Hansard -- Volume 3, Number 7 -- Tuesday, February 19, 2002

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY



CONTENTS

	Routine Proceedings
		Page

Throne Speech Debate (continued)
	Hon. L. Reid	1181

Tributes
	A. Hamilton	1183

Throne Speech Debate (continued)
	A. Hamilton	1184

Tributes
	P. Sahota	1186

Throne Speech Debate (continued)
	P. Sahota	1186
	K. Stewart	1188
	B. Penner	1190
	V. Roddick	1193
	R. Sultan	1194
	J. Wilson	1196

Hon. L. Reid: Yesterday I was suggesting that we had much work to do in our province on behalf of early childhood development. Certainly, I want to make reference again to the work of Dr. Clyde Hertzman. We indeed have established a relationship with the human early learning partnership, based at the University of British Columbia but a consortium of understanding among all of the universities of our province.

The human early learning partnership links universities, government and community programs concerned with early childhood development, health and education for research purposes. It will help us define and understand the biological, familial and community factors — both positive and negative — that influence young children's ability to learn.

We are fortunate in British Columbia to have some of the finest leaders in the country concerned about our growth and development in the area of early childhood development. The partnerships we're building with universities and with people like Dr. Hertzman are examples of the kinds of approaches we want to take to this very complex area of public policy. Many of you in this room have extensive knowledge, skills and experiences that you're already offering to children and families.

We want decisions to be based on the best available science. We want to constantly monitor and measure the results of those investments to see if we can do better for our children. That is what we mean when we discuss strategic investment. We will take every opportunity to share with you the best available evidence, research and emerging scientific and medical knowledge.

This strategic research-based approach has also been applied to existing programs, such as the early intensive behavioral intervention program for children with autism spectrum disorder. This program currently serves 75 children under the age of six with autism spectrum disorder in eight communities throughout British Columbia. The program has an extensive evaluation component which is being conducted by the University of British Columbia. They will be looking at significant measurable factors: child and family change, community capacity-building and best practice.

As well, families with autism spectrum disorder have said they want the right to choose from a range of early intervention options. This year eligible families of children under the age of six who are diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder will have access to individualized funding for treatment services for their children. Individualized funding is funding provided to eligible families or individuals for the purchase of early intensive intervention services. The amount of funding each individual family will receive will vary based on the assessed needs of the individual child.

Recently, we have posted a request for proposal on the B.C. Bid website. We are seeking qualified providers to implement the individualized funding option. This would include the management, administrative, operation and accountability skills and experience necessary to implement this option. This RFP, request for proposal, will close on March 11 of this year.

The area of research into autism spectrum disorder is complex and growing rapidly. Every year there appears to be new levels of knowledge, new approaches to test. That is why, as we implement this early intervention program, we must be prepared to adjust to the new findings in order to get the best outcomes for children with autism spectrum disorder. We believe this evidence-based approach is the best way to address the needs of children with autism and their families.

This brings me to my third priority, which is to examine opportunities for parental education initiatives in five specific areas. We're going to spend a great deal of time and investment, I believe, in the area of fetal alcohol syndrome. Certainly, the awareness aspects are important. We have recently joined the Prairie–Northern Pacific FAS Partnership. We have Building Blocks programs. We have infant development programs. We now have an aboriginal infant development program adviser on the horizon. As a society and in our communities, we can dramatically improve children's development by emphasizing the importance of maternal health in shaping the environment for fetal growth and development.

Fetal alcohol syndrome is the leading known cause of intellectual disability in children, and the damage is permanent. Educating parents on healthy pregnancy is a priority for this government because healthy parents are more likely to have healthy infants. Social supports for pregnant mothers, as well as positive prenatal nutrition and other personal health practices, can help reduce low birth weight and other problems associated with birth.

We know that FAS is preventable. Early diagnosis and intervention can make a difference in reducing the problems associated with this syndrome. Some governments and communities have been providing FAS intervention for many years. The work is hard, but it is something we can absolutely move forward on.

British Columbia recently joined the provincial-territorial Prairie–Northern Pacific FAS Partnership. I represented British Columbia at our first meeting on November 22 in Edmonton. As part of this western and

northern team, we will work with our partners towards increasing public awareness in the prevention of FAS.

A large proportion of the children in the care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development are there because of FAE or FAS involvement in their family. The financial costs to taxpayers of this totally preventable syndrome are huge — schooling, medical care, too often the justice system. The human costs to these children are unacceptable.

There are no easy solutions to ending FAS and FAE impacts on our society, but there are answers — tough work that needs to be done by individuals in community. That is certainly what we mean when we talk about capacity-building: how we can encourage communities to care for their own children, to put their health interests first. Again, this research has shown that the greatest benefits result from government and communities working together to design and deliver programs tailored to the needs of each community. I'm proud to have incredibly knowledgable people, both at the resource society and the FAS/E Support Network of B.C., continuing to offer advice to me. This is one area where we must achieve success.

Building Blocks programs in our province were established in 1997 to help parents cope with the demands of childrearing through education and support. Building Blocks programs currently serve 27 communities with resources, education and supports for families who need assistance to provide a safe, nurturing environment for their children. Elements of this program include lay–home visiting, FAS prevention, advanced infant-toddler stimulation and mentoring of new or expectant families by more experienced parents.

There are many examples of success stories which are shared by these children, their families and their caregivers. Doctors have reported fewer incidents of children going into the emergency room. Young parents with children in care have gained sufficient skills so their children are able to come back to the family home. Parents have come together to form social networks.

Another great example is the Healthier Babies–Brighter Futures program in Burns Lake. The major employer for this community sits on the steering committee for this community outreach program. As a result, FAS prevention awareness sessions are provided for all employees on company time. In 1999 the Burns Lake program reported that 94 percent of the clients who were using alcohol or drugs quit or cut down during pregnancy, and the three pubs in Burns Lake now serve non-alcoholic beverages free of charge to pregnant women. The people of Burns Lake are proud of their successes, and frankly, I agree they should be. In fact, we hope to host an FAS symposium in Burns Lake in concert with the Prairie–Northern Pacific FAS Partnership in September of 2003.

The infant development program provides home-based services to infants who are at risk of being developmentally delayed. Services are targeted at children's first three years, which are particularly critical to a child's development. Overall development and health are enhanced by beginning early to identify a child's specific needs. Staff and caregivers work together to optimize the child's development. Mentoring of staff, neighbours and experienced parents is particularly important when parents have a child with significant developmental delays. We are enhancing infant development services across our province to ensure the continuation and growth of this vitally important connection for our families. The infant development programs in British Columbia are highly regarded across the country.

I am pleased to announce that we will be enhancing these services to aboriginal communities by establishing a position for an aboriginal infant development program adviser. This position will give added support to aboriginal communities for optimizing the healthy growth and development of their children and families. We are working in close connection and consultation with the aboriginal communities to ensure that the design and implementation of this new infant development support position meets the needs of aboriginal families across British Columbia and ensures, as in the urban aboriginal ECD funding, that services are community and culturally relevant. The RFP is on the B.C. Bid website today, and if you have interested individuals in your communities, my hon. colleagues, I would encourage you to encourage them to apply.

I said earlier today that the Premier's assignment to ministers of state was to address the long term, and certainly, that is about a future plan for early childhood development. There are two issues affecting our long-term commitment to early childhood development. Firstly, the federal government has established the funding for the national children's agenda for five years up to the year 2005. After that, provinces should have programs and planning firmly in place.

Secondly, some of you may recall the reports by former child, youth and family advocate Joyce Preston. In all of her reports Ms. Preston called for "the development of a fund dedicated to early childhood development whose sole function will be to allow British Columbians to pay exclusive attention to the early years in children's lives." Most importantly, administration of the fund will be independent of government. We have taken a substantive and most important step by establishing the Early Childhood Development Legacy Fund through B.C.'s second-largest charitable foundation, the Vancouver Foundation.

The Vancouver Foundation has over $600 million under endowment, and since 1946 it has been distributing the earnings of its financial base to communities throughout British Columbia. The government will invest $1 million per year for the next five years. This government is challenging businesses, foundations, individuals, non-profits, professional groups and corporations in the private sector to build that fund to $25 million by 2005. Interest from this fund will go to enhance projects in early childhood development in perpetuity, whether it be the creation of a toy-lending library or a durable parenting program.

We will also have the opportunity for named endowments under the fund, and as you know, I am working very hard on these opportunities with many of my colleagues in this chamber. We hope to honour the work of Carol Legge, our province's first FAS coordinator — the only position of its kind in Canada — with such a named endowment. Before becoming provincial FAS prevention coordinator at Children's and Women's Health Centre in Vancouver, Carol Legge held a variety of positions, including program director and program manager at alcohol and drug education services. It was at this place where she created the FAS provincial consultation group.

Mother of two children, Brian and Rebecca, and partner to Ken, Carol Legge was a tireless, compassionate pioneer in prevention and health promotion, especially when it came to FAS and FAE. Unfortunately, she was taken by cancer in December 2001. The establishment of this legacy fund is one answer to Joyce Preston's call. This fund will assist B.C. communities in building their own capacity to serve young children and provide direct funding for projects.

Creation of this community incentive fund is a huge undertaking. However, I believe it will facilitate real partnerships and thus real change for young children in British Columbia. It will give communities access to other funding sources independent of government. I believe it is a duty a society has today to provide the means for the next generation to fully enjoy and contribute to everything this province has to offer.

This is the accountability of a responsible, visionary society. We have the means now to make it a reality. Each one of us can write a line on those little résumés. As those little folks turn five — those born in the year 2000 will turn five when this term of office comes to an end — we want to ensure that the investments we have taken have in fact enhanced their skill set, so they can indeed be successful in their kindergarten year in our province.

In terms of the fund, we've already had interest expressed by several heads of major private sector concerns, and we all believe this legacy fund will offer communities more flexible choices. The Vancouver Foundation has experience assessing and evaluating these kinds of grass-roots applications and ideas. With its experience and credibility, the Vancouver Foundation is uniquely positioned to attract financial support to the legacy fund.

Best of all, it is a true legacy, a legacy we can all share with future generations. I can tell you that my federal counterpart, the Hon. Jane Stewart, would suggest to you that we are the only province today making a plan for post-2005, when our national children's agenda funding comes to an end. We are doing some very fine things in our province.

I thank you most sincerely for your interest in this area, and I can tell you we're going to continue with the series of educational documents we've put forward. We have a Baby's Best Chance series. New parents in the chamber today may have indeed utilized that document. I certainly did when my little girl was born. It is a document we're going to put into increased publication, increased distribution across our province. We're actually going to offer second books in the series. We're going to talk about toddlers and their growth and development and young children as they enter the school system, so we have toddlers' first steps.

We certainly have opportunities to continue to provide real information to the hands of parents across our province so they can go forward and make the best possible choices on behalf of their children. That is something we believe in fundamentally. This is about increasing capacity and strengthening families, and if you do that, you have some ability to strengthen community and indeed strengthen the province as we go forward.

In closing, collaboration, consultation and research will help us provide programs and services that will create healthier and more resilient communities and, frankly, a more resilient society. Those are issues we believe to be vitally important.

We believe the steps we are taking today will, by 2005, lead to more communities planning and delivering ECD programs and services, enhanced community and family capacity, integrated and culturally relevant programs, fewer aboriginal children in care, healthier outcomes for children, families more able to effectively parent, a reduction in fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effect and more children ready to learn at school entry.

Our progress will be reported on the ECD website, which will be made available on the Ministry of Children and Family Development home page. Healthier development, safe and nurturing homes, opportunity and promise for the future — these are things we wish for all children. In partnership with organizations, communities and families, I know we can find and develop innovative ways to deliver effective early childhood development programs.

A. Hamilton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to rise in response to the Speech from the Throne. Before I begin my remarks, I ask the House to join me in a very special tribute.

On Sunday, I had the great privilege and honour of representing the B.C. government at the send-off of HMCS Ottawa for its deployment as part of the United States battle carrier group. All of us at the ceremony at Esquimalt were touched and immensely proud of the Canadian men and women on board for their deep commitment to our nation and its security in what seems, since September 11, to be an increasingly dangerous world.

I ask all members of this House to join me in thanking the men and women of HMCS Ottawa for their val-

our and devotion to duty and wishing them Godspeed, fair winds and a safe return.

A. Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, I want to offer my sincere congratulations to the Lieutenant-Governor on her appointment as the Queen's representative of our great province. I know all hon. members will join me in applauding her comprehensive and accurate portrayal of the substantial challenges we face and the action our government is taking to meet those challenges.

Like many of my colleagues in this House I am a relative newcomer to the world of politics, and like many of my colleagues I sought elected office for the first time last May out of my frustration and anger at the dismal state of affairs after a decade of the NDP. The frustration and anger were totally justified. The NDP legacy included a provincial debt that doubled in size and has grown more in the last ten years than it did over the previous hundred years. It included a provincial economy that went from being top in Canada to have-not status. The NDP's borrow-and-spend policy had reached a point where it was completely unsustainable, far outstripping the province's rate of economic growth. But, for our government to be successful over the long term in revitalizing our economy, restoring sound fiscal management and putting patients, students and other British Columbians first, we must follow the course set out in the Speech from the Throne. We must support the initiatives that will be forthcoming in this session's budget.

This is especially true given the recent downturn in the global economy and the fallout from September 11, events that have further increased the economic challenges faced by British Columbians. It is especially true when you consider that the provincial health care budget, currently at $9.6 billion and climbing, consumes an alarmingly increasing share of government revenue but is only offset by 14 cents on the dollar by transfer payments from the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, every cloud has a silver lining, and the silver lining in the cloud cast by these difficult times in British Columbia is obvious. Our adversity has given us the opportunity to start a brand-new day. We have the opportunity to move away from the spend-and-borrow mindset of the past and move forward towards prosperity and the well-being of all British Columbians.

We have the chance to make fiscal responsibility, prudent management and the developments of new opportunities the economic cornerstones of our way of life in the province. We have the chance to embark on a course that will lead us to lasting and beneficial change, and I believe that British Columbians are ready and willing to take part in this endeavour.

There will always be naysayers, to be sure. There will always be those not willing to change their view that government is there to serve their every need and to meet their every expectation, but I am convinced that these people are in the minority. Most British Columbians want a prosperous and secure future. They accept that it's going to take hard work and tough choices on the part of individuals and government to get there. They know it will take nothing less to end the appalling and frightening situation in which we currently find ourselves.

In recent days some media have taken to describing the initiatives put forward in the throne speech as revolutionary. I prefer to characterize it somewhat differently, not as revolutionary change but as a response we were obliged to make as responsible parliamentarians to an unacceptable and unsustainable status quo.

Every member of this chamber has to agree that our individual constituencies comprise the heart of British Columbia political life. From my constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin through every constituency on Vancouver Island, from Vancouver-Burrard to Shuswap, from Penticton–Okanagan Valley to Nelson-Creston, from Kamloops to Peace River North, British Columbians are saying the same thing. They are saying: "It is time to take B.C. from No. 10 in Canada back to No. 1." They are saying: "It is time to get rid of the taxes and red tape that have made B.C. the enemy of investment and opportunity." Most important of all, B.C. voters want to rekindle their pride and community spirit.

The priorities set out in the throne speech and initiatives we'll be hearing about in the budget that will be presented later today are proof positive that we are listening. For example, people from one corner of this province to the other say that they want British Columbia to rise from the NDP ashes and once again assume the role of economic leadership in Canada and North America.

We have responded by pledging to develop public-private partnerships to support greatly increased private sector investment in transportation, highways, information technology, land and resource development, health services and education infrastructure. We have responded by saying that we will strengthen the forest industry by streamlining the Forest Practices Code and moving towards market-based stumpage.

Other steps we will take to spark economic renewal include the introduction of measures to increase investment in jobs in the energy and mining industries; changes to the Company Act to cut red tape; and changes to the Employment Standards Act, the Workers Compensation Act and the Labour Relations Code to ensure more flexibility and fairness for workers and employers.

Perhaps the worst legacy of the previous NDP government is the crippling debt from ten years of incompetence, waste and simply spending more than we had in the bank. The bill for that decade stands at $37 billion, and the people of this province have made it clear that they want their new government to break the vicious cycle of borrow and spend and to set a course that is fiscally prudent and fiscally responsible.

On this issue, as the Lieutenant-Governor so eloquently put it, the government will not break its trust

with the people. We are keeping that trust by committing to balancing the budget by 2004-05. We are keeping that trust by an average reduction of 25 percent over the next three years in the budgets of all ministries except Health and Education. And we are keeping that trust by eliminating unnecessary expenditures and seeking cost-saving innovations in delivering government services.

The people of this province have also made it clear they want health care and education that puts patients and students first. Here, too, this government will not break that public trust. With respect to health care, funding cannot keep up with the cost of maintaining service levels, let alone improving patient care. Health care expenditures in B.C. have tripled in the last 15 years. As I mentioned earlier, the health care budget now stands at nearly $10 billion — more than all the revenues from personal income tax, health care premiums, federal transfer payments and the tobacco tax combined.

We have already restructured regional health governance to give local health authorities the tools to find savings and efficiencies. During this session, measures will be introduced to reduce costs from duplication, administrative overlaps and unnecessary regulations. Reducing health services in response to a chronic funding shortfall is not an option. We believe an increase in MSP premiums is the only recourse to fund the required increase in the health budget. Although this will be the case for most British Columbians, premiums for low-income earners will actually decrease.

Right alongside health care, education is also a major concern of British Columbians. People recognize that education holds the key to the future for our children and grandchildren. Since being elected, the B.C. government has taken important steps to put our students first. We have given locally elected school boards new management tools to deal with cost pressures and to utilize schools, classrooms and resources for maximum student benefit. There are new legislated class-size limits, and we will bring in a new funding formula to enable school districts to plan on the basis of multi-year funding allocations.

Mr. Speaker, I am truly proud to serve as the MLA for the people of Esquimalt-Metchosin, where I have spent the better part of my life. With that in mind, I would like to spend a few moments to bring the members of this House up to date on some important issues my constituents and I have been working on together.

As my southern Vancouver Island colleagues may be aware, the E&N railway service is scheduled for cancellation by mid-March. This throws the future of a key transportation system very much into question and perhaps into jeopardy. I am proud to be part of a major initiative to develop a strategy to save this important transportation infrastructure for use in meeting potential future demands from tourism, industry or passenger traffic. This initiative is spearheaded by the Association of Vancouver Island Municipalities, which is composed of the mayors of all the Island's municipalities, and the Vancouver Island Railway Society. The aim is to bring together all the key players in a round-table process to determine the best possible use for this critical rail right-of-way.

The first meeting of key stakeholders is planned for later this month in Nanaimo, and it will include a very impressive list of participants, including the Association of Vancouver Island Municipalities, the Vancouver Island Railway Society, the federal government Department of Western Economic Diversification, Transport Canada, Via Rail, native groups and a number of companies that currently use E&N for freight services. One option that may be considered during the round-table process is the creation of a Vancouver Island rail authority to oversee the future operation of the system. I am fully supportive of the E&N initiative. I believe there is a real opportunity here to lay the groundwork for the future development of our communities and our regional economy.

Planning for future economic growth and job creation is an important issue in my riding. To meet this challenge head-on, the West Shore Chamber of Commerce and representatives of Colwood, Langford, View Royal and the Highlands have established a special creating employment opportunities committee. This committee will develop a strategic plan. That plan will review the potential for growth and employment in the business, recreation, education, municipal services and law enforcement sectors. I serve on this committee and look forward to the employment opportunities it will supply to my constituents.

Another important local initiative is the creation of a new 41-acre park from Crown land at the foot of Triangle Mountain. Negotiations are underway with the municipality of Colwood, and I am hopeful we will gain a new greenspace in Esquimalt-Metchosin.

I'm also proud to be part the committee that has adopted HMCS Algonquin for the Western Communities. This relationship will recognize the importance of naval personnel in our community.

A lot has been said in this House over the past week about the need to make tough choices and tough decisions. A lot has been said about the immense challenges of correcting the sins of the previous government. It is true that we have tough choices to make. It is true that there are tough decisions ahead. There is no question that the previous government has left us ten years behind the rest of Canada. It is in our constituencies that we witness firsthand the everyday lives and concerns of those who elected us to serve. I believe our success as MLAs depends on how effectively we respond to these concerns.

As the throne speech says, British Columbia is on the move. It is charting new ground and reaching out to create a better future. The best days lie ahead.

H. Bloy: It is with great pleasure today that I would like to introduce in the gallery Harvey Grigg, who has been for many years a volunteer for all British Columbians. He was my mentor when I first started the process to win the election. I'd like the House to make him welcome.

P. Sahota: It is an honour and a privilege to rise in the chamber to offer my Address in Reply to the throne speech.

Before I begin my address and remarks, I would like to take this opportunity to wish my predecessor, Fred Randall, who was a longtime member of this House, lots of strength as he goes through a very difficult time with his family. As many members in the chamber know, Mr. Randall has been very ill, and we pray for him.

Shortly after I was elected, Mr. Randall phoned me and wanted to wish me a lot of success in my new job. We met after that, and he wanted basically to give me the survival tips on how to survive in Victoria. These are the sorts of things we don't get taught in campaign school or don't get told when we take on this type of job. I would like to thank Mr. Randall for his assistance and the advice that he offered me. I would like to wish Fred and his family lots of strength as they go through this very difficult time.

P. Sahota: Last Tuesday the Lieutenant-Governor delivered an eloquent throne speech, and in it is a mandate for the vision of our government. It lays out our government's path and direction. It outlines our government's priorities. It is clear that our government is determined and focused on revitalizing the British Columbia economy and on restoring sound fiscal management. By doing so, we will have the funds we need to protect the most important services like health care and education.

As the two opposition members continue to point out, there are those who are opposed to the government's agenda. They continue to tell us that perhaps we're not on the right track. I know and I believe that we're on the right track. I also know that we don't have a choice in this. We were elected with a mandate to change the way government is delivered in British Columbia and to reinvigorate an economy that had been allowed to stagnate for more than a decade. The challenge has been immense, but our government has not shied away from making the tough decisions geared to creating new opportunities for British Columbians, even if those decisions do not meet with everyone's approval.

What have we been doing for the last eight months or so? We implemented the 90-day agenda. We made promises to British Columbia, and we kept those promises, which was one of the first steps toward delivering a different kind of government. One of the most interesting parts of the past eight months has been the collaborative approach implemented by Premier Campbell. During the election, the Premier spoke of creating new and meaningful roles for MLAs, and he has done that.

I am honoured to sit as a member of the Select Standing Committee on Health, which did not sit for nearly a decade under the previous government. The committee's report, Patients First: Renewal and Reform of British Columbia's Health Care System, was tabled in the House yesterday by the member for Delta South.

You will note in this report that there are a number of committee members from various parts of the government. There is also the member for Vancouver-Hastings, who was appointed to the Health Committee. But you will also note that she did not attend a single meeting in the course of our travels across the province. So it's pretty hard to take when the member for Vancouver-Hastings, the opposition leader, gets up in the House and demands answers from the government on health care. She was on TV last night showing off this report. What I find indefensible is that for 14 days the Health Committee travelled across this province to Kamloops, to Quesnel — we were in Surrey for three days — and did she bother to show up once? Did she bother to show up to listen to the health care workers, to the patients? No, she did not bother to show up. The committee's report is a product of extensive consultation, but the member for Vancouver-Hastings did not show up.

If she had bothered to show up, she would have been able to hear from British Columbians about the kind of health care system they want. Our committee listened, and the message was heard. The government is committed to creating a system that has the flexibility to meet the needs of patients. We're not going to build up a bureaucracy in Victoria to make decisions on your health care, but we are going to implement a system where decisions on local care are made at the local level. The government has done that with our new, restructured regional health governance model.

As the government, we know we've had to make difficult decisions to create a viable health care system for today's and tomorrow's generations. We undertook this task in the most thoughtful and open way possible. Side deals made away from the bargaining table, in some cases weeks before the 2001 election, were going to cost B.C. taxpayers millions of dollars. No one likes to open up contracts. However, we were elected to ensure that the best interests of the public were put first. We had a choice to make. We could either maintain the status quo, or we could take action to ensure that patients come first. I think the choice was clear.

Mr. Speaker, we have made some tough decisions over the past eight months not just in health care but

across government. Though difficult, the decision to reduce and discontinue services was not taken lightly by the members of this House and the members of this government. It was a result of a careful reassessment of the size and scope of government, an approach based on answers to questions such as: what services should government provide, and what services can government afford to provide? It's a responsible and reasonable approach, no different from what each and every family does on a daily basis to live within our means.

Those made for tough choices, but we believe the well-worn path of the past ten years was the wrong one to follow. We fully realize the magnitude of the problems we face. Our government is committed to putting patients and students first, to ensuring that the core services of government are protected.

The Premier has my full support, and I believe British Columbia deserves a better future. We believe in British Columbia. We will stand up for a new way of governing and a new future for our province. The hard work has just begun, and good things are happening in spite of what the opposition would lead you to believe.

I'm going to talk about some of my constituents and the good things that are happening. Abdul Tejpar and his family, for the past five years, have invested close to $30 million in the province of Alberta because they couldn't afford to do business in British Columbia. But they're ready to do business in B.C. again. Their new hotel is opening up this week, and the company is already looking at sites to build more so they can bring their business back to British Columbia. In a letter to myself and the Premier, Mr. Tejpar notes: "We have decided to build our latest hotel in British Columbia due to the favourable investment business climate created by you and the Liberal government. Once again, we applaud your policies to create a supportive business and taxation climate to do business in British Columbia."

I also know that the real estate market is on the upswing in Burnaby. If you talk to the local realtors like Ron Basra, they will tell you that housing sales are on the increase. People like Ron Basra are not only looking for opportunities in Burnaby or in British Columbia, they're also looking overseas. He's been to China to see if there's a market for stucco.

I have met with constituents who are looking to places like China and India to export our lumber. As the softwood lumber dispute drags on, despite the hard work and the best efforts of the Minister of Forests, we as the government are doing the right thing as we look to diversify not only our economy but our reliance on the U.S. industry. The Premier has travelled to Hong Kong, Shanghai and Tokyo. The government signed agreements in Shanghai to improve access to China's growing market for wood-framed housing.

You know, Mr. Speaker, good things are happening, and there are people who are once again looking for these opportunities. People are feeling a sense of hope. As the throne speech pointed out, there are signs the economy is on the mend. I receive many phone calls, e-mails and letters from my constituents who are not only looking for new opportunities, but they're also very happy with the types of policies that our government has carried out. I'd like to share some of those letters that I've received from my constituents.

Mr. Kang: "Congratulations as your government takes a number of steps to improve the health care delivery."

Last, a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Nylander from Burnaby: "It's time that we stopped relying on the government to provide for all of what we perceive as our needs and realize that like ourselves, the people who manage our province must be financially responsible as well. Only in this way will the real needs of the people of B.C. be taken care of."

You know, Mr. Speaker, there are some good things that are happening, as you can tell from some of these letters and some of the examples that I've offered, but I also know that not everyone will agree with us. There will be those who will work against our vision, but that is democracy. I understand those who are afraid and unhappy. I understand there are those who are advo-

cating for their members, and so they should be. But my job as MLA, and our job as government, is to advocate for everyone, not just a special interest group. Furthermore, I'm here to represent my constituency of Burnaby-Edmonds, and I want to do that in a fair and just manner.

I also know that as a government, if we don't make the tough decisions, we will be worse off. The vision of our mandate as a government has only just begun. I envision this province in four years' time as one with a new set of priorities, where fiscal responsibility, transparency and accountability are the cornerstones of this government; where the people of British Columbia embrace the possibility of growth and prosperity; where free choice and less involvement from government are valued rather than feared.

This is what the throne speech lays out. We all have to work together to make sure we accomplish these goals. We all have a stake in the changes that are coming. Change is not always easy because it impacts real lives. It will impact every corner of this province. It is going to have a positive impact on the growth of business. It is going to have a positive impact on how communities interact and get involved. It is going to motivate parents to take a more active role in their children's lives. It is about making all of us more accountable and responsible, and that is a crucial shift that is taking place in government and in British Columbia today.

I believe that we must continue to work together as we go through these very tough times. We must accomplish what we set out to do, so we can make this province a bountiful place to live in, to work in and to grow old in. Thank you.

K. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, it's my pleasure today to address the House with my response to the throne speech. Before getting into the specific impact of the throne speech, I would first like to introduce myself and the constituency that I represent to the House.

When I was born in 1955, my family was living in a small home on River Road, situated halfway between the towns of Hammond and Haney. Geographically, this is about as close as you can get to the centre of the riding that I now represent. Today the Maple Ridge Hospital sits about one kilometre from this site. It's now called the Ridge Meadows Hospital.

In 1955 my mother had to journey on many gravel roads to the Royal Columbian Hospital in New Westminster for my birth. What necessitated the trip was that the Maple Ridge Hospital, as it was first named, was not opened until 1956. The local population was then about 1/10 of its current size. Since one is only entitled to one birth, I missed by a matter of months my chance to be born in the local Maple Ridge Hospital. This, however, did not stop my wife from having all four of our children born in that hospital.

Today it is no longer acceptable for the people and the mothers of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows to trek to New Westminster to have their children. I make this comment not only as an announcement of my birth but also as a lead comment in expressing to the Minister of Health and the Minister of Finance the importance of this hospital to my constituents.

Today this hospital provides service not only to 55,000 constituents in my riding but to 25,000 members of the adjoining Maple Ridge–Mission riding. The future of medical and health services in my riding is of paramount concern to my constituents. This is also of paramount concern to my government. Balancing the delivery of health care services and being fiscally responsible are challenges that I will be carrying forward in the following months and years.

My riding of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows is bound geographically by water on three sides and mountains to the north. No river of the province is as important as the Fraser River, the river that makes up our southern boundary. My community and the province are closely interwoven by the economy and history of the Fraser River. Our boundary to the west is another important watercourse: the Pitt River. This river meanders up to — of all names — Pitt Lake, one of only two tidal lakes in the world.

While canoeing upriver, as I've done many times, these tides can be used to carry one upstream well into the lake. I'm sure these tides were used thousands of times over a period of hundreds of years by the local Katzie people. These people fished the massive sturgeon that rested in the sloughs along the Pitt River and picked the plentiful wild berries that grew in the tidal flats. At this northwest corner of my riding is the Pitt Polder waterfowl preserve, still plentiful with ducks and geese. But these populations are nowhere near the numbers that rested in these tidal flats in the early part of the last century, when outgoing flocks would darken the skies. A number of recent and ongoing land acquisitions are preserving more local lands for fish and fowl habitat.

As we move east on our northern boundary, we come to the peaks of Golden Ears Park, most of which I foolishly soloed on in my youth. These peaks provide much enjoyment and recreation for thousands of outdoor enthusiasts, a multitude of users which grows each year. Traditionally, the eastern boundary had been Stave River and Silvermere Lake, another geographically defined water boundary. The eastern boundary of my riding has recently moved westward due to the rapid population expansion of the area. A political division of a series of roads and cross streets now replaces the past water boundary to the east.

Many of my colleagues have stated that they live in the most beautiful part of British Columbia. We all know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I can assure you that to look north across the rivers in the morning light to the snow-capped peaks of my riding is something to behold.

South across the river of my riding is historic Fort Langley, to which many of my community's first settlers came. Both sets of my grandparents came to Maple Ridge in the early part of the last century. At the time, lumber from the local forests and salmon from the mighty Fraser were king. Agriculture also played

Why did I spend so much time on the past before I got on with the details of today's throne speech? I believe that before we move ahead, we should be well aware of what has happened in the past. To know where you've come from will help direct you in the future.

As we move to the future, it is not only important where you've been in the past but where we are today. What is the reality of our current status? Financially, we know the past rate of government expenditures was unsustainable. As a result, we've made a number of significant and drastic changes. I believe, and I find my beliefs well supported in the throne speech, that our fiscal responsibilities are equally matched by a desire to more efficiently deliver core services — those services the people of British Columbia find so important. Not only are we going to reduce the cost of delivery of services but in many cases actually improve the services delivered, with less cost per unit of service.

I know many of you have followed with interest the impact and responses to our legislative and financial actions in Victoria. The focus of my campaign last year was on the fact that the NDP operated in a fiscally unsustainable manner. Changes would have to be made.

Since being in Victoria, the challenge of financial stability has become very evident. The previous government committed to future funding increases with no ability to pay. This problem is much worse than I had expected. As a result, I have participated in making a number of unpleasant decisions. As difficult as some of the solutions have been, I do support these actions. I do not see any easy way out of the difficult situation we now find ourselves in. Turning the province around will require tough, sometimes unpopular decisions.

A number of people have asked me: "Why are you acting so quickly?" I counter this question with: "If not now, when?"

We are acting quickly, and the changes we are making are dramatic. The current state of our province makes these changes absolutely critical. Along the way we will make mistakes, but I am hopeful that when presented with strong evidence, we will be able to make corrections. Revisiting seniors' bus passes is one example of doing so.

The need for expediency still exists, as the financial time bomb is ticking. The quicker we are able to reduce expenditures, the more opportunity we will have to get B.C. back on track. The previous government left us with a number of financial landmines previously unknown to us, and we are working hard to make the necessary changes. The time has come for your government to live within its means.

The Speech from the Throne, our legislative agenda, will allow us to make the necessary changes to get government back to the point where we will become fiscally responsible to those who are paying for these services: you the taxpayer. As a government sensitive to the real needs of British Columbia, we will be asking over the coming months and years for your input on a number of issues. Our government's priorities are to revitalize British Columbia's economy, to restore sound fiscal management and to put patients, students and people first.

Our government's central mission is to revitalize the economy as quickly as possible. Steps will be taken to make the economy more competitive, diversified and attractive to investors. As mentioned earlier, the investors are coming back. This will provide a sustainable framework to maximize growth and job creation to establish British Columbia once again as an economic leader in North America.

Changes to the Employment Standards Act, the Workers Compensation Act and the Labour Relations Code will be initiated in this next year to provide greater flexibility, fairness and efficiency for those employers and employees alike. Of all the agencies that I get complaints on from my constituents, the most complex files all belong to WCB. This tops the list. Changes to this act must be made for the workers to get the protection and the justice they so deserve.

Private-public partnerships will be explored to spur more private sector investment in transportation highways. This is a trend that I've spoken on a number of times and have firsthand seen what benefits can be gained when business and governments work together for mutual goals.

Efforts will be intensified and focused to win the bid for the 2010 Olympics. Those of you who remember Expo 86 and recall the positive effects that had on British Columbia should be able to visualize the effects of such an important event as the international Olympic Games.

In the forestry industry a shift will be made towards market-based stumpage, and the complex challenge of forest policy reform will be tackled. It's crucial to make these changes to again allow forests to be the number one motivator for financial gain in British Columbia. We have seen, over the years, this number one industry be slowly ground down. It's time now to make the fundamental changes to make forestry again number one in British Columbia.

A referendum will be conducted later this spring by a mail-in ballot that will put forward the question to guide the government in negotiating treaties, foster greater understanding of the treaty process and build public support for the critical need for treaties. I have met with our local Katzie band, who initially are not overly pleased with the referendum and have indicated that they will pass on their concerns, through me, to this House. I would like to add how inclusive they have been with local governments, and I've enjoyed my meetings with their Chief, Peter James. Although we disagree sometimes, we still have respect for each other. I'm sure we can move forward with that.

Restoring sound fiscal management to British Columbians. They elected a new government to make the decisions necessary to live within the taxpayers' ability to pay. The government will not break this trust with the people. The government is committed to balancing

its budget by the third full budget, 2004-05. We will spell out the commitment of how that's to be done later today.

Deficit financing is not new. It started in the late sixties with the federal government and in the mid-seventies for British Columbia with the first NDP government. Off and on, most provinces in Canada have gone to deficit financing. Most provinces, though, woke up in the late nineties. B.C. continued on that deficit financing trend, which got us in the mess we are in today.

This can't be stopped in one year, but I'm sure that with the fiscal plan that's going to be presented today, we will be able to move on to that fiscal responsibility and, in 2004-05, finally balance the budget for British Columbia again. During this process, every effort has been made to protect those most vulnerable in this society, putting patients, students and people first.

There's no greater or more pressing challenge than the need to save and renew public health care funding. This funding cannot keep up to the cost pressures, however, that are needed to maintain service levels, let alone improve patient care. This will require major structural reforms that will challenge us to all accept some short-term sacrifices for long-term improvement in patient care.

Changes to the School Act will be aimed at improving student achievement through better system accountability and increased flexibility and choice and involvement for parents. I couldn't help but note the other day where we've gone with our schools, when I saw a group of parents who were lunchtime volunteers being forced to join the Teamsters union to supervise their children at lunch. That tells me that there's drastic reform needed in our educational system.

Legislation will be introduced to create more choice for post-secondary students to ensure that the system serves them better. This legislation will build on the new tools recently given to post-secondary institutions to fully and properly utilize this resource.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to relate an event of this morning. Like many of my colleagues, getting into any type of lifestyle routine in Victoria is a bit of a challenge. One of the activities I have chosen to do is jog the three kilometres to work each morning. This morning I woke up a bit tired. It was raining out. I looked at my truck in the driveway. It would have been so easy to drive, so easy to get off the routine that I've set for myself, so easy to fall back into the old ways. Instead, I put on my running shoes and jogged off in the drizzle. On the way…

…I was rewarded, as were many out at 7:30 this morning, with the most blazing, vivid rainbow possible right over the House here as I came in. I take this as a bit of an omen for today's budget speech. To the Minister of Finance: though it may seem tough at times, stick with it, seize the day, for if you continue with your program, as tough as it may seem, you and all British Columbians will be rewarded, as there are rainbows ahead.

B. Penner: I left my sweaty T-shirt at home, and you'll all be happy to hear that.

I rise to respond to the throne speech. It's a privilege for me to do so, and I thank you for that opportunity.

There's a Chinese proverb, which has sometimes been called a curse, that says: "May you live in interesting times." Indeed, it seems like we are. Ever since this government was elected back on May 16, 2001, things have been very interesting and not always for the good.

We have the softwood lumber dispute, which has gone from bad to worse. I fear, despite the best efforts of our Minister of Forests, the Premier and the many concerned people in the industry in British Columbia, we are not going to get easy resolution to that matter anytime soon. It appears to me that we'll have to pursue the litigation angle rather than rely on negotiations. It's become all too clear to me and other interested observers that in the U.S. system, there is no inherent incentive for industry to compromise. Their legislation is entirely different than ours, so their complaint process is industry-driven, whereas ours in Canada requires the support of the federal trade department.

We've also, of course, been dealt a serious blow as a result of the tragic consequences of September 11. Of course, many thousands of innocent people lost their lives in that mindless act of terrorism, and thousands upon thousands of people have lost their jobs as a result of that ill-conceived endeavour. British Columbia has not been immune to that either.

Those are the interesting times in which we live. I suppose, to compound all of those things, we are just entering upon a worldwide recession or at least a recession in the northern hemisphere of North America and perhaps throughout the western world.

Against all of those odds, the B.C. government is struggling to come to grips with our spending and our fiscal imbalance, which we've encountered in this province for far too long. It's not going to be easy, but I suppose when we all let our names stand for elected office, people told us that. We knew that, and now we're coming to live with that reality — that it is not easy. Many people who are opposed to some of the tough measures that the government has taken seem to have the belief that there must be an easy way out of the problems. There's got to be an easy way out of dealing with the softwood lumber crisis, the fallout from September 11, the worldwide slowdown in the economy and the legacy of ten years of fiscal impropriety on the part of the previous government.

Well, I ask you: do you expect there to be an easy way out of your own personal problems when you have financial difficulties? As an example, many of us in this assembly, including myself, went to university for a period of time. During that time, we had to make

sacrifices. We didn't have an income, because we weren't working; or if we did, maybe we had a part-time job that wasn't enough to entirely pay for our university education. We had to really scrimp and save to make ends meet, but that was a conscious decision we made in the knowledge and belief that by short-term sacrifice we would be positioning ourselves for incredible opportunities in the future — certainly far more opportunity than we would have if we went straight to working in a mill after high school or to some other reasonably well paid job. Those of us who made that sacrifice did so knowing, or hoping, that we would be rewarded for that.

I would submit to you that the situation for government is really no different. There is no easy way to get out of the bind that British Columbia is in. The NDP likes to say: "Well, gee, we managed to balance the budget right at the end of our ten years in office after more than doubling the provincial debt." Of course, they did so on the back of a windfall in energy revenues after a record level of energy prices in North America. They also did so on the back of a one-time accounting change, which was worth more than $1.2 billion or $1.3 billion. That accounting change didn't result in any more revenue actually flowing into government coffers. It was simply a transaction that showed up on a piece of paper.

It would seem to me that only a party as irresponsible as the NDP would base future spending decisions around a one-time windfall, record-high energy prices and a one-time accounting change that didn't result in any new revenue to government. Yet that is exactly what the previous government did through any number of collective agreements, side deals, secret accords and not-so-secret accords. This government locked in expenditure levels at unsustainable rates based upon a one-time windfall in revenues and an accounting change. That's not responsible, and we're going to have to deal with that to get out from under it, and it won't be easy.

The NDP's explanation over that previous ten-year period about why they didn't balance the budget sooner was that now was not an opportune time. It just was too difficult to do it right at the moment. I remember being in opposition then and thinking: "You know, this reminds me of something. I've heard this before." One day when I was driving in my car I heard a song on the radio, and I realized what it was that the NDP was reminding me of. It was reminding me of that old Creedence Clearwater song, Someday Never Comes.

That was the NDP's entire approach to fiscal propriety. It just wasn't an opportune time to do it now — maybe later but certainly not today. They did that while the rest of North America was experiencing an unprecedented economic boom, the likes of which most people in our generation have never seen, and I fear we may not see for a long, long time to come.

British Columbia missed out on that whole economic cycle. We missed out on about ten years of sustained, phenomenal economic growth throughout the rest of North America. It's very hard to get that back once you've missed it. Frankly, I don't think we'll ever get that opportunity back. We will, I hope, position ourselves to catch the next big wave of economic growth in the cycle, but that last cycle has come and gone, and British Columbia missed it. I hold the previous government wholly responsible for that decade of lost opportunity in British Columbia.

Someday has come in the eyes of this government. We can't simply put off the tough tasks hoping that maybe another windfall in energy prices or some unforeseen miracle might bail us out of our current problems. That's not prudent. People wouldn't do that in their own lives because if you do, if you keep borrowing more than you take in, eventually the bank's going to throw you out of your house. We don't want that to happen to our province. We have a responsibility as legislators to look to the medium to long term. While trying to mitigate the short-term impacts, we have to always keep our eye on the long term.

Trust me, nothing would be easier than to say: "Well, gee, I'm an elected person. I'd like to get re-elected. Maybe if we just paper over our problems, hide it, shuffle it, do some off-the-books borrowing, maybe we can somehow waltz our way to the next election, pretend everything's all right, keep people mollified and content, and maybe we'll get re-elected that way."

Well, that would not be the responsible thing to do, and that would not be the honourable thing to do. We're going to look our problems straight in the eye, and that's what we've done. In fact, I've heard other members speak here, and I know that we've all struggled with some of the decisions that had to be made.

I have the privilege of chairing one of the government caucus committees that the Premier has established as part of his innovations as to how government should operate. We had to come face to face with some very stark realities last fall. The provincial government did not have the revenue required to continue to fund all the programs that people have become accustomed to. We had to make some tough choices, and that wasn't easy. I can't pretend to have been happy with all of the choices we had to make, but the bottom line is that we had to make those choices, and so we did rather than duck our responsibility.

Some people say that misery loves company, so maybe this will make us feel better. If you take any time to look around beyond our own borders, you'll find that many other jurisdictions are going through somewhat similar circumstances. I was in Washington State last week on Monday in my capacity as the vice-president of PNWER, the Pacific Northwest Economic Region. Their legislature is in session in Olympia, their state capital, and their number one issue is trying to figure out how to balance their budget.

They were heading into this session this spring with a projected $1.2 billion shortfall, out of a $20 billion budget. Their budget is roughly comparable to ours in its total size, but their deficit of course is projected to be smaller. The shock that they were experiencing last Monday was that their accounting office

had just predicted that in fact they were facing a $1.8 billion shortfall and not the $1.2 billion shortfall they were already trying to grapple with.

I was given the unique opportunity of addressing both the Republican and Democratic caucuses of the House. The first question they wanted to ask me was: "Do you have a deficit in British Columbia?" I said: "Do we have a deficit? We have a deficit, and ours is over $4 billion — at least that's what's projected for the coming year." They could not believe it. They thought they had a problem, and when they started to hear me talk I think I made them feel a lot better. I'm always happy to help people out.

Well, they're struggling to come to grips with that. What are they recommending to do? Keep in mind they have a Democratic Governor, Gary Locke. He's put forward a list of spending cuts that include reductions to women's shelters, to programs for abused women, to higher tuition fees, to ending all sorts of social programs that people have become accustomed to. Why is that? It's because they have to balance their budget, and they simply don't have any extra money to go around.

Unlike us, they have a constitutional requirement. They have a state constitution that requires them to balance their budget. There is no debate in their state about: "Well, maybe we can put this off for another day. Maybe three years, five years, ten years from now — maybe never — we can get around to balancing our budget." They don't have that discussion. They know they have to balance it this year. They have to sort it out, and they're not going to be allowed out of that legislature until they figure it out. They're going to have to make some tough choices.

I'd like to read with you an article I came across just yesterday on the Internet. As you hear it, I think you'll think it sounds eerily familiar to what you've been reading in our newspapers here. This is dated February 17: "Lawmakers responded today to…deepening fiscal distress by unveiling plans to constrict and reorder…government through tuition and fee increases, prison closings, health care cuts and dozens of other reductions that [a senior politician] called 'gut-wrenching.'"

"Struggling to close an immediate budget shortfall of $1.3 billion and a looming $2.5 billion gap" in the next year, committees have met with each other on many details of balancing the $25 billion annual budget.

"'The economic uncertainty…leads to gut-wrenching decisions,'" said one of the politicians. "'There's just no delicate way to put it. A $3.6 billion problem can't be fixed with a nip here and a tuck there. It can only be fixed with real, lasting budget reductions that involve a lot of pain.'"

They are considering various program reductions of more than $110 million for kindergarten through high school. Later the article notes that they're planning to make sure they avoid "one-time fixes" that lawmakers now acknowledge they have used in the past to paper over deeper problems in the way government manages its money.

"But lawmakers said it was time to usher in a [new] era of relative austerity, even if it meant politically unpopular choices. 'We put everything on the table,'" said one of the committee chairmen. "'There would be no sacred cow.'"

That is a report detailing the struggles in Virginia, and it comes from the Washington Post Online.

Many jurisdictions are struggling with fiscal problems. Texas — we like to think of that as a wealthy state. I was passing through there a couple of weeks ago, and they are struggling with a $5 billion projected deficit. Of course, that's U.S. money, so those are real dollars. Even Alberta is having to trim its budget. Ontario is facing a $5 billion deficit — in Canadian dollars — and so we're not alone.

I'll tell you where we stand out. In the past ten years the previous government did not take meaningful steps to get our spending under control. They kept avoiding the hard choices. They kept papering over the problems. That's made it even more difficult for us to do what we need to do. Well, I'm proud to say that I belong to a government that is going to do the tough things to make sure we are sustainable in terms of our finances and our economy in the long run. With a strong economy and sustainable finances, we can pay for the important services we depend on.

There is a brighter light. Yesterday members heard me speak briefly about new jobs coming to Chilliwack. I think good news bears repeating. Stream International has chosen Chilliwack as a location for one if its customer interaction centres, and already 1,054 people have been hired in just the past seven or eight months or so, with another 104 people working part-time. I talked to the plant manager the other day, and he is in the process of interviewing another 80 individuals for full-time employment. Here's a message to all of us: if you're getting tired of this job, get your résumé ready, because Stream International is continuing to look for more employees at their plant in Chilliwack.

It's my hope, working with city council and my colleague the member for Chilliwack-Sumas, that we will be able to use Stream International as a bit of an anchor tenant. Where Stream is located in other parts of the world — they have about 22 locations throughout North America, in India and in Europe — they tend to co-locate eventually, over time, with other high-tech companies. Stream provides services that support Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft and other high-tech organizations. I know the city of Chilliwack is very eager to try and attract Hewlett-Packard or some other entity to come and locate next to Stream, where Stream can provide the trained workforce that would be required for higher-paying jobs with Hewlett-Packard or these other companies.

That's part of the economic development strategy of my community, and I believe it is being made possible by B.C. now having a competitive environment in terms of taxes and wages and all the other things that

go with it. There is a bright future ahead for British Columbia if we stay the course, if we do the tough things that are necessary, if we make the sacrifice now to lead the way to the future.

With that, I'll turn the floor over to the next speaker. I thank you for the opportunity.

V. Roddick: It is a privilege to rise today for my third throne speech response. I would like to thank all my supporters in Delta South who worked tirelessly on my campaigns. Delta South was certainly put to the test with a nomination meeting, a municipal election, a by-election and a provincial election, all between September '99 and May 2001.

It shows what a community we have. Delta South is a strong, vibrant community that stands firm when threatened, puts forward workable ideas when asked and puts its hands around its heart when necessary. The sobering events of September 11 have impacted our lives in many, many ways, but the most important factor we now realize is that we must accept responsibility for our actions.

We as government are taking responsibility, responsibility to rebuild our province, and we are giving back to the people of B.C. the tools to achieve this goal of economic and social renewal. Our priorities will not waver. Our mission will not be altered or diminished. Robert Mundell, Nobel prize winner and arguably the greatest economist of our time, states that it is the anti-business philosophy that has permeated a lot of civil services and the government — the view that the economy is kind of a class struggle rather than something we can all benefit from.

Profit and competition are positive, encouraging words, not something that should be met with fear and loathing. When our economy suffers, people pay the price. If we do not balance our budget, our credit rating goes down. The province's interest rate goes up, and there's less money for programs people need. As the Premier said in his televised speech last week, we have to balance our personal budget, pay our rent or mortgage, pay our credit card bills, and it's the same at the government level.

It's not enough to spout warm and fuzzy comments about the fact that we enjoy a wonderful quality of life, as if that were exactly the same thing as our standard of living. It's nice, but it won't pay for our medical system or our post-secondary education. All this takes money. We simply have to be productive. We simply must encourage productivity.

British Columbia is heading for smaller, more effective government. No one likes change, but we have to be strong. Just remember an exchange described by writer Elizabeth Nickson in last week's National Post: "We're broke. Really broke. Despite the highest rate, pre-Campbell, of personal income tax in the world. The attitude of labour? Our money is their money."

I pointed out to Jim Sinclair, head of the B.C. Federation of Labour, that the tax cut only returned people's money to them, and I paraphrase. "That was our money," he cried. "No, it wasn't," I said. "Yes, it was," he said, before breaking down in confusion. If you remember only one thing about British Columbia, pre-Campbell, please remember this exchange.

Nickson went on to say that this part of the country, British Columbia, by resources, climate and proximity to Seattle, headquarters of the new, clean economy, is capable — were the business climate healthy — of attaining the best-educated, hardest-working families anywhere: "British Columbia should be a magnificent engine of prosperity for not only Canada but the whole continent. And it will be. If Campbell and his admirable team keep their nerve, in three or four years the B.C. miracle will astound us all. There is so much undercapacity and underemployment and so many broken dreams that, once freed, the province will be untouchable."

We can do it. The Delta South save the hospital campaign and its maintain community health care petition are just the beginning.

We must get back into the window of the world. People need to know this is a place to visit, spend tourist dollars, invest in businesses and natural resources, and that we are actually alive. We can develop and generate jobs across our province. There are lives beyond Hope, lives that contribute 50 percent of our provincial revenue, and they are only a quarter of the provincial population. We must not forget them.

We have many challenges facing us, but like the people of Delta South, we can do it. We can tackle offshore oil and gas, softwood lumber, aquaculture. We will achieve success based on sound environmental and scientific practices and procedures.

Touring the province as the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Health brought home to me just how desperate our health care system is. It also showed the depth and passion of its people and how they want to be part of the solutions we are going to be creating.

I must say I echo the comments of the member for Burnaby-Edmonds across the chamber re the member for Vancouver-Hastings, who was on the Health Committee. I can only assume that because not one comment was received from the member for Vancouver-Hastings, she agrees with and supports the findings of the Select Standing Committee on Health 100 percent. She had ample opportunity made available for her participation.

One of the many challenges facing our health care system is aboriginal health care. It has fallen through

the cracks over the years and is a disgrace. We all need to work to repair and rebuild.

One idea emanating from the Delta campaign is to possibly use part of Delta Hospital as a training-at-all-levels facility for first nations. Aboriginals have put the request forward time and time again around the province. They need a small but up-to-date facility to be able to learn in.

We are also focusing on truly core services in all aspects of government, including health and education. It won't be easy, and it won't be without some hardship, but it can and will be done. Avoidable costs will be avoided. Unnecessary expenditures will be eliminated. Cost-effective innovations in service delivery will be employed. All of this is to put patients, students and clients first.

Business plans will be used to make decisions such as the Delta courthouse decision. If more practical solutions are presented, they will be listened to — such as the Delta police working with Surrey instead of Richmond.

MLA offices are venues which the people of B.C. are realizing are neutral ground to be used to discuss problems and bring forward ideas and solutions. This should be encouraged and enhanced. We need to maintain democracy, and these offices allow that. We should not penalize citizens for running for office by intimidation, such as happened with the member for Victoria-Hillside at 5 o'clock this morning on her front lawn.

Our government has taken enormous steps in bringing back government to the people of British Columbia. Having a free vote on Bills 27, 28 and 29 is a prime example. The Valentine's Day presentation of the Delta Hospital campaign and all that that entailed is unprecedented, should be commended and will be encouraged in our new open and accountable way of running government.

I would like to thank our Premier for his vision, his wisdom and his courage. Under his stewardship, we will stay the course, and we will succeed.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my pleasure at being able to serve this government both as a member of the core review task force and as Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Health.

The changes outlined in the throne speech step by step will move us beyond our fears and expectations to the limits of our imagination.

R. Sultan: Mr. Speaker, I rise to address the question of how we are going to bring head offices back to Vancouver. The Speech from the Throne outlines certain initiatives this government will take to answer that question. I would like to expand on the topic.

The issue of head office is important for the many of my West Vancouver–Capilano constituents who work in or who even control such organizations. It is equally important to the citizens throughout our province. Head office is the hub and the brain of any business organization. Did anybody notice over the past decade how many of these head offices left town? Well, I did. When two out of the three largest head offices remaining in B.C. are Crown corporations, I'd say we have a problem.

Over the past decade astonished citizens on the Victoria side of the water watched an NDP government indifferent to — hostile to — head office. Over there, on our side of the water, alarmed citizens watched many of our corporations fail or simply pack their bags and leave town. It reminded me of living in Montreal in the 1970s, when the Parti Québécois cheered every loaded moving van heading down Highway 401 to Toronto, as if ideology would somehow replace all those good jobs for their children.

In British Columbia the typical NDP supporter seems inclined to say: "Good riddance to all those head offices and their corporate agenda. We'll get along just fine without them. We live in the richest province in the land. And while we don't quite understand how it all works, those government cheques just keep on a-comin'." Well, as a matter of fact, I say we do need those head offices if we want a prosperous and independent future for our children and for our grandchildren. B.C. needs business decision-makers.

Having lived and worked 15 years in the United States, I learned — up close and personal — how the Americans moved from virtual income parity with Canada to having a 50 percent advantage over us in just about 40 years. They did it through hard work and enterprise. I use "enterprise" in the business sense.

Some say: "Well, so what if the Americans passed us by in dollar terms? The skiing is better up here." And so it is. B.C. has been endowed with magnificent natural surroundings, and as long as we preserve and protect it, that natural endowment will carry us far. But if Mother Nature is the only touchstone of our strategy, the future of British Columbia — indeed, of Canada as we know it — is in doubt.

Remarkably, after 20 years of denial by Ottawa, only a few MPs even today will openly admit that if we don't pull up our socks, Canada faces a continued drain of capital and trained people. If we can't retain our capital and our trained people, Canada's destiny as an independent nation will certainly be affected. And when you talk about capital and trained people, you're really talking about decision-makers and head offices.

Here's a small but significant case example. Today, if you want to make a corporate loan from Canada's largest bank, that credit decision will be made in Calgary, not in Vancouver. This is a stunning reversal of fortune from only a few years ago. Under the NDP, Vancouver was becoming a branch office town with important decisions referred to head offices elsewhere — to Calgary, Toronto or the U.S.A.

Head office or branch plant? Which is it to be, British Columbia? The stakes are large. British Columbians are in a structural transition from life dependent upon

government — a government cash-strapped today by NDP waste — to life based on self-reliance. Canada was built by the self-reliant. As those dulled instincts are relearned, it should be abundantly clear that the characteristics of a successful, self-reliant society — that is to say, flexibility and mobility, high income, advanced education, professionalism, generous charitable and cultural activity and intelligent leadership, not to mention a healthy tax base supporting a reasonable menu of government services, all of these — are attributes associated with a thriving head office economy. One can't develop to maximum potential in one area without the other.

I've worked in head offices, and I've worked in branch plants. Believe me, head office is better. Head offices, their driving and striving professionals and the money they pump into the community, are essential ingredients of great cities. As well, with head offices comes control — control over great mobile pools of capital. Deployment of that capital creates jobs.

In many ways, the issue boils down to the questions of who will own us and who will control us. If we want British Columbians to control the destiny of British Columbia — an objective I think all would endorse — then we should understand that head offices are our friends; not, as the NDP would have us believe, our enemies.

The NDP's poisonous doctrine of class struggle and envy, its admiration of socialist enterprise over free enterprise, its affinity to Havana over Hong Kong or Singapore, its declaration that wealth is an accident of birth, not a creation of thrift and toil, has fortunately run its course. We witness its bedraggled remnants in tents on the front lawn of our Legislature today.

Even an eminent journalist in these galleries, no particular friend of our government, has commented with some acidity on those apparently fit who stand on the front steps of our Legislature bellowing into a bullhorn over the possibility of being removed from welfare. Surely such critical commentary from the newsroom marks a turning point.

All of this signals that our head office environment is changing for the better. Will it be sufficient to bring those head offices back? Yes, but it will take time. When it comes to decision-makers, once burned, twice shy, but the building blocks for head office renewal are coming into place.

One key building block for head office renewal is a welcoming tax environment. As the Speech from the Throne pointed out, our government has built a strong foundation through eliminating the capital tax on non-financial corporations, through reducing income taxes so that persons earning less than $60,000 enjoy the lowest rate of personal income tax in Canada, through lowering the corporate profits tax to equal Alberta's at least for now and through eliminating the provincial sales tax on manufacturing and resource sector machinery.

B.C.'s business taxes are now competitive internationally. B.C.'s corporate tax rate is now lower than the comparable tax rate in Washington State, Oregon or California. As a percentage of cash flow, B.C.'s tax burden in electronics manufacturing, software development, new Web media and engineering services is now more attractive than the three American states I just mentioned, as well as Ontario.

While there is still work to be done, taxes should no longer be a major impediment to head office renewal. Furthermore, as a side bonus under the federal-provincial tax allocation formula, growing head office employment in B.C. will give B.C. a larger share of corporate income tax revenue.

A second key element of our strategy is deregulation. Head offices don't thrive on government red tape. They've got quite enough of their own, thank you. The Speech from the Throne reminds us that the Minister of State for Deregulation is now tackling the 400,000-plus regulations now on our books. As the minister hacks away at this bramble bush, government and caucus are behind him every step of the way.

A third key element of our head office strategy is providing a friendly legal environment. Six months ago when, for the first time, I rose to address this Legislature, I declared my ambition to help create in British Columbia the friendliest head office environment west of Delaware. This remains my ambition, and I'm delighted our government is moving in that direction.

How can we create the friendliest head office environment west of Delaware, and what's so special about the state of Delaware? Delaware is the incorporation capital of America, and we're talking serious money here. Shares of Delaware corporations represent a major chunk of the market capitalization of shares traded in New York, and those have a collective value of more than 100 times the size of our B.C. economy.

Suffice it to say, for little old Delaware — an otherwise featureless place with lousy skiing, I might add — head office is a giant business, an ideal sort of business. There's no smokestacks, no pollution — just a lot of specialists and assistants running around, computers and filing cabinets, and tax revenues which keep pumping into the government from all over the world. The government just goes down the street and puts it in the bank to be used later to fund programs. I don't believe they have any crisis of health care finance in Delaware.

Delaware has climbed to the top of the incorporation heap by offering corporate clientele four things: (1) a short and sweet company act along internationally familiar and litigation-tested lines; (2) frequent updates via regulation, not via law, through a legislative committee charged with that responsibility; (3) a friendly and skilful corporations branch in the government there to help; and (4) a commercial court staffed by judges who actually have some understanding of finance and economics, balance sheets and sophisticated commercial transactions. As I look at the Attorney General, I'm led to believe they're a rare and endangered species in B.C., I'm told by others.

In British Columbia, if we could create these four attributes and throw in our good skiing for good measure, there's just no telling how far we might go. The good news is that our government is taking some key initial steps.

Where do we stand on the first of the Delaware prerequisites — the company act? The current B.C. Company Act is the child of the Bennett government, circa 1978. It's now going on 25 years old — in commercial legal terms, something like running your computer on an early version of DOS instead of Windows. Recognizing the urgent need to update the B.C. Company Act when, at age 11, it was due for retirement, the government of the day constituted a task force. That was in 1989. Two years later the socialists stormed the gates of this House. One of their first victims was the Company Act project. What good socialist would want to have anything to do with something called "company"? Not many, as it turned out. It never occurred to them that companies employ people.

Eventually, as moving trucks emptied downtown head offices of their furniture, even the most doctrinaire NDP diehards began to wonder: maybe something here needs fixing. In 1999, after some hurry-up drafting, they actually passed a new B.C. Company Act right here in this Legislature — 1999. The practising corporate bar assessed its flaws without mercy. The Lieutenant-Governor was never asked to promulgate it, so it never became law — a good thing, too, for one of its principal themes was that company directors should be hung, drawn and quartered for any misfortune that befell their firms. It was hardly a legal philosophy calculated to win friends and influence corporations to B.C.

Since then, another task force has loyally toiled away attempting to draft a B.C. company act which will fulfil the needs of an increasingly international and multinational clientele. Meanwhile, British Columbians came to favour incorporation in such odd places as the Yukon, Nova Scotia or even Ottawa. Many companies either abandoned their B.C. charters — most notably in recent weeks, Intrawest, owner-developer of Whistler — or chartered their new ventures elsewhere.

After 25 years it's time to act. As the Speech from the Throne indicates, the enactment of a new Company Act is one of the government's high priorities for this session of the Legislature. In the future let's keep our Delaware competitor in mind, where updating cycles are measured in months, not in decades.

The requirements of a new B.C. Company Act are quite clear. A committee of leading corporate legal practitioners recently advised that it is the committee's view that, rather than create legislation that is unfamiliar and hope that business people, practitioners and companies will spend the time and resources necessary to understand and utilize it, the surest way to achieve the desired goals is to take legislation that is familiar to the widest possible audience in British Columbia and Canada and amend it to address the perceived deficiencies in that legislation, thus creating legislation which is the best of what already exists and is familiar. The goal should be harmonization with other Canadian practice, not a unique statute.

That advice is clear. This Legislature's response should be equally clear. The first principle of a new act should be familiarity and commonality. Having said that, there is no doubt that any such legislation should also embody a second principle: desirability. By that I simply mean that the act should have features which corporate decision-makers and their advisers find attractive as they shop around. For make no mistake: in this marketplace the customer has lots of choices, ranging from the Yukon to Bermuda. If we're serious in our quest to attract a healthy and growing volume of corporations back to B.C., we must be competitive and even offer certain unique advantages. The imagination to construct such laws and regulations within the bounds of conservative and responsible corporate governance is readily available.

To sum up, the Speech from the Throne sets out our government's intention to enact a new Company Act, which is long overdue. A properly constituted Company Act will send a strong message, reinforcing the other elements of our platform, that B.C. is open for business.

The head office business is the type of clean, high-paying, income-tax-attracting, dry and no-heavy-lifting industry we need. Head offices and the managerial and capital resources they command are vital to our long-term prosperity and independence. If we could become the friendliest head office town west of Delaware — and there's no reason we cannot — and then throw into the balance our North Shore amenities — for example, Saturday sailing from Eagle Harbour, Sunday morning latte at Delaney's on Edgemont Boulevard, evening skiing on Grouse Mountain or simply walking the dog at Ambleside Beach and watching the setting Pacific sun reflected from all those new head office towers in Vancouver — then we could truly savour renewed prosperity for all. There really is no telling where it might all end. Thank you.

J. Wilson: It's indeed a privilege today to be able to stand here and address the throne speech, the direction that this government is taking. I have been in this House since 1996. Each year I read the throne speech. This is the first time I picked one up that has any substance to it whatsoever.

British Columbia has suffered immensely. It's sort of like watching a horror movie. We have become a land out of time. We are no longer in sync with the rest of North America. We've gone, as you've heard, from first place in 1991…. British Columbia had the best economy in Canada. And where are we today? Tenth or eleventh.

Why did that happen? Well, there were a number of reasons. We had a government that didn't understand what it takes to keep a vibrant economy. We had a government that didn't understand that you can't tax and spend and tax and spend, and then when you run out of money, you tax some more so you can spend

some more. And if things really pick up and you make some money in whichever area and industry that's doing well, whether it be forestry or gas and oil, and revenues go up, you simply factor those in and spend more. Never a thought to where we're going with our debt, consistent failure to balance the budget, all of these things….

What basically happened is that we ended up with a province where business was regulated out of existence. We did a baseline count: 404,000 regulations in this province that people have to contend with if they want to operate and work here. Is it any wonder that there have been hundreds of businesses that packed their bags and left British Columbia for other areas in Canada and the U.S.? No, it's not. You cannot work under such a huge regulatory burden as we experience in British Columbia today.

At the same time as our companies were leaving, our government continued to grow. It grew right along at a fairly regular rate. Not only did we lose companies out of the province, we lost workers. We've lost roughly 60,000 working families. A lot of them have gone to Alberta to find employment. These are young families that need to have work to raise their families, educate their children and all of those things that this province should be providing. With the exodus of workers, the exodus of companies and the increased tax burden that they were experiencing…. Yet the take-home, after-tax pay has continually dropped over the last ten years.

I might add here that since the election there are some areas of this province that have actually seen a little bit of recovery, but there are some areas where it is very slow. The central interior of British Columbia is one of those areas. There are a whole array of factors affecting it. It's a resource-based economy up there. What's happening to us is that we are losing workers. They take their families with them. The children are gone. Now we're looking at school closures. We're looking at reduced funding to keep our infrastructure alive there, where once it was vibrant. It was a great place to live. Now we see schools closing every year. This is not acceptable. We have to turn that around, and the only way we can turn it around is to follow the plan that's laid out in this throne speech.

If there's one thing that we can count on in life, it's change. Change is the only constant factor with people, with governments, with living. Each day we get older — that's change. It's amazing how much resistance you find when you want to change things. The changes that we're bringing in are not for the worse; they're for the better. Yet people are resistant to change, and it's up to us to allay the fears that are being brought on by individuals and organizations that this is a bad thing. It is not a bad thing. Change is good.

We've identified certain areas that needed to be addressed and needed to be addressed very quickly. One is in taxes. Shortly after we were elected as government, we reduced the personal income tax on the people of British Columbia. If you're in that $60,000-or-under tax bracket, it is a real benefit to people that are trying to earn a living and feed their families. I've had several people come up to me since that day and say: "Thank you. What you've done has really helped us. We appreciate it even though it is not something huge. We recognize the fact that it has cut the government revenues immediately, but it will increase the government revenues in the long run because the dollars that we get back on our taxes we can spend on the things that we need to spend them on." Those dollars go back into the community, they go back into the economy, and they generate jobs in the private sector.

Regulations are another area that's being addressed. We're committed to reducing those regulations by one-third at the end of three years. Also, we can expect some changes to labour laws — more flexibility, fairness and efficiency. Those are needed and have been brought up many times as one of the things that this province needs to address. British Columbia is a rich province. Unfortunately, we have that wealth out there, and we can't access it because of the regulatory burdens. Changes to our mining act, our forest policy, our stumpage appraisal system will all help to stimulate this economy and get it back on track.

One of the problems that we inherited from the previous government was in the health situation we encounter in our forests in the interior from 100 Mile House to Smithers and Mackenzie. It's the mountain pine beetle. For ten years we tried to get government to address the issue of forest health. Nothing happened. In June of this year, after the election, our Premier had the foresight to immediately address the problem. He struck a task force which went through the affected regions and reported out to the Minister of Forests. It's the first time in ten years that anything has happened to address this problem.

Now we have addressed it, and we are on the road to dealing with it. If that hadn't been done, the economic cost to this province would have been in the billions and billions of dollars. This pine beetle has a voracious appetite, and it eats its way through our forests. It doesn't stop for any type of legislation or regulations; it just eats away. Until the weather conditions come that will deal with it, we have to address the problem. We can't ignore it, and we haven't ignored it. We are now doing that.

We have a huge opportunity in this province in gas and oil. Our minister recognizes that, and he's making changes that will facilitate the development of those resources. That will create jobs. It'll create some wealth in the areas where we desperately need it today.

One of the issues that keeps coming back — the previous government spent hundreds of millions of dollars and really had no results — is the area of land claims. We are having a referendum on this, and we will get the direction from the people as to how they want us to negotiate. By doing that, it's an effort to speed up a process which to this point has really had no results. We need to get this thing settled. We need to

Another area that we've looked at is the municipal government level. We've come out and developed a community charter that puts more ability in the hands of the local communities to deal with the issues that they understand. Victoria doesn't understand their needs; they understand them. To do that, we have to leave some revenue there so that they can make the necessary changes in their communities so that they will be more efficient and better managed. That is another area where we're going to see some development in the near future.

I guess the biggest problem that we have today — and it's not just us; it's been identified by all the Premiers of Canada — is in health care. We cannot continue to keep throwing dollars at something. There have to be some changes in this system. It is already eating up almost 40 percent of our government revenue. We have to get those dollars to the patient level so that they will do the job they were intended to do. We are doing this. It is an enormous task — huge. It's being worked on, and it will be something that evolves as time goes on.

The other area that we've identified as a problem is the shortage of nurses and doctors. We've addressed those by putting in more positions in our universities. We've created a facility at the University of Northern British Columbia in conjunction with the University of British Columbia so that we can graduate more doctors and try and keep them in the region where we need them: in the north and the interior. It has been a really serious problem up to this point to maintain the level of doctor service in those regions. This is something that will help. It will address that problem.

I see that I'm running short of time. I had a whole lot of other good news here that I wanted to expound on, but I would like to say one thing. I've lived in this province since 1967, and this is the first time that I have seen a government come into office and actually do what they said they were going to do.

We had an aggressive 90-day plan, and we met it. We said we are going to balance the budget. We will balance the budget. It is to me an honour and a privilege to be part of bringing British Columbia out of the recession that it's in and putting it back where it rightfully belongs in Canada.

Hon. G. Plant: Others will have the opportunity to continue the debate in due course.