that freeze continues through this year. As I announced yesterday, we will be extending the tax freeze for individuals, families and small businesses for another three years. Taxes will be frozen for individuals, families and small 

[ Page 17119 ]

businesses until the year 2000. On top of that, I'm also pleased to announce a modest income tax cut for British Columbians and a tax cut for small business.

As the Premier has announced, our government is also freezing B.C. Hydro rates, ICBC premiums, and college and university tuition fees. The income tax cut, and rate and tuition freezes, will save a typical B.C. family of four, making $55,000 a year, up to $500 annually. Our B.C. Family Bonus initiative that is taking effect this July, providing new benefits for working families with modest incomes -- together with the tax cuts and B.C. Hydro and ICBC rate freezes -- will mean that a single-parent family with two young children and an annual income of $30,000 will be better off by up to $700 a year.

The tax cut for small businesses, the sector of the economy that creates the most jobs, will provide $29 million in tax relief annually. These accomplishments are possible because of the province's strong economic growth and because we've taken action to reduce the size and cost of government.

Hon. Speaker, budgets are about choices. They're about people; they're about whose side you're on. Ottawa chose to dramatically cut funding for health care, education and our social safety net. Federal funding for British Columbia is being reduced by $435 million this year alone and will decline even further in the next three years. Some provincial governments have accepted these cuts and chosen to pass them on to their citizens. Ralph Klein and Mike Harris have made drastic cuts to health care and education services for the people of Alberta and Ontario.

Here in British Columbia the opposition advocates over $1 billion in tax breaks for banks and corporations, and $3 billion in service cuts, which would have a devastating impact on health care and education for middle-class and working families.

Our government has made a different choice. We say no to billion-dollar tax breaks for corporations, we say no to $3 billion cuts that threaten health care and education, and we say no to Ottawa's cuts to people. Instead we have chosen to reduce the size and cost of government, and to put those savings toward protecting health care and education.

As the Premier announced in recent weeks, we are eliminating more than 2,200 positions from the public service this year, saving more than $210 million annually. We've cut the number of ministries from 18 to 15, the smallest number in 35 years. We're reducing real per capita spending by 2.2. percent this year, continuing the trend of the last three budgets, which also saw reductions in per capita spending. We're cutting spending in two-thirds of government ministries to focus our resources on priorities like health care and education. We're eliminating two Crown corporations -- B.C. Systems and B.C. Trade -- saving taxpayers $71 million a year. We've ended the MLA pension plan. We're extending the freeze on salaries for cabinet ministers and MLAs. We're saving up to $113 million by holding the line on public sector wages, and we're keeping public sector wage costs down, with no wage increase this year for government employees and no compensation increase for doctors.

It's because we've made these choices and cut the size and cost of government that we're able to protect health care and education, make our communities safer, and protect and create jobs. It's because of these choices that today's budget is such a good one for ordinary British Columbians. Jobs are up; taxes are down; the budget is balanced. That is the budget in brief.

[10:30]

Now, having given you the highlights of the budget, let me turn to the details. When this government took office in 1991, we inherited a deficit of $2.4 billion from the previous government. We reduced that deficit each year. Last year we eliminated it completely, producing a surplus this year. This year we have a second surplus budget. British Columbians expect a balanced budget. We've been listening, and we've delivered.

Unlike other provinces where governments have taken the axe to services to people, we've achieved our balanced budget while protecting health care and education, making affordable investments in our economy and improving the quality of life for our families. Now, there are those who believe that the role and responsibility of government should be dramatically restricted in order to cut taxes for big corporations. They argue for a lower-wage economy, less protection for workers and the dismantling of environmental safeguards in order to increase corporate profits. They argue for deep spending cuts to health care, education and other services that British Columbians count on.

We believe differently. We believe government has a legitimate and necessary role to ensure quality health care and education for all British Columbians and a strong social safety net for those in need. We believe this role can be fulfilled through good fiscal management, by balancing the budget, cutting waste and duplication, and promoting economic growth that generates new revenues.

We believe government must continue to make affordable investments that are essential to our economic growth and success. Transportation investments -- such as the Vancouver Island Highway, the West Coast Express and B.C. Ferry construction -- all have a major impact on our economic efficiency and help make our province more attractive for private investment. Investments in people are essential to creating a healthy, skilled workforce, strengthening B.C.'s ability to succeed in the highly competitive global economy.

Those who support harsh cuts to investment, health care and education point to Alberta, Ontario and the actions of the federal government to make their case that deep cuts are also needed in British Columbia. But the fiscal and economic situation in our province is very different from the economic problems faced elsewhere. Here are the facts: Alberta's debt per capita is almost twice the size of British Columbia's; Ontario's is over 50 percent larger; B.C. has the lowest debt per capita in Canada. The federal government spends 37 cents of every revenue dollar on debt servicing. In Ontario, 19 cents of every revenue dollar goes to servicing the debt. In Alberta, the figure is 14 cents. British Columbia spends less than 8 cents of each revenue dollar to service the debt -- the lowest in Canada -- and British Columbia enjoys the strongest economy in Canada and has the best record of employment growth over the past four years.

There are those who are painting a dark picture, who say we must follow the destructive and divisive path that has been the fashion in some other provinces. British Columbians will not buy that. British Columbians have a confidence and an optimism about the future of our province. This budget reflects that confidence. This government shares that optimism. We believe in British Columbia, and we believe in B.C.'s future.

Let me now turn to a brief review of our 1995 budget performance and then provide the details of the 1996 budget. Throughout the 1990s, B.C. has led Canada in economic 

[ Page 17120 ]

growth. Our economy grew 14 percent from 1990 to 1995, while the economy in the rest of Canada grew at only half that pace. As a result, B.C. has also led Canada in job creation. In 1995 there were 29,000 new jobs created. Our export performance was outstanding, and business capital investment was at an all-time high. All of this contributed to our strong fiscal performance and to the achievement of key fiscal goals. In 1995 the surplus was $16 million. Taxpayer-supported debt declined to 18.6 percent of provincial GDP, surpassing our debt management plan target. Real spending per capita decreased by 4 percent. British Columbia continues to have the top provincial credit rating and the lowest debt-servicing costs in the country.

Let me now turn to the 1996 fiscal year. In 1996 we expect the economy to grow at the same pace as it did last year: 2.7 percent. We expect interest rates to remain low. We should see another year of moderate growth in the United States and overseas economies, with notable improvement in Japan, our second-largest trading partner. Prices for our major exports rose sharply last year. Even though some prices have slipped from their peaks, most should remain higher, on average, in 1996.

This positive news about the economy will translate into 40,000 more jobs in B.C. in 1996 and 43,000 in 1997. This means the unemployment rate should continue its decline, though more people will enter our workforce each and every year. Last year the unemployment rate averaged 9 percent -- less than the national rate and down from 9.4 percent in 1994. This year the B.C. unemployment rate will decline to below 9 percent.

Revenues will be hurt by Ottawa's cuts to B.C. -- which I referred to earlier -- of $435 million for health and education. Ottawa chose these cuts to people instead of choosing to eliminate corporate tax loopholes and business subsidies, as we had urged them to do. Let me repeat: this government will not pass on those cuts to British Columbians.

That said, Ottawa's cuts will mean that B.C.'s total revenue will increase only 2.6 percent this year, to $20.7 billion. Given that fact, there is little scope to increase overall spending. The total expenditure for 1996-97 is expected to be, and is budgeted at, $20.57 billion, a responsible 2.1 percent increase -- half the rate of inflation and population growth. Spending increases will be focused on priorities such as protecting health care and education. Two-thirds of government ministries will see their budgets decline, and overall government real per capita spending will decrease by 2.2 percent. The result is a second surplus budget -- a surplus of $87 million.

As you will recall, hon. Speaker, in the last budget I introduced a comprehensive debt management plan. The plan has four benchmarks: to eliminate direct debt over 20 years, to cut the size of the debt relative to GDP, to cap interest costs at 8.5 percent of revenues, and to maintain the highest credit rating in the country. I'm pleased to inform the Legislature that total government debt will decline this year by $99 million and direct debt by $53 million. We will continue to cut the size of the debt relative to GDP, interest rate costs will remain below the cap, and our provincial credit rating is expected to remain the best in Canada.

British Columbians take debt very seriously. They want government to reduce its debt responsibly, while protecting health care and education and making the necessary affordable investments in B.C.'s people and in B.C.'s future -- in schools, in hospitals, in roads, in ferries and public transit -- and that's exactly what we're doing. That's why British Columbia has Canada's strongest fiscal record and Canada's best economy.

Let me now outline a few of the new measures that will benefit B.C. families and small businesses. I return for a moment to the issue of choice. When a government is in a fiscal position to consider tax relief, does it choose tax cuts for ordinary people and small businesses, or does it choose to cut tax for banks and large corporations already enjoying record profits? The official opposition has made its choice perfectly clear. It promises $1.1 billion in tax cuts for banks and large corporations through the elimination of the corporate capital tax and school property taxes paid by corporations.

Hon. Speaker, this government makes a very different choice from the parties opposite. We choose tax cuts for B.C. families. Middle-class and working taxpayers have seen their incomes lag behind as the cost of living has risen, and that makes money tight when you have children to take care of, a mortgage or a rent cheque to worry about, and bills to pay.

That's why yesterday I introduced legislation to extend the tax freeze for individuals, families and small businesses for the next three years. That means that taxes for British Columbians and their families are frozen until the year 2000: no tax increases, no new taxes.

Today I'm announcing that the provincial personal income tax rate will be reduced by one point, effective July 1, 1996. It will be reduced a further point effective July 1997. The reductions will be capped for taxpayers earning more than $80,000 a year, and total savings for taxpayers will be $68 million this year and $155 million annually by 1998-99. As I stated earlier, this tax cut, together with the ICBC, B.C. Hydro and tuition freezes, will mean savings to the average B.C. family of up to $500 a year.

Our budget also includes good news for homeowners and first-time homebuyers. We've extended the homeowner grant threshold to ensure that 96 percent of B.C. homeowners receive the full grant, and we're raising the threshold for the property transfer tax so that more first-time homebuyers won't have to pay the tax, saving them thousands of dollars.

This budget also lends support to low-income working families with children. We took a hard look at income assistance programs in British Columbia over the last year. We renewed these programs with B.C. Benefits, introducing some of the most progressive social policy changes anywhere in recent decades. A key element of B.C. Benefits is the B.C. family bonus, a monthly cheque of up to $103 per child, which will help low-income working families with the costs of raising their children. The B.C. family bonus ensures a fair share for low-income working families. It removes disincentives for parents on welfare seeking jobs. In short, it makes work a better deal than welfare. To repeat, with the family bonus, tax cuts, and B.C. Hydro and ICBC rate freezes, a single-parent family with two young children and an annual income of $30,000 will be better off by up to $700 a year.

This budget also cuts taxes for small business. This government understands the central importance of small businesses in creating jobs in British Columbia. So, effective July 1, 1996, the small business income tax rate will be reduced to 9 percent from 10 percent. In addition, a two-year income tax holiday will be introduced for eligible small businesses incorporated after today. This is good news for the small businesses in the province creating new jobs and for the working people who are filling those jobs.

I now want to turn to a discussion of investments in this year's budget. With Ottawa's health care and education cuts, and only modest growth in revenues as a result, our government has focused its limited resources on the priorities 

[ Page 17121 ]

of British Columbians. Nothing is more important to B.C. families than ensuring that they have good, family-supporting jobs. This government has put jobs at the top of our agenda. In the next few weeks Premier Clark will be announcing a new jobs plan, with ambitious, achievable targets for private sector job creation.

The Premier has also announced a number of new initiatives in recent months that will mean thousands of new jobs for working men and women in this province. In B.C., there are 15,000 more forest jobs than there were five years ago. Forest Renewal B.C. and the Forest Practices Code reinvest in our forests and ensure sustainable harvesting practices so that there continue to be good forest jobs for generations to come.

[10:45]

That said, though, it is a well-known fact that B.C. gets fewer jobs from its timber harvest than many other forest regions in the world. We have to get more jobs from logs. The Premier has recently announced new initiatives that will do just that. In March he set the target of 21,000 more forest sector jobs through a jobs and timber accord, in partnership with the industry. This month we launched a plan to expand B.C.'s value-added wood manufacturing sector, which will help meet that target. The comprehensive plan tackles three issues that have held back the growth of the value-added wood sector: access to wood, skills training and business development. It will mean getting more value and jobs from every tree cut in British Columbia.

The Premier has also announced new initiatives that will mean new jobs in the energy sector and 5,000 new jobs over five years in the environmental technologies.

Last week we announced a new partnership with the tourism industry to help create 23,000 new jobs in that sector over the next five years. B.C.'s tourism industry leads the nation, growing six times faster than the national average. Revenues in the industry last year reached an all-time high of $6.7 billion, and jobs in the industry reached a record of over 220,000. This new partnership will ensure that the industry continues to grow and create jobs for years to come.

When looking to B.C.'s future, nothing is more important than investing in young people. Expanding job and education opportunities for youth is an important priority for this government and for British Columbians. The Premier underlined that importance when he named himself Minister Responsible for Youth. Recently he announced A Guarantee for Youth, the most comprehensive youth jobs and training initiative in this province's history. This guarantee will help create 11,500 jobs for young people this year. There will be summer jobs, jobs as part of environmental youth teams, first jobs in science and technology, business and entrepreneurial opportunities, and jobs through Opportunities '96, where the government will connect young people to private sector jobs. In addition, the government will be providing training and work experience this year for more than 20,000 youth on welfare, through our new B.C. Benefits program called Youth Works.

This government's vision of greater opportunity for youth includes access to affordable education, skills and training. This is another part of our guarantee for youth. As the Premier announced a few weeks ago, tuition fees at colleges and universities will be frozen this year. That means no tuition increase. The government is guaranteeing spaces for every qualified student who wants to enter a university, college or post-secondary institution. We will be working with post-secondary institutions to add 7,000 new student spaces this year, building on the more than 14,000 new spaces already created by our government. We're expanding skills training and apprenticeship opportunities for young people. Contrast this, hon. Speaker, with the cuts and reduced access and affordability elsewhere in Canada.

Protecting public education for students in kindergarten to grade 12 is another part of our education priorities. There are few things more important to B.C. families than making sure their kids have a good quality education. This year's budget reflects the importance that we attach to education. We are increasing school funding by $138 million. We're fully funding enrolment growth. We're restructuring B.C. school districts to save provincial taxpayers $120 million over four years -- money that will go to protect funding in the classroom. We're protecting funding for students in special education, aboriginal education, and school meal and inner-city school programs. We're also building new schools to meet growing needs. Since 1991 we have built or expanded hundreds of schools, creating more than 55,000 new spaces for students. That's our commitment to children. We believe in quality education for all children in British Columbia.

Quality health care is also at the heart of what this government is about. We've been working extremely hard to cut the size and cost of government so we can protect health care services for British Columbians. In fact, in the face of the federal cuts, this has not been easy. But we have succeeded despite the federal cuts. Hospitals will get more funding this year -- a 2.5 percent increase over 1995. We're continuing to target money to areas in our health care system where B.C. families and seniors have expressed concerns. Since 1991, wait-lists for heart surgery have been reduced by 50 percent, and wait-lists for cancer treatment have also gone down significantly.

We're building on that success. Just weeks ago, we announced an agreement with the province's doctors. The doctors will receive no compensation increase this year or next, enabling the province to direct $25 million more to further reduce waiting lists for cancer and heart surgery and for hip- and knee-replacement surgery, and to provide funding for renal dialysis, magnetic resonance imaging, breast cancer diagnostic services and breast reconstruction. The government has also announced funding to establish new mammography services for northern communities, the interior and the lower mainland. I would like to thank all of those in the health sector who have supported our efforts to direct the limited resources that are at our disposal into services for patients.

As this budget indicates, our government will protect medicare. We will not allow a two-tier health care system in British Columbia, and we will ensure quality health care for each and every citizen.

Let me now turn to a very different concern. British Columbians have been telling us that they'd like to see government put a greater priority on fighting crime and the causes of crime. We're listening, and we're doing just that. This budget provides $19 million in new funding to keep our communities and streets safe. In cooperation with the RCMP, we're setting up a major crimes investigation unit. This unit will investigate unsolved murders and other crimes, using state-of-the-art technology such as DNA fingerprinting. We're establishing Canada's first forensic dentistry laboratory, which will use groundbreaking technology to improve crime investigation and prosecutions. We're fighting prostitution, getting tough on the pimps who profit from prostitution and the johns who keep it going. We're getting young people off the streets, providing them with positive alternatives to violence and 

[ Page 17122 ]

crime through our Nights Alive initiative. Nights Alive operates in 20 communities across the province and uses school and recreation centres after hours for sports, arts, music and other activities chosen and organized by local youth. All of these investments -- in jobs, education, training, health care and safer communities -- are about protecting and improving the quality of life for British Columbians and their families.

There are two other investments I'd like to mention in that light before moving on: child care and the Healthy Kids initiative. Since taking office in 1991, this government has created 20,000 new child care spaces; that's a 50 percent increase. And we're building on that record. In April, for example, we announced funding to help build 30 new school-based child care facilities in 27 communities throughout the province. Those facilities will create another 800 new child care spaces. By supporting safe, accessible, quality child care, we're doing something important for B.C. children, and we're providing more parents with the opportunity to seek education opportunities and skills training. That is an excellent investment.

Healthy Kids is another excellent investment. It provides basic dental and vision care coverage for children in low-income families. Some 235,000 children will benefit from this initiative, and because it not only covers families on welfare but also low-income working families, Healthy Kids removes one of the barriers to moving from welfare to work.

I have discussed the government's investments in some detail, because of their importance to middle-class and working British Columbians. I want to underline again that this government has been able to focus our resources on the priorities of British Columbians because we've succeeded in cutting the size and cost of government. Spending is down in two-thirds of government ministries. Real per capita spending is down 2.2 percent, and I've outlined a number of the actions that we have taken to make this happen.

We have also achieved savings in program delivery which are worth noting. As I mentioned earlier, there's $120 million in savings by restructuring school districts -- money that goes back into the classroom. We have introduced reference-based pricing for prescription drugs, ensuring that patients receive the best drug at the best price and saving $30 million for health care.

I am also pleased to announce that this government has stopped the historic growth in welfare caseloads. For three months in a row, caseloads are down. They will continue to go down, saving British Columbians hundreds of millions of dollars. Our measures to tighten welfare eligibility and reduce fraud and abuse are working. Our progressive B.C. Benefits initiative -- which helps people move from welfare to work -- is working, and we're continuing to ensure that British Columbians who are unable to work receive the support they need.

To conclude, this is a budget that I'm very proud to present on behalf of our government. Jobs are up, taxes are down and the budget is balanced. The budget protects health care and education for B.C. families and helps keep our communities safe. It invests in young people. It cuts the size and cost of government, putting the savings towards the priorities of British Columbians and protecting the financial health of the province. It is a budget that reflects the confidence and optimism of British Columbians.

Our government has made great progress over the past five years. We've wiped out the deficit, experienced tremendous job growth, taken historic steps to protect our natural wilderness, built new schools and health clinics and stronger communities, and invested in people like never before. We want to build on that success. There is every reason for British Columbians to be optimistic when they have a government they can rely on to be there for them. Whether we're cutting taxes for middle class and working families or protecting the services they count on, this government clearly shows whose side we're on.

There are no billion-dollar tax cuts for big corporations; no $3 billion cuts that threaten health care and education. These opposition promises make no sense at all for ordinary people. They would contribute nothing to our economy, and they would do great harm to the many British Columbians who are working hard to provide a good life and a good future for their children.

A budget is about dollars and cents, there's no doubt about it. But it's also about people. Making the choices that the people of British Columbia have told us they are looking for from their government, making the choices that protect the things that matter to them, and making the choices that build our province and create new opportunities today and tomorrow. That's what this budget is about. That's what this government believes in.

F. Gingell: It's an unexpected pleasure, I must admit, to stand and start the response to this budget. What a date, what a day to choose for budget day. It's April 30; it's the deadline for filing our personal income tax returns. If anyone scurries out, we'll know that they appreciate this reminder.

Taxpayers, though, should be reminded that although it's a federal income tax return, a large portion of those taxes are payable to the provincial government. It's the largest single source of government revenue, fully 25 percent.

[11:00]

All Canadians pay the same rate of federal tax, but all Canadians don't pay the same rate of provincial tax. If you are what this government classifies as high income, you pay the highest marginal rate in this country. In fact, you pay the highest marginal rate on this continent.

If you're not a high-income earner, and your income remained static from last year, as most did, you're a lot worse off. You don't need to check the figures; you just know it. You're saving less. There's a lot less money left over the day before pay day, and you're cutting back all the time. But I digress. This is a subject I will come back to. I first have to address the record of this government and not be sidetracked by thoughts evolved by the timing of the tabling of this budget.

I do prepare for these budget responses, even if they fall wasted on the deaf ears across the chamber. I review the Public Accounts. I consult with many knowledgeable people. I re-read important articles and editorials in newspapers. Finally, to get into the right frame of reference to comprehend the attitude of mind that lies behind the government budget, I turn again to the fourth estate and open the weekend funnies.

And there it is. I have to look no further than Peanuts, with the ever-smiling Lucy urging Charlie Brown to try to kick that football one more time. We all know what's going to happen, but he doesn't seem to. She smiles and promises; he runs and kicks; she pulls the ball away; he's flat on his back.

[ Page 17123 ]

Lucy is this government, and this government thinks that the people of this province are no better than Charlie Brown. If the people of this province believe this government one more time, they'll be flat on their backs again, gasping at the thin air of broken promises.

Let us review the delivery of this budget. A series of press announcements dribbled out in bite-sized pieces. The interim Premier says he knows how to feed the media. He must hold them in some contempt to voice such a view. But the medium is the message. It's entirely a budget of election promises. It's offering to buy the votes of the people with their own money. The interim Premier makes announcements that have no substance, hiring people here while cutting authorized positions there in a great con game. They hope the people will look no deeper than the words and become believers. But the voters are deeper than your words. They are wiser than you think and, you will find -- to your chagrin -- less gullible than you had hoped.

In 1990, just prior to the last election, the interim Premier said that an NDP government would not raise tuition fees. He was persuasive, and people bought it.

G. Farrell-Collins: What happened?

F. Gingell: What happened? Tuition fees at UBC, SFU and UVic went up by 24 to 28 percent. Per-student provincial funding dropped by 11 percent. The interim Premier, friend of the student, had pulled the football away. Now he's promising exactly the same thing: no tuition fee increases. Should we believe him, like Charlie Brown believes Lucy, or should we examine the NDP record further and see what else it says?

In 1990, in response to the question of whether an NDP government would raise taxes, the interim Premier said: "No, absolutely not. In fact, I think the contrary." But what does the record show? Immediately after being elected, the interim Premier, then the Finance minister, presided over the largest tax grab in B.C. history: 29 new taxes; hundreds of fee increases. B.C. now has the highest marginal income tax rate in North America, and its families pay more taxes than anywhere else on the continent. Now he's promising no new taxes again. Will we fall for it again? Will we have another go while Lucy Clark is holding the football? I think not.

In 1989 the member for Vancouver-Kingsway said there was no magic to balancing a budget in B.C. He said it would be extremely easy, simple to balance the budget in B.C., absolutely one of the easiest things he could imagine doing. Did he balance the budget as Finance minister? No. In spite of those huge revenue increases, he didn't. Last year's budget wasn't balanced, either. The protestations of the previous Finance minister and the present one do not make it so.

They changed the accounting policies and practices so they could make this false claim. They brought in the Transportation Financing Authority so they could beat transportation costs out of the. . . .

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, please.

F. Gingell: Not just the construction costs. Now they capitalize payments to the ministry for administration and planning, and they capitalize interest during construction. So, do a redesign? Delay the project? Slow it down? This government believes you're adding value to the project.

When the real figures come in, this year's budget won't be balanced either, despite what this government says. Will we let the Premier make a Charlie out of us again? No. Governments generally run on their record. Not this one. They're so used to being the opposition that that's how they characterize themselves. It's called distancing.

An Hon. Member: Your nose is getting bigger.

F. Gingell: It always has been rather large.

They are now promising to do many of the things they have failed to do for four and half years. Beds and day care for AIDS patients in Vancouver: how many years has St. Paul's Hospital been begging for this funding?

These are the words of the Premier, spoken on March 21, 1991: "It is clear that now, on the eve of a general election, they're saying: 'We won't do it anymore.' Given the longstanding failure of this government to tell the truth, to distinguish between right and wrong, does anybody really believe that this promise will last more than the two or three weeks of the election campaign?" Those are his words, spoken on March 21, 1991 and recorded in Hansard.

Now they say: "Let's run against our own record. Let's pretend that the member for Vancouver-Kingsway wasn't Finance minister, wasn't one of the Gang of Six, wasn't busy making patronage appointments -- the appointments that have been such an embarrassment to this government. Let's run against that record."

Then there are the promises and announcements that are mirages; castles in the air that have no substance; puffs of smoke; two-way mirrors with large trap doors. The master illusionist's art. A freeze on ICBC rates. Let me quote the Premier when the Socreds froze ICBC rates prior to the last election: "I don't think governments should play political football with ICBC rates." Straight from Lucy's mouth. But what happened? The new ICBC rates are out now. Guess what. They aren't frozen. Some are up, some are down, but on average they are up. The actuaries decided -- as well they should -- not politicians. So what was his announcement other than a puff of smoke and a big trap door.

Civil service cuts have been announced, but this is a matter of revolving doors. Under the NDP the civil service has increased by 44 percent. Mainly the increase came when the interim Premier was Finance minister: 27,000 people increased to 40,000, according to the report of the auditor general. Now the Premier does his magic, performs his illusion. They add 1,700 civil servants, then announce a cut of 2,000. What isn't announced is that they are currently looking to hire an additional 3,000. So the 2,000 will be shuffled around to fill some of the 3,000 places, and in fact the BCGEU expects that no one will lose their job. Even the Finance minister has said that there is no guarantee that new positions will not be created.

It's a con game performed by a sleight-of-hand artist. It's like the store manager who triples his prices on Wednesday so he can advertise a half-price sale on Friday. We all know of the big lie technique. If the lie is big enough, if it is brazen enough, and if it's repeated often enough with a straight enough face, it will be believed by many -- just so long as you don't mention it on television, of course. That is why the Premier is grinning. He thinks that with a big lie today about tomorrow, we'll all forget about yesterday.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Grand Cayman affair. It's a horrible mess, where the so-called party of the people is enriching itself at the expense of the people. Among 

[ Page 17124 ]

many, I will mention but two things that defy belief. Brian Smith described the exercise to raise capital as amateurish. I suppose that if you intended to keep it for friends and insiders, you would ensure it would be amateurish. But if you wanted it to be real so there would be no individuals sitting on both sides of the fence, so the interests of the project and the interests of the people of British Columbia would come first, you would have hired a professional underwriter to sell the issue and distribute the shares.

If you wanted to secretly enrich yourself and other NDP friends and insiders, what would you do? You would ensure that some B.C. Hydro senior employees and officers are shareholders. How could anyone for one moment believe there would be no inborn conflicts the moment one B.C. Hydro employee -- let alone an officer or a director -- became a shareholder of IPC? How could anyone not believe that this was a pretty good insurance policy against personal loss? To believe otherwise is naive at best; but for a lawyer experienced in these matters, I would suggest that it is contrary to the tenets of his profession. Lawyers are taught at their mother's knee that they can only represent the interests of their client; they can never serve two masters at one time. I guess that's why the chairman's first response was to lie and say that he had no interest.

The second issue, the internal whitewash, concluded that the Grand Cayman scheme wasn't there to avoid taxes. How can we believe this? Why do you set up a company in the Grand Caymans -- a notorious tax haven -- if not to avoid taxes? To cap it all, Mr. Speaker, the central figure in this affair, the chairman of Hydro, the originator of this scheme and a major investor, John Laxton -- who was, I remind you, the Premier's handpicked lieutenant -- said in his first interview after the news broke that the purpose of the Grand Caymans was to avoid paying taxes -- taxes that would benefit the citizens of this province. How can anyone write a report that says that it wasn't set up for tax purposes? The report says that it wouldn't have succeeded. Does that speak to the intent? No. It speaks to their competence. When the Premier and the Minister of Finance say, "No new taxes," that's just for friends and insiders, those who invest in special deals in the Cayman Islands -- and no old taxes either.

Did the Premier know about this? His handpicked deputies were present at board meetings. His handpicked directors were on the board. He is known for his attention to detail. We asked him point-blank about it in this Legislature last summer. He didn't bother to answer the question, and worse, he didn't bother to find out. Did he know? Did anyone in government know? I hear the echo from the west block of this Legislature, and I've heard it before: "Everyone knew but me." The face is different, but the excuse is the same.

We have a choice to make: do we question his truthfulness, or his competence? As it would be most inappropriate, Mr. Speaker -- as you would remind me -- for me to suggest that the Premier was untruthful, I have to conclude that he is incompetent. The use of a tax haven is inexcusable. How can government expect people to pay their taxes if this government turns a blind eye to its friends? These are the ones who rail against people who avoid paying taxes -- and rightly so. What hypocrisy!

[11:15]

What about Connie Munro? It was $88,000 to move her into the Workers' Compensation Board and over $300,000 when she decided to move out. You have to ask yourself: do other WCB employees get severance when they quit? If they don't -- and they don't -- it's a special deal. Is the candidate for the 1991 NDP nomination in Vancouver-Fraserview an insider? You bet she is. Was this a special deal for friends and insiders? You bet it was. Is this living up to the promises that this NDP government made before the 1991 election? You bet it ain't.

This party has not changed since the Commonwealth shell game, where they switched money between a number of trusts and companies controlled by the Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society -- the party -- and charities: some real; some just phony fa�ades for fraudulent purposes. Just like at the carnival, the money all ended up in the carnies' pockets. Then the NDP made pathetic attempts to cover it up by repaying a tiny portion that not even they could pretend hadn't been stolen. And then a promise to repay it all -- another broken promise. Good headlines, but no action.

How about the cabinet minister who stated, in effect, that she had spent an evening examining her conscience and had cleared herself? We should try self-trial in the criminal justice system. First, think of how much money we'll save; and second, think about how we'll be able to boast of unbelievably low crime statistics. Unbelievable -- that's what it is. It's right out of the Sunday comics. The real test will come when these matters are sent to the law. Some matters may not be able to be proven beyond a shadow of doubt, but the real shame is on this government for stonewalling so long. The people will vote before the truth is known, before the actors are tried, before the verdict is in. It is only when the guilty are convicted of criminal charges that this shame will be expunged.

To this budget. This budget is simply a further attempt to defer the truth till after the election. One has only to ask: what is the point of this budget? The House is going to be dissolved, and the budget won't be passed, I expect. Why do we go through this exercise? It's for the purpose of dressing up a bunch of election promises, to put them before the voters, to tell them about the state of the government's finances and expectations. There will no check on it. There will be no debate. I expect no estimates. They can promise all they want and paint as rosy a picture as they like, knowing that none of it will be tested. It won't be found to be lacking until after the election.

The Premier, like a caricature of a used-car salesman, doesn't care what he says to sell this budget, because once he gets it off the lot he can't be held accountable. I recently heard that what citizens look for in politicians is humility, charity and veracity. I don't think even the interim Premier will expect to get a passing grade for humility.

Charity. His inflammatory catcalls -- "whose side are you on?" -- and his threats of class warfare against some mythical enemy show his weakness. He does not understand that his job is to be government and to be fair and just and evenhanded to all British Columbians, rich or needy, employed or those seeking work, the young, the adult, the elderly, the fit, the sick, the able and the challenged. That's what people are looking for from those who govern: fairness and charity, with an even hand for all people -- and so too veracity. Well, the record speaks for itself.

Let's explode a few myths about how well the economy is doing. GDP is up, I agree, mostly due to in-migration, resource commodity prices and government spending.

So how are the people doing? A recent study, a series of papers that emanate from the United States think tank, called "Redefining Progress," suggests that our current methods of measuring the economy have got it all backwards. Negative things like sickness, crime, environmental destruction, family 

[ Page 17125 ]

breakdown and declining volunteerism all get measured as positives in the measurement of GDP. And preserving the environment, time freely given to charity, and the work of the child-rearing spouse don't get measured. We need a new ruler, new criteria, new benchmarks.

It sounds like the Public Accounts Committee report I tabled yesterday. I should, at that time, have encouraged all members to read that report from the select standing committee, and I recommend it to you now. It proposes major changes and improvements to our legislative practices and processes.

But the new indicator, suggested by this think tank, is called the GPI -- the genuine progress indicator. Pollster Allan Gregg says:

"Four out of five Canadians fear it will be harder for young people to find jobs by the end of the century. More than one out of two think the quality of life will grow worse for seniors. Three out of four Canadians worry they'll have to work more and have less time for leisure, which means people will have less time with their children, to volunteer, or to upgrade their educations. Three out of five Canadians believe the crime rate will get worse, and the quality of the environment will be no better."

Disposable income in B.C. is down every year in the 1990s. Put simply, in the basic measure of personal income, we are worse off than we were five years ago. Welfare recipients are up 77 percent. Unemployment is higher now than when the NDP took office, and 18 percent of our young people are out of a job. Many of those who are employed, it's only part-time. We have truly become a welfare state.

Don't let this government fool you. The people of this province need only examine their own state and that of their friends and relatives. Are they any better off, or are times harder? How do you think we rank on the genuine progress indicator?

So has this government managed the economy responsibly? As the Premier said, "We're shovelling money off the back of a truck" -- to all their friends, of course. Where has the money gone? To better programs? No, it has gone into 13,000 more civil servants and pay raises all around. It has gone into a health care accord designed to reduce 2,000 jobs so that the money saved could not go into better health care for patients but to pay each worker more. Only half the promised cuts, and three years later 264 people are still being paid to stay home. Once again, the benefits to the unions are concrete and the benefits to the province never materialize. Do you remember, Mr. Speaker, with what fanfare this program was announced? Remember instead what a mockery it has become.

The Island Highway and the fair-wage policy are two more examples, costing taxpayers over a quarter of a billion dollars extra. The highway was promised before the last election, but the special deal for the unions wasn't. Are you surprised? Rumours abound on the cost overruns on the right-of-way acquisition. Now the details are hidden away in the TFA. No Coquihalla fiasco for this government, if they can avoid it. With the dollars wasted on the highway, and through the health labour relations accord, 82 schools could have been built. Instead, the number of portables has doubled. The NDP is not concerned about education as much as they are about how much their buddies get paid. To fund all this, the member for Vancouver-Kingsway, as Finance minister, has given us the highest marginal income tax rates in North America. But still it's not enough. We have more per capita government revenue than anyone in North America, and still we incur debt.

Five years and one month ago -- the last financial year of the previous administration -- the tax-supported debt stood at $9 billion and change. On April 1, 1996, after five years of NDP administration, the tax-supported debt stood at $19 billion -- a very substantial change, an increase of $10 billion on your watch. No wonder we're all concerned that the ship of state could run aground.

Just to give everybody a reference point as to what $10 billion is, think about 10 billion seconds. A second is a very short period of time, but 10 billion seconds ago Newton was studying gravity and discovering that what goes up must come down -- just like the polls of this government. Ten billion seconds ago, in 1769, the Privy Council in London decided to retain the tea duty in the American colonies, which started the first movements of the American War of Independence. I think, in light of the types of battles that go on in this House, we should remember that 10 billion seconds ago this year, Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington, and Napoleon Bonaparte were both born. That's only a second. Lets move to a minute. Ten billion minutes ago was in the year 1700 B.C., and the world was in the Iron Age.

Interjection.

F. Gingell: That's what we're afraid of, Mr. Speaker -- that we're going backwards instead of forwards in dealing with debt.

To quote the suddenly invisible member for Esquimalt-Metchosin, just a year ago he said: "We've made a conscious decision to incur debt. We make no apologies for our spending." The member for Cariboo North believes that we should incur more debt and leave it for our kids to pay.

This government even turns bad news into good news. The bad news was when they set the rates on the B.C. bonds last October; they set them far too high. How much too high? Well, almost 30 percent higher than Canada savings bond rates that came up just a few days later. The commonsense thing for this minister to do before setting the rate was to talk to federal Finance officials to get a feel for the temperature of the government debt-raising market. But the Finance minister set a rate that she knew would ensure success in raising the desired $350 million to $375 million. How much higher than market was the 6% percent offered by the province? Enough to cause $1.2 billion to come rushing in.

[11:30]

Then they called this screwup good news. Instead of admitting that error, they gloated about how this showed confidence in our province -- junk bond rates, when this is not a junk bond province. The province guaranteed this rate for one year. So instead of coming clean and admitting that they screwed up, they boasted about renewing the rate at 6% percent. They had no choice. They couldn't get out of the lousy deal they had made. But they boasted, as everyone renewed their bonds, that they must have confidence in this province and this government. What nonsense! What a waste of $18 million a year of the taxpayers' money by paying 1 percent over market on $1.2 billion.

An Hon. Member: How many schools can you build with $1.2 billion?

F. Gingell: How many schools could that build? How many hospital beds could that open? We are told that it was all an accident. They didn't mean to raise $1.2 billion. They didn't mean to stock a treasure chest, a nest egg that would allow 

[ Page 17126 ]

them to make all these election promises without going to the debt market. They didn't include this borrowing in last year's budget. They won't include this borrowing in this year's budget. Fortunately, this government won't have the opportunity to prepare next year's budget.

They pretend they are responsible. They say that this province is in good financial health. The reality is otherwise. There's a false front on everything this government does, a thin fa�ade that belies the reality. But smiles and charm and grins can only go so far. The NDP's view was enunciated by the member for Nanaimo; it is that the people of this province aren't very sophisticated. But I believe that they are sophisticated. They are smart. And they will see through this plan. They will see the reality beneath. This NDP government will become a blip on the political radar screen of this province once again.

J. Weisgerber: It's a pleasure to stand and respond to this; I guess it's a budget. It's a bit of a wish list for the campaign. It's nothing more than a blatant bribe that's going to be paid for with $1 billion in new debt. This Premier, having overseen the largest deficits in the history of British Columbia as the Minister of Finance, having brought in the largest tax increases in the history of British Columbia, now comes forward with a budget that he portrays, through his Minister of Finance, as being balanced, but which requires a billion dollars -- a billion dollars, Mr. Speaker -- in new borrowing in order to finance. It's incredible that even on the eve of an election, these guys can't get it straight.

We see this budget presented on April 30 -- 45 days later than any responsible government would table its budget. Responsible, Mr. Speaker. A government that's been in power now for four and a half years, but still this Premier and his Minister of Finance can't get together a budget in time for the traditional practice in this House.

Then we see the budget introduced on a Tuesday morning, and we go immediately into budget debate. There is no opportunity for critics to prepare; simply a requirement to respond almost immediately to the budget.

The Premier says he needed extra time to prepare the budget, and still he displays ongoing contempt for this Legislature by the process that we see here today. He indicates that we are soon going to go to the polls, but he doesn't have the courage to allow for full debate of the budget.

We are operating on special warrants passed in cabinet -- passed without debate, passed without an opportunity for anyone to examine the plans of the government. Other governments that have tried this have paid a price. I suspect this one will as well.

Indeed, the Premier and his government appear to have finally screwed up the courage to go to the voters. I don't think they are going to like what they hear. I don't think they are going to like what I am hearing, because I hear, as I travel around this province, that people aren't fooled. People haven't been misled; people understand what's been happening in British Columbia and in Victoria over the last four and a half years. They understand the threat -- the tremendous threat -- that $10 billion in new debt represents to this province, particularly to health care and education. The one thing that will undermine British Columbians' ability to maintain services is the ongoing growth in debt and debt-servicing charges.

This budget has $167 million in new interest charges included. The government says they have debt under control. But while interest rates fall, the costs of servicing debt go up. Why is that? It's because this government had to borrow a billion dollars in the debt warehousing plan in order to finance this year's budget, an incredible admission of failure by a government that wants to pretend it has balanced the budget, wants to pretend that it has turned the corner in debt growth -- because those are not the facts.

Even though we have had only a very brief opportunity to examine these estimates, it's clear that underlying them is a billion dollars committed to buying votes from taxpayers, a billion dollars hidden in these estimates in order to maintain the mistaken belief, in order to create a camouflage of a balanced budget -- an illusion.

L. Stephens: Smoke and mirrors.

J. Weisgerber: It's smoke and mirrors. We've heard it before; we'll hear it again.

I look at the budget with respect to welfare costs. We continue to have runaway welfare costs: a $900 million a year increase in welfare costs over 1991 -- almost a billion dollars a year more spent on welfare than there was in 1991. What an incredible admission of failure by a government that likes to talk about creating jobs in the strongest economy in Canada. The strongest economy in Canada -- with $900 million in extra welfare payments? The strongest economy in Canada -- when one British Columbian in ten is on welfare? The strongest economy in Canada -- when one child in eight is in a family that depends on welfare?

Mr. Speaker, the facts speak for themselves, and it is the welfare bill, the welfare costs and the welfare-dependent society that has developed under this government that speaks louder than any other action that this government might have taken, or speaks much louder than any of the fiction that's spun through these budgets.

We look at interest costs, because we have $10 billion in new debt. Interest costs are at $1.9 billion a year -- almost $2 billion a year that we spend on welfare and $1.9 billion that we pay for debt-servicing costs. Debt-servicing costs are up by $900 million over what they were in 1991, and welfare costs are up $900 million -- $1.8 billion in new tax expenditures brought on by this government. That is a legacy that any government should hang its head over.

The cost of the public service has exceeded $2 billion a year for the first time in the history of British Columbia. What an incredible statement for a government that says they've brought down the size of the public service and reduced public service costs. The opposite has to be the truth. Public sector wages are at an all-time high.

What we have here is a budget simply crafted to get this government through the next few days. We don't even know whether we'll get through the day or not. We don't even know whether the government will stick around long enough to allow for debate on its budget and throne speech. Will the government have the courage to bring in a bill that would legitimately authorize spending by the government during the election period? Are they willing to come to this House and at least allow us to debate 90 days supply spent? I don't think so; it doesn't look that way.

[ Page 17127 ]

But again, with the contempt that this government and this Premier have shown for this House, for legislative practice and for parliamentary tradition, we don't even know whether or not there's going to be a budget debate this afternoon. We don't know whether there are going to be debates on estimates, or whether there's going to be any opportunity to examine this budget. We think not. Very likely the government wants to get through this just as quickly as they possibly can, because this budget document won't bear the scrutiny that a budget normally receives in this House.

The new ministers in this government don't want to have to come into this House and explain why they allowed the reductions in the ministries that they represent. They accepted the cuts; they had no intention of living with them anyway. This budget is crafted with only one objective, and that's to get these folks -- this government, which has wilfully misled British Columbians for four and a half years -- through 30 more days. That's the only objective.

The other day we saw a bill in this House that allowed the government to impose settlements for 60 days, and now the time frame is shortening. The government doesn't need 60 days anymore. All it has to do is skate through the next 30 days. That's what we're seeing here today -- a budget that's tabled without any substantive thought, without any willingness by the government to stand up and defend the budget.

More importantly, we won't have an opportunity to sit in this House or in the committee room with each of these ministers over there and ask them how they're going to manage the business of government with the allocation that they've accepted in the budget. These ministers don't want to answer these questions. The Minister of Social Services doesn't want to have to explain that the costs of welfare have been moved over to other ministries, that they've been moved into other areas, in order to deflect. . . . Skills Training, B.C. Benefits and the Ministry of Environment have all become a cover for welfare costs. One of the great tragedies and one of the great shames that this government goes to British Columbians with is their inability and their unwillingness to control those costs.

We've seen and we've heard from police agencies around this province that welfare abuse is out of control, and what do we have from this government? No response, other than to craft a projection that says welfare cases are falling. But alas, the numbers continue to grow. We've got more people on social assistance in this province than we ever had, in this prosperous British Columbia, in this haven for investment. I'll tell you, the haven for investment is in the Caribbean; the haven for investment is for the friends of this government -- not only the Laxtons and the Munros but many, many others.

[11:45]

This budget starts from the premise of deceit. The government set out a few months ago to borrow and warehouse money. I challenge anyone who's in the corporate world, anyone who operates a small business or anyone who finances the affairs of their family to think back to the last time they borrowed some money from an institution and put it in the bank because interest rates were low. Think about the last time you and the wife and family sat down and said: "Look we've got to do some long-term financing for the family. Let's go out and borrow $50,000 or $60,000. We'll tuck it away in the bank because interest rates are low, and then if we happen to need it, we'll have it there available." Or the small business person who's thinking that they might want to expand their business. They might want to open a new store. So they say: "Let's go down and see the banker. Interest rates are low. Perhaps we could get a few hundred thousand dollars. We'll tuck it away in this little account. It will draw half the interest that we're paying for the money we're borrowing. We'll have that tucked away in our little warehouse of money so that when anyone needs some, we'll be able to just hand it out."

Of course, the corporate world, the business giants in British Columbia, have been following this example set by our Premier. The business pros -- yes, the people in the corporate world -- have been flocking to the banks to follow the lead of our government. They're out borrowing money, and they're all warehousing it in case they might happen to put in a new sawmill or want to open a new mine. They'll already have the money warehoused. It is such an outrageous concept and designed only to allow these people to craft a response that says that the cost of borrowing is down, the costs of debt are down in British Columbia. Of course they are, because we went through this outrageous charade of warehouse borrowing a few months ago.

Then the budgets this year -- Mr. Speaker, if you've not had an opportunity to look at them. . . . They don't compare this year's budget with last year's budget. They compare this year's budget with last year's revised forecast. Last year's revised forecast happens to include this new bonanza of money, borrowed and warehoused -- the greatest little warehouse in the west, I guess we'll refer to it as. I know the Minister of Finance won't take exception with that, even though other politicians around the province have.

We're heading toward an election. We've got an election budget in front of us. I want to leave the people of British Columbia with the one thought, the one honest figure, in this budget. The figure is that in order to make this budget work, the government of British Columbia has to borrow $1.05 billion more that it owed this time last year in order to finance the operations of this province. So we can skate around, and we can dance around, and we can fudge the figures. The fact of the matter is that we're again $1 billion further in debt than we were last year.

We are going to borrow money in order to finance this budget, the most conclusive figure being the $10 billion in new debt, which can only be repaid by taxpayers, that's been accumulated by this government. They can duck, they can bob, they can weave, but they can't hide for 28 days from the legacy of debt that this NDP government has brought to British Columbia. We saw it in the 1970s when the Liberals started this debt spiral in Ottawa -- and shame on them! In 1991 the debt spiral started here in British Columbia -- and shame on you!

J. Pullinger: I rise to take part in this scintillating debate. But looking at the clock, I'd like to adjourn the debate to the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. J. Pullinger moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved on the following division:

The Speaker: Hon. members, the question is adjournment of debate until the next sitting of the House.

Motion approved on the following division:

[ Page 17128 ]

 

NAYS--23
Dalton	Stephens	Tanner	de Jong
Reid	Weisgerber	Jarvis	Neufeld
Campbell	Hanson	Anderson	Blencoe
Farrell-Collins	Serwa	Symons	Chisholm
Hurd	Wilson	K. Jones	Warnke
Gingell	Tyabji	van	Dongen

Hon. E. Cull: Hon. Speaker, I have the honour to present a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

C. Serwa: Point of order.

The Speaker: On a point of order, the member for Okanagan West.

C. Serwa: The point of order is that the vote was just taken and the House has been adjourned.

The Speaker: No, the House has not been adjourned.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Order, hon. members. Hon. members, the motion was to adjourn the debate until the next sitting of the House after today. We are proceeding with the process involving budget day.

Hon. E. Cull: These three bills implement the budget measures that I introduced earlier today in the budget speech. In moving first reading, I'll just quickly state what they are.

The Budget Measures Implementation Act, 1996, amends 12 provincial statutes to implement budget measures announced during the budget speech. The homeowner grant is amended to increase the assessed value, from $475,000 to $525,000, at which the phase-out of the homeowner grant begins.

The Property Transfer Tax Act is amended to increase the maximum value of residential properties eligible for the exemption under the first-time homebuyers exemption program, and also to prevent tax avoidance on the purchase of property by associated corporations.

The Social Service Tax Act is amended to introduce a new exemption from the provincial sales tax for tangible personal property incorporated into prototypes.

The Municipal Act is amended to exempt certain airport improvements from property taxes in order to remove an impediment to the transfer of airports from the federal government to local control.

The Motor Fuel Tax Act is amended to allow the transfer of an additional 1 cent per litre of the clear fuel tax to the B.C. Transportation Financing Authority.

The College and Institute Act, the Institute of Technology Act, the Open Learning Agency Act and the University Act are amended to allow universities, colleges and other post-secondary institutions to pay grants in lieu of property taxes to their host municipalities.

[12:00]

The Special Accounts Appropriation and Control Act and the Wildlife Act are amended to establish a new habitat conservation fund special account to allow for increased enhancement and habitat protection initiatives.

The Industrial Development Incentive Act is amended to increase the funding cap from $300 million to $400 million.

Bill 3 is the Income Tax Amendment Act, 1996, and it reduces taxes by reducing the personal income tax rate and introducing the family bonus for low- to modest-income families with children. It also provides tax relief for small business by reducing the small business corporate income tax rate and providing for a two-year corporate income tax holiday for eligible businesses.

Bill 4, the Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 1996, amends the Motor Vehicle Act to enable the superintendent of motor vehicles to delegate authority to the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia.

Hon. Speaker, I now move first reading of Bills 2, 3 and 4.

Bills 2, 3 and 4 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.

Hon. J. MacPhail moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The House adjourned at 12:02 p.m.

Copyright © 1996: Queen's Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada