Hansard -- Volume 3, Number 13 -- Monday, February 25, 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

Tributes		1305
	Hon. G. Campbell
	J. MacPhail

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)		1306
	Langford and Malahat volunteer firefighters	1306
	B. Kerr
	Impact of government communications on fisheries policies on coastal communities	1306
	R. Visser
	Canadian Home Builders Association conference	1306
	R. Stewart

Oral Questions		1307
	Funding of legal aid services	1307
	J. Kwan
	Hon. G. Plant
	Hon. L. Stephens
	Government support for small communities	1307
	J. MacPhail
	Hon. G. Campbell
	Hon. G. Abbott
	2010 Vancouver-Whistler Olympic bid	1308
	W. McMahon
	Hon. T. Nebbeling
	Funding for services for disabled persons	1308
	S. Orr
	Hon. G. Hogg
	Recall legislation	1309
	J. MacPhail
	Hon. G. Campbell
	Health care pilot project for northern and rural communities	1309
	B. Bennett
	Hon. C. Hansen

Point of Order		1309
	J. Kwan
	Hon. G. Collins

Budget Debate (continued)		1310
	Hon. S. Hagen	1310
	Hon. J. Reid	1312
	H. Long	1314
	Hon. G. Bruce	1316
	Hon. L. Stephens	1321
	S. Orr	1323
	J. Bray	1325
	V. Anderson	1330
	I. Chong	1333

Hon. G. Campbell: Yesterday all of Canada celebrated the incredibly successful Olympic event that we had. I thought it would be worthwhile for this House to recognize, in particular, the 25 B.C. Olympians who participated during the Olympics.

While we all celebrate the men's hockey success and the women's hockey success and the excellence that they brought to their sports, I think we have to recognize the incredible effort that went in for over two dozen B.C. athletes who dedicated their time, their effort and their energy to be able to compete on behalf of Canada in the Olympic Games. They would be the first to tell us that their support came from coaches, from family members and from friends who were always working to make sure they could achieve their best and reach their firm goals. I can't tell you how proud I was to see the Canadian athletes participating and being successful not just for Canada but for themselves, in their individual initiative as well as in their teamwork.

Yesterday Team Canada did an exceptional job, but I can tell you that I was in Williams Lake for the opening of the British Columbia Winter Games on a rainy, cold Thursday evening, and every single one of those people couldn't stop cheering for the Canadian women's hockey team, who won the first gold medal in hockey for Canada in 50 years. Everyone was glued to their television set yesterday as we watched as the men not only beat the United States, they trumped them with skill, with energy and with effort that reflects the skill, energy and effort of Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

On behalf of this Legislature, I would like to congratulate and would like the Legislature to congratulate our 25 Olympians and the contribution they made to the Canadian effort. I'd like to remind everyone that in the year 2010, we're going to do ten times that well.

J. MacPhail: I'm delighted to join with the Premier today to echo his comments on how much we appreciate the wonderful work of all our Canadian athletes, particularly our British Columbia athletes. We heard, over the last week, our own Don Cherry describe the opposition as a couple of left-wingers who couldn't top 180 on the scale together. So today we suited up to show our support and to say that we may be left-wingers, but we're heavy into defence, and we support everything that happened.

W. Cobb: To the Premier, I was involved in the closing ceremonies yesterday for our Winter Games, and the closing ceremonies happened when the announcement came over that the men had won the gold. If you think it was loud on the first day, it was even louder yesterday.

Also, today I would like to ask the House to welcome…. As you know, this morning I introduced some people from one of my communities. This afternoon I have another group of people here from another one of the communities. I would like to welcome Mayor Donna Barnett and her administrator, Dianne Lawson. Talking about rural communities, welcome, Donna and Dianne. They're from 100 Mile House, and this is just an example of what we're trying to do in rural B.C. to get B.C. back on its feet. They're down here, and we're meeting with different ministers, and we're having a really positive meeting.

Hon. M. Coell: I would like the House to join me in welcoming Don Toth, MLA for Moosomin, Saskatchewan. He's the critic for the Ministry of Social Services, and he's here to meet with MLAs and ministers.

Hon. G. Bruce: In the House today with my wife and my son, who you all know very, very well, is my niece Sarah Whunderlich and two other friends of hers, Deanna Vanice and Heather MacDonald. They are all students at Trinity Western. It might be of interest to the House that my niece Sarah is in the last year of soon becoming a nurse here in this great province of British Columbia. Deanna is in communications, and Heather is in human sciences.

More importantly, though, Deanna is actually from that great country, the United States of America. Yesterday we all gathered at my brother's place to watch that great hockey game. Being a competitive family as we are, but understanding of the good wishes that go on in a game like that, I let her know that the Minister of Forests had thought about bringing in a ban of all softwood products that had got to the United States, meaning that we would have to have withdrawn all the hockey sticks their team was going to play with. But really, we wanted to have a fair competition, so we left the hockey sticks there with their club. As we had lunch, we of course gathered as a family in the dining room. Deanna was downstairs in the little room with the smaller television, but in a very magnanimous way, as only my family can be, at 18 minutes and 40 seconds of the third period we invited Deanna to come upstairs and enjoy the rest of the game with us.

Could we make all of them feel welcome, and a particularly fine round to Deanna for the great game the United States of America played against our fine hockey squad of Canada.

Hon. R. Thorpe: It's a pleasure for me to introduce a friend of mine. We worked together some 14 years

ago. He lives in Surrey–White Rock: Bill Brooks. Joining Bill today is his friend and business associate, Alan McInnes. They're here in Victoria to meet officials.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, for the benefit of those members who may not have been present this morning, I would like to advise the House that we have two Clerks from other jurisdictions on attachment to our House this week: Mr. Charles MacKay, the Clerk of the House in Prince Edward Island, and Ms. Loredana Catalli Sonier, the Clerk of the House in New Brunswick. Please join me in welcoming both of these Clerks to our House.

B. Kerr: As a result of the horror of September 11, we've heard a number of stories about the courage and dedication of the firefighters who worked at Ground Zero. I'd like to say that the courageous efforts of firefighters is not restricted to New York alone. We have very dedicated, selfless and heroic firefighters right in our own back yard.

On July 17, 2000, there was a very serious accident on the Malahat highway just north of here. This accident involved a propane tanker truck and resulted in the tragic death of the driver. But only the driver was killed. That the tragedy did not take even more lives was a result of the dedication, hard work and selfless efforts of the volunteer firefighters of Langford and Malahat. All through that terrible night and for most of the next 24 hours, these brave volunteers put their lives at risk to eliminate a significant threat to public safety from thousands of litres of highly explosive propane leaking from the twisted wreckage.

I'm pleased to inform the House that their efforts have not gone entirely unnoticed. A couple of weeks ago Mayor Stew Young of Langford and I were given the honour of awarding to the volunteer firefighters of Langford and Malahat the Governor General's certificate of commendation.

Now, this award is not given lightly. The recipients are chosen through a voting process after being deemed eligible by the Canadian Decorations Advisory Committee. It is issued only to those individuals who have made a significant contribution by providing assistance to another person in a selfless manner.

I'd like to congratulate again the firefighters of Malahat and Langford and the two private individuals who also assisted and received this prestigious certificate.

IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT
COMMUNICATIONS ON FISHERIES POLICIES
ON COASTAL COMMUNITIES

R. Visser: An area of considerable concern to the people of North Island, and indeed all coastal communities, is the relationship between the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans and our Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. I believe we have come a long way in a few short months in building a working relationship that is based on trust, sound science and continuous and meaningful dialogue, but there is still work to do.

I represent a number of those coastal communities, aboriginal and non-aboriginal alike, whose very existence is based on their relationship to the sea. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans has a profound impact on those people's ability to make a living, raise their families and contribute to the fabric of their communities.

We need to dramatically improve the communications on issues around the timing of fisheries management announcements, be they sport fisheries or announcements for the hard-hit commercial sector. Not only do people feel left out, But it is an economic imperative to have the information as early and as clearly as possible. People and businesses make decisions. They make investments in equipment and staff, and they take in deposits on fishing vacations from people around the world. Timing delays in DFO's fisheries management decisions affect their ability to plan, the range of choices they can make and, in many cases, whether they succeed or fail.

We also need to strengthen the communications around regulations under the federal Fisheries Act. Decisions should be timely and certain. Whether you're in aquaculture, tourism, forestry or commercial fishing, you are faced with duplicate and often parallel processes. We need to encourage and nurture investment in our coastal communities, and excessive and duplicate red tape is a significant and real barrier to success.

I want to close by thanking the Hon. Herb Dhaliwal for his hard work as the federal Minister of Fisheries, and I would like to extend an invitation to the new minister, Robert Thibault — himself a native of rural Nova Scotia — to visit British Columbia. We need this dialogue between the two levels of government to grow. I would welcome the minister to Victoria and to the North Island. I encourage him to see firsthand the challenges we face and some of the solutions our government has.

R. Stewart: This week the city of Victoria is hosting the fifty-ninth annual national conference of the Canadian Home Builders Association. Hundreds of delegates have descended upon this beautiful city to discuss issues and challenges associated with housing Canadians from coast to coast.

Housing is vitally important to the integrity of communities and the health of families and individuals. As a society, I believe we must work hard to ensure that appropriate housing is available for our young people, for seniors, for people with disabilities, for

families — both traditional and non-traditional — for aboriginal citizens and for all citizens facing challenges associated with poverty, health, mental health, domestic violence and a host of other social challenges facing our society.

Home ownership is recognized as an outstanding goal for governments to adopt. At the same time, home ownership is often out of reach of many citizens and families for a variety of reasons. Affordability is certainly number one among those reasons, and governments must continually evaluate the ways in which we can affect as governments, positively and negatively, the affordability of such an important consumer good. We must recognize that we owe a duty to all citizens to ensure that at every income level, our society has housing available.

That doesn't mean that governments must build housing. It means, though, as I believe, that affordability of market housing can be enhanced and that the market, both conventional and non-profit, can satisfy the vast majority of our housing needs.

I want to applaud the Canadian Home Builders Association for its ongoing work in advocating the continuous improvement of Canadian housing stock such that Canadians are among the best housed people in the world. Of course, there are many challenges still to be addressed, challenges that I know the CHBA is working on: energy efficiency, durability, quality, sustainability, accessibility and of course affordability. Finally, I want to welcome those delegates to Victoria.

J. Kwan: The Attorney General is cutting $34 million from legal aid. Members of his own party call this shocking and disturbing. At the same time, his government is raising taxes on legal aid services — money that is supposed to fund legal aid. Mr. Speaker, not so long ago in this House the Attorney General asked: isn't there something wrong with taking all this money from legal accounts yet not actually directing all of that revenue into legal aid services? What an excellent question. To the Attorney General: what is the answer? Is it good public policy to divert money from providing legal aid services, from the people who are most in need, just to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest in British Columbia?

Hon. G. Plant: Well, it was a good question when I asked it, because it was those members in the NDP who introduced the tax and then failed to fund legal aid when they were in government. That was what made the question good. Now, today we face a $4.4 billion deficit in the province of British Columbia, and some difficult decisions have to be made. What we can do within the resources that are available is that we can ensure that people accused of criminal offences have access to legal aid, that domestic violence matters will involve legal aid, that child protection matters will be covered by legal aid, that mental health matters will be protected by legal aid. We'll have money for a public legal education and information program, and there will be funding for family law legal aid. Three years from now British Columbia will still have the third-most-generous legal aid program in Canada. I think the members of this House should be proud of that fact.

J. Kwan: This government will be profiting more than $42 million from taxes on legal aid. Yet he is cutting legal aid services funding. Legal aid is not simply a service; it is a right. By denying this service to single mothers who are fighting to support their children or to protect themselves from violence and abuse, this government is attacking the rights of women. There was a time when the Minister of State for Women's Equality in this House stated, "It is really quite shocking when you look at the fact that single mothers and women are severely disadvantaged" when it comes to legal aid.

Given the huge cuts to legal aid that will impact most harshly on women, will the Minister of State for Women's Equality stand today and tell this House: was she wrong then, or is the Attorney General wrong now?

Hon. L. Stephens: You know, we stand in this House, and we listen to the members opposite here. Those of us that have been in this House over the past ten years have heard over and over again the rhetoric of the members opposite. You know, it was those members of that previous government that have us in the problems we have today. We have a $3.8 billion structural deficit, thanks to those members opposite. There are some tough choices we have to make. Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that this government is protecting essential priority services for women in this province.

J. MacPhail: Small communities in British Columbia are being hammered by this government. I'd like to quote from a letter from the district of Hope sent to the Premier recently. It says: "With all the cuts to jobs and services within our province that were announced yesterday, it seems that many of the smaller communities are to bear the brunt of these cuts. The district of Hope can ill afford any more cuts to jobs and services within our municipality." The letter then goes on to ask that small communities be consulted before the province starts closing hospitals and be invited to tomorrow's provincial congress meeting. Can the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services please tell the House why B.C.'s small communities have been shut out of tomorrow's provincial congress meeting?

Hon. G. Campbell: Tomorrow's provincial congress meeting is a historic first. It will bring into one room every MLA, every MP, every Senator, as well as

representatives of the five municipal associations, the president of the UBCM and 15 largest communities in British Columbia as well as first nations representatives. We all represent the same British Columbians. Small communities will be heard, large communities will be heard, and the federal government, provincial government, local government and first nations government will all be heard tomorrow for the first time in the history of the province.

J. MacPhail: I can understand why the Premier didn't want the minister to answer the question. There are some words that the minister responsible for communities said a few weeks ago, when he was asked about cuts to small communities. In an interview with the Metro Valley News, he said to municipalities: "Well, cry me a river; that's the way it goes." That's the kind of attitude that's got small communities so angry in this province.

Here are some more words, the words of Kimberley city councillor Ron McRae. He said it would appear that the government is ignoring the needs of small communities. Again, to the Minister of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services: is that because they don't matter to this minister and this government, or is it because the government has spent a lot of time and money to showcase the Premier and the provincial congress, and it doesn't want small communities raining on his parade?

Hon. G. Abbott: It's interesting that Burnaby's now been relegated to a small community, because that's where the interview was. I think there's an important point here. What I was making very clear to the reporter was that there are two models for dealing with fiscal challenges in the province. In the one case — and that would be the NDP government in 1996 — rather than deal with their own problems, what they did was download $113 million of problems onto local government. They downloaded their problems onto local governments, including small communities. Well, I think that's wrong that they would do that.

We've advanced a different model where we protected resources to local government — $130 million across the board. If I was going to be proud of something, I'd be proud of that. I'd be ashamed — I'd hang my head — if I was a member of this opposition.

W. McMahon: My question is to the minister responsible for the 2010 Olympic bid. After yesterday's dramatic gold medal performance by Canada's men's team and last Thursday's performance by the women, I know that many British Columbians are excited about the prospect of the 2010 Winter Olympics bid.

Can the minister responsible for the 2010 Olympic bid tell us the current status of our bid?

Hon. T. Nebbeling: I'd like to thank the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke for her question, because it's a good one.

As we all know, it's been 50 years since Canada's ice hockey team brought back the gold to Canada. It is the intention of this government, the federal government and the bid corporation not to have to wait for another 50 years. What we see happening now, of course, is that the populace of British Columbia has gotten very enthusiastically behind the whole Olympic movement. There's no doubt, if we succeed in having the 2010 Olympics here, that British Columbians will have the very best seat in the house. It will be home ice, and there is no doubt that we will have another good shot at bringing more gold medals here.

The federal government, the provincial government and the 2010 Olympic Bid Corporation work very hard, very diligently, and are willing to move every mountain that needs to be moved to indeed succeed in bringing the Olympics to British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Columbia River–Revelstoke with a supplementary question.

W. McMahon: While British Columbians are excited about the possibility of hosting the 2010 Winter Olympics, many of my constituents are interested in knowing how those benefits can flow into their communities.

Will the minister responsible for the 2010 Olympic bid tell us how regions outside the lower mainland can expect to benefit from a successful bid?

Hon. T. Nebbeling: This bid is for all British Columbians. That's how we started, and that's how we will continue.

When we succeed in bringing the Winter Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games to British Columbia, it will have tremendous benefit for all our communities and all the people living in our province. The games will play a major role in stimulating our economy through opportunities that we will have to showcase British Columbia to the world at large, showcase the opportunities that British Columbia can offer the world at large — opportunities in our natural resource industries, our high-tech and knowledge-based industries. The manufacturing sector will see tremendous boost and demand for product. And, of course, tourism as an industry will be shining brighter than ever before when we get the worldwide exposure of these Olympic Games.

This is an investment in the long-term prosperity of our province. This is an investment in British Columbians everywhere in the province. I believe it will deliver on that promise.

A tragic murder-suicide in Kelowna recently highlighted the need for support services to help the devel-

opmentally disabled. Despite help from their loved ones, developmentally disabled adults continue to face very, very difficult challenges.

To the minister: what is his ministry doing to address the needs of these British Columbians?

Hon. G. Hogg: I'm sure everyone in this House — indeed, everyone who was familiar with the story — was saddened that a family could feel that their options were so extreme that they had to choose to take lives.

The family had approached the government, I believe, in 1998 in an effort to find some support services for themselves. There were no support services available, inasmuch as at the time we were trying to fit people into services rather than finding services that could respond more specifically to the needs of the individuals.

We have looked at that, and we have looked at a number of other issues that have come forward in the past number of years, and we're actually now proceeding forward with an individualized funding model that will allow for families to have services to wrap around the individuals rather than trying to fit the individuals into a service.

We're responding by that, and it is covered in our service plan that we'll be moving forward with individualized funding models to support families such as the one the member refers to.

J. MacPhail: The Premier's new-era campaign promise was to "establish workable recall legislation to make it easier for citizens to hold MLAs accountable. " The throne speech was silent on that promise. To the Premier: why?

Hon. G. Campbell: One of the things we undertook to British Columbians during the last election is that we would appoint a citizens assembly that would be able to look at the way they would like to have government operate, the way they would like to have government elected. It seems reasonable to me that the rules for recall, which were up for a great deal of concern from British Columbians…. It made sense for people to have a chance to have a say on that. That will be done. It will be undertaken, and it will be completed prior to May 17, 2005, when this government goes to the people to be held to account.

B. Bennett: I have a question for the Minister of Health Services this afternoon. Before I provide my question, I'd like to preface it by saying that since the announcement of this government's restructuring of health care in British Columbia, the hospital in my home community of Cranbrook has not been on diversion, and we have been on diversion at that hospital any number of times — dozens and dozens of times — leading up to the announcement.

Traditionally, rural and northern communities in B.C. have had a challenge in accessing health care. Today I understand that the Ministers of Health Services and Health Planning participated in a demonstration of a telemedicine project that connected the Vancouver General Hospital and all its resources with the Cranbrook Regional Hospital. I'm wondering if the Minister of Health Services could tell my constituents just how this project will help them.

Hon. C. Hansen: It was a very exciting demonstration. For the first time in British Columbia history, we were able to connect through technology some of the top specialists in British Columbia, based at Vancouver Hospital, with front-line physicians and nurses in Cranbrook and in Terrace, which are the two sites for the new pilot projects. What this means for communities throughout British Columbia is that the time is coming very soon when they will be able to link together so that health care providers can get that top-level tertiary support that's necessary. It is very much a step in delivering the kind of health care that British Columbians need, where they live and when they need it. We're committed to it. It looks like it's going to be a fabulous project, and once the pilots are finished, we hope to be able to roll this out to other communities in British Columbia.

J. Kwan: On a point of order. A sessional order was introduced by the government. It states that a private member may ask a qualified question of a minister during question period. The member from whose constituency the question comes will have first refusal to put such question to the appropriate minister. There is on the order paper a public written question from Michelle Kinney of the University of Victoria Students Society which I believe is timely.

The member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head has not asked that question of the minister today. Could you please advise this House which constitutes first refusal, and would the member's decision not to rise and ask the question put by her constituents today meet the test of first refusal?

Hon. G. Collins: On the point of order, it's my understanding that the provision is there, as it was last session. I don't believe the wording has changed.

Hon. G. Collins: Well, I'm not aware of a big change. Certainly, my understanding of the intent of the standing order change was that once the question is on the order paper, the member whose riding it is has the first opportunity to ask that question on the first day it appears. If they choose not to or they're unable to, then it is available to other members to ask the question. That's been my understanding, and I don't think that's changed at all.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, both hon. members. We have not set a specific time for first refusal, but we'll take it under advisement and come back to the House with the decision. In any event, the questions must be asked during question period.

Hon. S. Hagen: It's a pleasure today to reply to and support the budget. In all my years of public life, I can safely say that I have never seen a more substantive and decisive opening to a legislative session as we have seen these past two weeks. We have a huge challenge in front of us, and our agenda is ambitious. We were elected to turn this province around, and I believe strongly that the Speech from the Throne set out a clear map and that the budget is the right vehicle to get us started on the road to recovery.

Make no mistake: these changes constitute a fundamental challenge to the status quo British Columbians rejected last May. We recognize that change is never easy. As the Premier points out, it sometimes appears more convenient to stay in the broken rut of the status quo and to duck challenges rather than to confront them head-on. I don't want to deny or minimize that the changes will cause short-term adjustment problems for some people. We have made some very difficult decisions, and I know that neither myself nor my colleagues on the government side take these decisions and this responsibility lightly.

I believe strongly that the core review process was a rigorous, thoughtful means to reducing government cost. Quite simply, action had to be taken. The current level of government spending is simply not sustainable. We cannot run a Cadillac government on a Chevrolet economy any longer.

Of course, there are those who say we should wait — wait because of the tragic events of September 11, wait because of the softwood lumber dispute with the U.S., wait because of global economic slowdown. I can tell you that in my riding of Comox Valley, which is still the most beautiful riding in this province, my constituents can't afford to wait. The small businesses in the Comox Valley can't afford to wait for our government to restore sound fiscal management to this province. The patients and students of the Comox Valley can't afford to wait for our health care and education systems to put their needs first.

British Columbians gave us an overwhelming mandate for change last spring, and we are delivering on that mandate to usher in a new era of hope, prosperity and public service for this great province. The course of action is clear, and the time to act is now.

When you look at the facts, you can see clearly why, with this budget, we are continuing the path of change. Over the last decade British Columbia slid to last place in Canada in both investment and economics. Over the last decade B.C.'s average annual take-home pay shrunk by over $1,100, while incomes in Alberta and Ontario grew. We had the devastating fact that British Columbia actually became a have-not province. We are tackling these challenges head-on.

Our Premier, the Finance minister and indeed the entire government are convinced that we are laying the foundation for an improved future with this budget.

Along with this budget, our government has released the most comprehensive set of service plans that state clearly our plans over the next three years. Fundamental in these plans are the recognitions that economic growth is the bedrock upon which all public services depend. The state of our economy is the critical determinant for what government can and cannot afford to do. We can't control commodity prices, the U.S. lumber lobby or the global reverberations of September 11, but we can and we must take steps to make our economy more competitive, diversified and attractive to investors. We've already made significant progress to achieving this goal.

In our first 90 days our government cut personal income taxes, reduced corporate income taxes and eliminated other business taxes that were discouraging job creation. We also acted to reduce the regulatory burden on small businesses and create a level playing field for all British Columbia businesses through the elimination of business subsidies.

As a result of these changes, we are starting to see encouraging signs that our economy is on the mend. For example, last year British Columbia posted Canada's largest increase in housing sales. British Columbia had the highest percentage increase in residential construction in the nation. Retail sales have been increasing at a faster rate than the national average, and automobile sales have been strong.

As a small business person, I am pleased that our government is working in partnership with British Columbia entrepreneurs to jumpstart investment and opportunities for our communities around the province.

Later this spring the Premier will lead a series of round tables on small business that will invite small business owners, operators and entrepreneurs to offer their input and advice in the most vital of all sectors. Small businesses are by far the biggest job creators in

our economy, and this government wants to hear from them directly on the barriers to expansion and the opportunities for growth. We need to work with them, and we need to pursue innovative ways to deliver services and create new opportunities for employment and investment.

We will be looking at new, cost-effective mechanisms for the provision of services and public-private partnerships. These P3s, as they're called, have proven very effective in attracting private capital to support public policy objectives in B.C. and in other jurisdictions.

We will move forward to help spur other private sector investment in transportation and highways; information technology; housing, land and resource development; health support services and facilities; and educational infrastructure.

Measures will be introduced this session to boost investment and job creation in both the energy and the mining sectors. Steps will be taken to enhance the effectiveness of the Oil and Gas Commission and to improve the investment climate for mineral exploration.

Within my own ministerial responsibilities in the coming session I will be introducing an updated Environmental Assessment Act to streamline the major project assessment process while maintaining our high environmental standards. Other changes will be made to increase competitiveness, cut red tape and provide greater access to Crown land and resources.

Many of us on Vancouver Island are excited about the prospects of new investment in coalbed methane extraction. More will be done in the coming months to develop this resource and generate jobs in regions across our province. And, of course, there's tremendous interest in the northwest about the prospect for offshore oil and gas exploration.

While there's significant economic potential for the region, we will proceed with caution to ensure that any activity taken in this regard will always be guided by sound science and an unswerving commitment to responsible environmental protection. We'll be taking a progressive approach to promote growth in our traditional resource sectors and emerging industries such as salmon aquaculture. Recent changes will ensure that this sector can grow sustainably with the toughest environmental protection framework in the world.

My own ministry is engaged in a planning and mapping exercise to identify suitable areas for relocating salmon farms. This is part of a comprehensive plan to minimize the environmental and social impact of fish farms and support local coastal communities and their economies.

In terms of agriculture, I will be introducing legislation this spring to implement our new-era commitment to make the Agricultural Land Commission more regionally responsive to the needs of farmers and communities.

In all of these reforms, we will be guided by the principles of sustainability to ensure that we balance economic and environmental concerns. The Premier has directed all ministers to maintain the highest standards of environmental quality. I can assure all members of this House that we take that obligation very seriously. This budget reflects these priorities, and the Finance minister deserves high praise for making this a reality.

We are making these changes because every household in the province knows that you can't live beyond your means. While we get our spending in order, we must also be cognizant of the need to improve British Columbia's competitiveness. Over the past decade tens of thousands of British Columbians left the province to find jobs in other areas of Canada. We will reverse that course, and we will reverse it by making British Columbia attractive to investors once again.

Here's what we're doing. We've cut the corporate income tax rate from 16.5 percent to 13.5 percent. We've eliminated the provincial sales tax on production machinery and equipment. By September of this year we will have eliminated the regressive corporate capital tax. We're introducing a new 20 percent flow-through credit for mineral exploration. With this budget we've raised the small business income tax threshold by 50 percent to $300,000.

To protect low-income British Columbians, we've increased the tax credits by 50 percent. We have also increased disability-related tax credits. In total, we have made 13 tax cuts since last July.

It's simply irresponsible to put off tough changes that must be made to bring spending into line with revenues. When we target our resources to key priorities, we need to make sure those dollars are going to people, not bureaucracies.

There is a consensus across the country that our health care system is unsustainable. Our population has grown older, and life expectancy has increased. The costs of drugs, equipment, doctors' fees and health workers' wages and benefits have all grown exponentially. We simply cannot keep up with these funding demands while decreasing taxes and balancing the budget at the same time.

We will be undertaking major structural reforms in health care that will challenge us all to accept short-term pain for long-term improvements in health care. Some of these changes are already underway, such as restructuring regional health governance and delivery and giving health authorities new tools to find savings and efficiencies. We'll be moving forward with a comprehensive nursing strategy and increasing the number of medical school graduates.

Health care is not just about doctors, nurses and hospital beds. The health of our environment is directly linked to the health of our population. That's why I'm pleased that the throne speech and the budget reaffirmed our commitment to new legislation to strengthen drinking water and groundwater protection. We will be allocating more resources to the monitoring of drinking water quality.

We are also taking steps to ensure that our post-secondary institutions are more responsive and accountable to students. Just as students learn differently

and have unique needs and aspirations, our universities and colleges should be adaptable and flexible to ensure that these needs are met. As a former Minister of Advanced Education, I take a particular interest in this area. I have every confidence that Minister Bond will ensure that the changes we are implementing will make British Columbia a leader in post-secondary education over the coming years.

I've been around long enough to know that the tough times don't last, but tough people do. There's no question we are going through challenging times, coming off a decade of lost opportunities and abysmal governments, but we already see encouraging signs of recovery. Our government's agenda as laid out in the budget will build on that momentum.

We have a glorious history in this province. We honour and cherish our past, but some would have us stay there forever. To them I say that British Columbians can and must move forward. This government has a vision for the future that will take us through today's challenges and help us grasp tomorrow's opportunities. By remaining true to our principles and being steadfast in our resolve, we will help build a better future for this province.

Hon. J. Reid: I am honoured today to rise to reply to the budget speech. I have to start by talking about my constituency, because today was such a glorious morning as we were coming in — the sun was shining; the sky was absolutely crystal-clear blue — and I thought about my constituency and all that I was missing at home. Nanaimo-Parksville is my constituency. I'm going to start with Parksville and work my way down the Island. Today in Parksville the tide would have been out. The tides are now lower in the middle of the day. That glistening sand would have been there for all to see. The sea birds would have been circling. It's just about time for the herring to spawn. The eagles would be collecting in groups, as they do this time of year. It's a time when the sea life is rich and bustling and the community is vibrant with the new life that spring brings.

In this budget speech that I am replying to today, I have to think about my community. That scene that is so clear in Parksville is there in Nanoose Bay and in Lantzville and on into Nanaimo. This whole area is built around that life. The life that once was dependent on the resource communities, the life that was composed so much of the forestry and fishing activities, has changed. It's changed over the years. While this is an excellent family area and an excellent place to retire, the economy has had to go through difficult times in that area. I'm proud to say that it has adapted very, very well to the challenges that it's faced.

Nanaimo has expanded northwards with its boundary and its commercial activity, which has put increasing pressures on Lantzville to make decisions about their future. The popularity of Nanoose, well renowned for its golf courses and for its seascape, is also continuing to grow, as well as the community of Parksville.

It's become more oriented toward tourism, but the amount of high-tech in this region is actually very surprising. Quiet businesses are hidden in the background, but are there nonetheless.

While we've moved and changed, at the same time there is a large number of small businesses that have grown up in this area and have become very much the foundation of the economy, working quietly in the background but very significant nonetheless.

When I was running in the last election and communicating with people, they were talking to me about their problems. I believe this budget that has been presented is a reflection of the concerns that people brought to my attention at that time. The concerns were that this is a difficult time that we're in. The economy is struggling in these changes. In the past we've seen a significant decrease in business activity. Businesses have been fleeing the province instead of coming to the province. We're very much in need of new activity in the area, new activity to come in — whether it be the movie industry, whether it be all sorts of small industries or more high-tech. There needs to be those opportunities for those businesses.

In Nanaimo we have Malaspina University College, an excellent institution that provides a good education and good opportunities for young people, but the jobs haven't been there. Jobs for young people has been a very, very serious concern. While we're glad for the tourism — because we have such an incredibly beautiful area, there are opportunities there — we want a greater depth of business that takes place.

In this budget speech the government has outlined that it has a vision and a plan. That's absolutely essential to move us ahead. We've outlined a three-year plan, so it's not a matter of taking it one day at a time. It's not a matter of trying to invent new ideas. We've been consistent with our approach to the economic realities that face us in this province.

There are a number of roles for government. One of those roles is to handle the finances for the collective group of people — this province. We have to make sure that money is available for the services that this collective group of people say they want and say are their priorities. But what happens — as should be obvious, but sometimes we forget — is that a new government comes in and inherits everything that the previous government did. It might be like someone who buys a new house and, upon moving in, finds that they take over all the debts, all the bills, all the correspondence, all the day-to-day functions of the previous residents. That produces a significant challenge for government.

We have a desire — and I believe it's a desire all people share — that we are able to live within our means with a vibrant economy and with a protected environment that will allow us to provide the social programs we deem important as a province. I believe this budget that was presented allows us to get to that

I had an interesting conversation with my mother-in-law recently, who was asking me about some of the changes, as people do: "Why are you doing this, and how are you doing that?" I reminded her of a number of years ago, when she was raising her family and they were being supported through the commercial fishing industry. There were some good seasons, and there were bad seasons. I reminded her that sometimes, when the fishing seasons were not so good, she couldn't provide her family with all the things that maybe the children had the year before, especially when going back to school. I asked her whether she thought she was a bad parent because she had to live within her means and whether the children understood that. She said she felt she was doing the right thing, but, no, the children didn't always understand why that had to take place, and, yes, that was difficult. I said that that's exactly what we're trying to do here. These choices we're making aren't easy choices; they are difficult choices. We're trying to do them as carefully as possible with as much care as possible, but that doesn't change that they are difficult choices we have to make.

This province has had the most generous social programs, with the worst-performing economy, for the last ten years. Unfortunately, the economy has not picked up; and predictably, it hasn't picked up. So we find ourselves in a situation where, while people are becoming more and more accustomed to receiving certain benefits, the government no longer has the means to be able to provide all the benefits that were previously received. People are understandably upset about this and understandably wonder why they're not receiving something they had before.

It's important for people to realize that there's this larger picture of the economy that we're trying to address and that this budget does address. It's a fairly simple, straightforward concept. Businesses are in an area, and businesses employ people. From that, businesses pay taxes, and the people who work for a business pay taxes. The money that's collected goes into the government, and the government spends it on behalf of the people, providing services back to the people and employing people through government in order to deliver those services. If the businesses go away, the jobs go away, the taxes go away, and we have a government with more people employed and not enough money to pay the bills. Again, we also have a government that inherits the previous government's plans and positions and spending.

We have two sides to this ledger. How do we get to a balanced position? How do we get to a position where we can say with confidence, as a government, that we are delivering the best for the people of British Columbia? We have to look at the spending side, and we have to look at the income side. The budget speech made this, I believe, perfectly clear. We have to look at why businesses left this province. I think we've spent a lot of time talking about, in the last number of years, why businesses have left this province — why we weren't competitive with other jurisdictions around us. We had to come up to a level where we could compete with other jurisdictions. When we have investment back in this province, we'll also be increasing the income that will provide the money we need for education, for health care and for the other services that government provides.

On the other side, we have to look at our spending and how we match our spending with our income. Those, again, are very, very difficult decisions we've had to make. We're trying to attract business. We're trying to build up the economic foundation. I'm going to use the analogy that was used in the budget speech, and that's the foundation of a house. The previous government had this house. Meanwhile, they were whittling away at the foundation, which is the businesses that employ the people and pay the taxes. That was the foundation. As long as they were whittling away at that foundation, it imperilled the rest of the house that was built on top of it.

We have to address that problem. We don't have a choice but to address that problem and rebuild that foundation. We've done that by lowering income taxes and by making our tax structure more competitive. This is rebuilding the foundation from the bottom up so that we can have a strong house that sits on top.

On the other side, in reducing spending…. Again, I've heard from so many people that they're so concerned when they see their tax dollars wasted. It's hard enough when they have to give away their hard-earned dollars — the difficulty of earning a living and the hard work that goes into that. When they give up their tax dollars, they want to make sure that those tax dollars aren't spent in frivolous ways and that those tax dollars are extended as far as possible to get the very best result possible, never forgetting the effort and sacrifice that went into raising those dollars in the first place, that went into making that income — holding down that job while raising a family.

In my constituency, because it's an area where there's a large percentage of retired people, one of the areas that's very important is health care. This budget speech is a reminder to people that the cost of health care is shared by all of the people. We do have rising health care costs. We said that we need to pay nurses more because they're in such high demand, not only across this continent but around the world, and that we have to attract and keep nurses. Somebody has to pay that increased cost. There's an increase in cost.

We say that doctors are valuable. They're very mobile. Doctors can leave for many different jurisdictions. We have exceedingly well trained doctors in B.C. When they're frustrated, when they don't believe they're compensated fairly, they threaten to leave. The people have said to us: "We've got to maintain our health care system." So we have to look at how we compensate doctors. When those costs for doctors rise, where does the money come from? It's a serious problem. We have doctors, nurses and many other exceedingly well trained health care professionals in B.C.

We have to make some choices. We've made choices about how health care is administered, so that people can't come to us and say: "You're wasting dollars on administration." We've said that we're going to put patients first, and we put patients first by not have dollars wasted on administration, but by targeting every dollar that we can directly on patient services. That's a choice that we've had to make in order to extend the dollars available for health care.

People are constantly contacting my office — and, I'm sure, everyone else's office — about Pharmacare benefits and wondering when one medicine or another medicine will be added to the Pharmacare list. It's again important to remember that every time there is an increase in Pharmacare benefits, the money has to come from somewhere, and there's no new money.

It would be unfair to suggest to people in any less than an honest way that we aren't in very difficult times with a very, very serious deficit facing us. This is not something that we would wish upon ourselves. Indeed, governments have to adapt to the circumstances they find themselves in. While as government there's no use complaining about circumstances, we still have to deal with them. We didn't anticipate what was going to happen in the technology industry and stocks and marketplace last summer. No one could have predicted the terrible events of September 11 or how they continue right now to work their way through our economy. Those were a surprise to us and to everyone else.

The softwood lumber dispute continues to go on, and it puts us under difficulties as a province that has been so tied into the forest industry and the forestry sector. While resolution isn't anywhere close, we have to deal with that.

We're not going to complain about these circumstances ? this is life ? but as government we're expected by the people of this province to react to these circumstances and to deal with them in as sustainable a way as possible. We're being honest with the people of British Columbia and saying: "These are some tough times, these are difficult circumstances, and we are reacting to them."

We've been honest in this budget. We've been honest in looking at it being a realistic budget. We're not trying to hide the bad news from people; we're not trying to give them nice, pleasant answers. We have a three-year plan that we believe is going to help give them the stability they need to make decisions. We can't keep promising people anything they want. We've been clear; we've been honest. We're trying to build up the economy. At the same time, we are trying to contain the costs of government.

In this consistent approach, there will be people who are impacted, and there will be people who have been frustrated by the changes that we have introduced. We hope that people will understand that we're doing this to work together with everyone. We believe that everyone in this province does have the same goals in mind. Those goals are a fiscally sound province, an energetic province, able to compete with the very best in the world — not just in Olympics or in sports but in every other way.

We do have a vision, and we do have a plan, and it's not going to be easy. We are willing to make the tough decisions, and we're also willing to look at innovative solutions to the problems that we find ourselves in.

Part of this is to examine different options open to government, such as public-private partnerships. How can we get important infrastructure still progressing in this province at a time when government, quite honestly, doesn't have the dollars to put into those investments? How can we work with the private sector to attract those investment dollars to increase our economic activity? We're exploring those options, and we'll continue to work in different ministries to seek out solutions to those problems.

In my role, I've had communities coming to me and asking me to look at this, because they'd like the projects to go ahead sooner rather than later. I'm being very honest with them and sincere that we will look at these. I don't know what the answers are yet, but we are exploring different options to try to solve these problems.

It's very important for all of us to keep in mind that we're working together to try to find solutions. It always distresses me when people think there are somehow differences in this province that will result in different outcomes. I believe that we really do have the same goals in mind. We do have to listen to each other, look at where people have been impacted, try to mitigate those impacts as much as possible, and support people and work with the communities and with new ideas that come along. We can build up this province so that we will have jobs for our young people. Communities like mine and Nanaimo, Parksville, Lantzville and Nanoose will see the increase in economic activity. They will see the jobs for their children, and they will see that all opportunities that B.C. has will be there awaiting them.

In conclusion, I'd like to say that I support this budget speech. I believe that this budget is hard news for British Columbia — but good news.

H. Long: Mr. Speaker, I'm privileged and proud to rise today and speak to the budget speech as well as the throne speech — together.

Most of the members know where Powell River–Sunshine Coast is. Just to bring them up to speed on exactly where it is, it starts at Port Mellon on the Sunshine Coast and goes all the way up to Namu on the whole west side of the mainland of British Columbia, just below the North Coast. It's hugely dependent on the forest industry. We have two pulp and paper mills in the region which are the major employers for Sechelt and the Sunshine Coast as well as Powell River.

First, Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate both the Premier and the Minister of Finance on the budget that came down from Finance and also the Speech from the Throne for the Premier. In both instances, they're working hand in hand for British Columbia to bring a better life to all those people in my riding and throughout the province.

I know that in my riding, I've had some people ask me questions about the budget and the throne speech and exactly how that was going to impact on them. I think there are a lot of people out there who are misguided by some information that has not been correct. They're mimicking it. I find that a lot of the people I've talked to — after I spoke with them and they understood exactly what we were trying to accomplish and the time period and what we were left with — understand better.

I can take, for instance, the teachers. During the reign of the NDP in this province, I think they got zero-zero-and-2, if I'm not mistaken, on their raises. With this government, sure, we had to put them back to work and call it an essential service, but they got 2½ over three years, which I think is incredible. As well as that, I feel they got a certain amount of job security that the private sector today does not have. I think the professional teachers understand, and most teachers are professionals. I've got to hand that to them — that most of the ones I talk to are professional and want to teach the children. They feel they have a pretty good deal going for them under the circumstances of the economy today.

I also know that some of the people in my riding are concerned with health care. There's been a misrepresentation of how much money was in health care. They're saying that health care funding was cut, and we know that not to be truth. A billion dollars more in one year into health care is not cutting health care. That's adding to health care. We have to find new ways to spend that money within the health care system for the patients, to make sure the patients get care.

I want to say to the people in Powell River specifically and Sechelt as well, who have hospitals, that it's incumbent that we find new ways through the regions to deliver those services to the people. We have given a mandate to the regions to come up with new and cost-saving ways to deliver that service. We have to wait and work with them and with the communities and with the hospitals to make sure that when we deliver these health care services, we really give a good service to all those people in our ridings.

I come from small business. There's another misconception out there: that small business and business somehow are in conflict with labour. That's a fallacy. In our company we have over 100 union members. Our company could not operate without them. We depend on them. They're our ambassadors. We work with them; they work with us. They have a good living, and I hope that we can run our company properly so we can make a profit and reinvest in what we do in the transportation business. It's not a battle between labour and companies and business; it's a cooperation between the two.

It kind of upsets me to see some of the public sector unions trying to drive a wedge between unions and people in business, when it's absolutely imperative that we work together. [Applause.] Just a little reprieve here.

I've got to bring another thing up. In Sechelt, for instance, we have more than the B.C. average of seniors. In Sechelt 21 percent of the people are seniors — with a B.C. average, my understanding is, of 12 percent. That's huge. They have a concern. They want to make sure things are happening. They want to make sure they're looked after and they're thought of. I know that they, through our budgets and so on, have taken a bit of a hit, too, but a lot of those seniors are taking it with pride. They know they are part of the solution. They know they're going to be part of the solution in the long run, and therefore they accept that and they work with us.

I'm proud to represent those people. They have one of the biggest clubs for seniors on the Sunshine Coast. They have their own buildings. They have their own auditorium. They have many, many functions for seniors there, and I commend them on what they do for the people on the Sunshine Coast.

When we get down to cutting red tape for business…. That's probably one of the more basic ones that I'm familiar with. When we start cutting red tape, we're saying to small business and businesses: "Come on in. It's past the era where we're going tax you out of this province. It's past the time where we're going to say that we're going to give you the right and a proper tax structure so you can flourish in this province."

When I say that, I go back and think about other people. I mean the real small businesses in my community, the ones that actually create the bulk of the jobs throughout my whole riding and probably throughout British Columbia. A lot of those small people and small companies — they employ one, two, three and anywhere up to ten people — actually put their money up front. They have nothing to fall back on except their business and how they perform their business. They can't get unemployment insurance like a lot of the other people working for them. They really take those risks. I've got to commend those that put their money up and create jobs for people in the future, and I think it's incumbent upon our government to make sure we're there for them and that we create the climate so they can flourish in the future.

It's funny. I have people talk to me about the Finance minister and about the budget and some of the cuts. I see the signs up. I saw them out here on the lawns on the weekend, saying the cuts go too deep. First they're admitting there have to be cuts. The second thing they're saying is: "Well, they're too deep." They don't have the knowledge, which we have in this House and the Finance minister has, of how deep we really have to cut to make this province flourish in the future. Only the government knows at this time. We've

tried to tell the people and the unions how deep we have to cut, but some of them don't believe us.

I know personally…. I'll go back in my history. I was running my company. I got into a situation where we seemed to be having some financial difficulty, so I hired a good accountant. Do you think I wanted to believe that accountant? There was just no way, in my business, that I wanted to believe we had the kind of trouble we had in our company. It took a lot of talking on his behalf and a lot of proving to me that I was wrong. I had to clean up the way I was running my business and how I was operating.

That's what we're saying today. The Finance minister is saying to this province that after ten years of neglect by the NDP, this is what we're putting up with, and I commend him on taking the stand for the future of British Columbia.

I mean, there are so many things within this budget and within this throne speech that are important to people. I think we came under criticism for lowering the taxes to all the people of British Columbia. Well, those are the funds that go back into the economy. They say: "We don't see any results yet." The results are there. We've had a downturn in our economy — it's worldwide; we're almost in a world recessional time right now — but things will get better. They will spend their money. We will create the jobs in this province after the budget and they come to fruition.

Mr. Speaker, I think it's important that we all pull together. I think it's time that labour, business and government really put a concerted effort into pulling together to make sure that this province works, because we're all in the same boat. We're all in the same province. It's the greatest province in Canada, and I think it's worth really working for in the future.

I have a letter here that was not written by me and not even a party member or anyone else. Opposition leaders have a tendency to read letters out within this House. It quite clearly lays out to the people of Powell River in a letter to the editor just exactly what they feel out there — a lot of supporters. It says: "Short-term pain for long-term gain." It goes into great detail. It says to let us not forget the huge debt that came down upon us. The fudge-it budget was one they referred to here. Then they go on to say that the previous NDP government probably would not have been elected in the election previous to this one if they had not lied to the people of British Columbia. They had to virtually lie to make the government of British Columbia.

It does go on to draw a lot of conclusions to many things that the NDP have done in the past, so I don't feel too bad when I stand up and defend the throne speech and also defend the budget here today. I think these private-public partnership, P3s, that we're going into are going to be a fact of life. I hear people say that we're going to have to, possibly, have tolls on our highway. Well, we live in one part of the country that's 100 percent dependent on B.C. Ferries. I think they call it a toll. I think we pay a big toll to live in our part of the country, and that may be expensive for us, but if people came and saw the kind of beauty we live in, it's worth it.

I just hope that in the coming months, the B.C. Ferries, when they raise their tolls, remember that this is very important to the people — how much we pay. In fact, I want to put on the record today for my constituents that they already pay above the average on B.C. ferries, both on their discounts — for what they get for their pre-bought tickets — and for the lift-off charge and the mileage. They pay a little more than most places. I hope they take that into consideration, when the rates go up shortly — that they do not move as high on the ones…until they get it up to the average for all the fleet.

This budget is good for British Columbia. It's good for the people of the province. I think that once the unions and the NDP, who are one and the same…. I'm talking about the public sector unions and the NDP; they come from the same house of cards. Once we do, though, put down the gauntlet and start working together…. There's going to be tough times. Sure, we're going to have to make some cuts. Sure, there's a tough budget ahead of us. But you know, in the end, this province will rise up, it will carry on, and it will be the best and strongest province in Canada again. I believe that will happen with the direction of this Premier and the ministries that we have on that side — I think we've got a lot of strong, good people working for it — as well as the whole back bench.

I think the last thing I want to say is that a lot of people in this province or even in my riding have pointed a finger at all these MLAs, the 77 MLAs which are Liberal, and said: "They don't have heart. Look at what they're doing." Well, if you take all the MLAs from the Liberal side, they do have a heart. They have families. They have concerns, just like everyone else in the province. For one sector of the province out there to yell and scream that other people don't have a heart…. They are the ones that have to do the hard stuff. They are the ones who are elected to sit in this House and make decisions that a lot of those people could not make.

They asked us to make the decisions, and we have to make those decisions for them and for us. As hard as it may be, Mr. Speaker, this budget is necessary; this throne speech is necessary. We must carry on, be strong and show the province that it will work.

Hon. G. Bruce: It's a pleasure indeed for me to rise today and speak on this budget. Indeed, it's a pleasure to be able to follow my colleague, the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast. He and I spent time in this House 12 years ago, ten years ago, 11 years ago…. It was a long time ago.

It's nice to be able to be back here and, more than that, to be able to talk about a budget that really is going to help turn the province of British Columbia around after ten dark, dismal years of incompetence — probably the worst government that we've ever seen in the country of Canada, never mind in the province of British Columbia. Indeed, it's nice to be able to take

part in the debate of a budget that has a plan to it and a process that will allow us to get out of the difficulty that we currently are faced with after what the previous NDP government has done.

Before I actually get into the budget itself and the different items that I'd like to comment on, I'd like to speak a little bit about the actual development of this budget. This is a first — how this budget has been developed here in the province of British Columbia. In fact, it speaks to the whole new era of government in British Columbia.

The Premier of this province talked many years ago — I think it was just after the 1996 election — of his vision and view for how this Legislature ought to run and ought to operate, the notion of true free votes in the House and the matter of how you should have the debate take place in this House.

In fact, we saw that first free vote here not too long ago on a very important piece of legislation. It wasn't frivolous. All members were given the opportunity to vote their conscience, and they did. We had one of our members that voted against that legislation. We also had another member that voted against two sections of that legislation.

It's important to note that when we have 77 of 79 members in this House, there will be free and unfettered debate. It's a testament to the Premier of this province. Often you've heard leaders in the past talk about the need for changes in the Legislative Assembly and how debate ought to take place, but as they get closer to assuming power and as they get closer to taking over the leadership and the Premiership of the province, they tend to wane from it.

Our Premier did not do that. In fact, he's encouraged that. Here, not too long ago as I mentioned, we had that first true free vote as a government in the House here in the province of British Columbia.

Following as part of that, we've had this whole building of the budget where we've employed the Treasury Board process of the past, the normal way, but what's different about that is that we have private members on Treasury Board. It's never been the case before. We have private members that are bringing their views and their ideas to Treasury Board as the budget process is being developed.

We have the government caucus committees that have taken a very active and detailed role in the development not only of the budget but of service plans and the impact that they have on the building of legislation and the building of economic strategy.

This is a first. This is a first in the Legislatures and the House of Commons here in Canada. It perhaps isn't a first as it relates to parliaments around the world because the mother parliament in Westminster made this change many years ago where they introduced free votes to the House back in the early seventies. In that first instance, every time there was a private member of the government side that voted against the government, there was a great to-do. But after two or three or four or half a dozen times of that happening, it became the notion that that's what will happen within the House, and there will be those that will vote against certain things.

With that and with the steps we've taken in regards to the budget-building process that has been developed here and the inclusion of private members in that, I think we now lead the Commonwealth in the new way, the new era, of how the Legislative Assembly ought to operate and the fact that…. [Applause.] Yes, it's historic. That's been an important part.

Now the budget itself. No sooner had we introduced the budget than the stats came out that there were 27,000 new jobs created here in the province. We're leading Canada in the development of those jobs. That's not as a result of the budget coming out, but it's a result of changes that are happening here through the last eight months of this province with the new government in place and a new feeling of confidence, I believe, by the population — with the understanding that there are some very difficult and tough decisions that have to be made. There is a bitter pill to be swallowed after ten years of neglect. However, I believe that in spite of some of the rhetoric we hear, the people of British Columbia have truly elected us to do those difficult things, and we must not waver.

It's ironic that what you hear on the streets and in the different demonstrations that take place…. The very people that were part of the process of the government of the last ten years, the NDP government, are now the ones again speaking out and trying to dissuade us from doing the things that need to be done. Have they offered new and creative solutions? No, they've just offered that we should carry on in the way they did business and ran government in British Columbia. They haven't offered any new ideas. It's just: "Stop, stop, stop." The fact of the matter is that we don't have that latitude, and the people of British Columbia understood that in the last election. They clearly demonstrated that with the result that was shown here in the House, with 77 to two. They wanted a change.

When there are as many of us as there are — 77 of the 79 members — we must be careful that we consider what we are undertaking carefully, and that we listen to our constituents and understand what they are saying to us but don't back off from the purpose of what needs to be done. It's important, too, that where we make a mistake — and we will make a mistake — we change those mistakes, as the Minister of Finance brought in with his budget in respect to the bus passes for the people in the areas that have transit service, to make sure they're available. It's important that we take the second look at things. That's not pulling away, and that's not wavering from the things that need to be done. That's just taking a good second look. When there are 77 of us in this House, it's all the more important that we do take that second look.

I believe things are turning — as I say, the 27,000 jobs and housing starts are up in the province. We have a long way to go, Mr. Speaker. Very clearly we do. But I believe that with the introduction of this budget, we are laying a plan and a path that shows,

between this year and over the next three, that we will get to that end result where this province will once again be a leader in Canada and will not be a have-not province. How shameful it was to find that, in fact, this province with all its resources, with all its wealth, with all its beauty and the very fine people we have who live here in British Columbia, would be considered a have-not province. After ten years of clearly the most reprehensible government we've ever seen in Canada, they managed to bring us down to be a have-not province.

There's work to be done. When you look at the fact that this budget brings with it a $4.4 billion deficit — not an easy thing to say — it's a difficult challenge for all of us. As we've gone through the process of building this budget in an attempt to change the direction of government and to get our costs under control, we're still faced with a $4.4 billion deficit. Even worse is the fact that over the three years, this will end up being a $40 billion debt that we have to pay for — a $40 billion total debt in the province of British Columbia.

It took 50 years to get to $17 billion, and it took ten years to get from $17 billion — ten years with the former government — to $36.5 billion worth of debt. Now the task for all of us is to turn that around and, as this budget lays out, to get us back along the path to a balanced budget by 2004-05.

What I think is particularly encouraging in the budget is the strong emphasis on small business, and many have spoken in the House here today about that and how important small business is to us. We've heard from many governments across Canada in a variety of jurisdictions and parties, whether they be federal or provincial. All speak and talk glowingly about the importance of small business.

You know, if you're in small business, as I am — and my hon. colleague is also in small business — it was almost a death sentence as soon as you heard politicians talk about small business because you knew you were going to get clanged. Nobody truly understood the importance of small business, so I'm happy to say, when I look at my colleagues here in this caucus, that we have a great number that not only understand small business but are in fact small business people.

It is a huge component of our economy. The greatest employer in the province is small business. That employing group is really a small business of 50 employees or less. That entrepreneurship that's necessary, that faith in yourself and the people that are working with you to succeed and an ideal of some sort of endeavour — that you've got the courage and the guts to take your whole family investment and put it into a small business and keep it alive….

You know what happens in small business when things get difficult? You don't have the latitude or the luxury of saying: "Well, I'm going to back out now. I'm going to close the doors." What you do is go out and find another brother or another sister or another aunt or another uncle who wants to invest with you a little bit more, to try and get you through those difficult times, because you believe.

After these past ten years of what we've been through, small business in British Columbia has been thrashed by ten years of neglect, ten years of absolutely rotten government in the province. Now small business in this province has a chance. It has a chance to renew itself. Many are simply hanging on. They're hanging on by their fingernails in the hopes that we will carry on and do the things we need to do, like increasing the threshold of small business from $200,000 to $300,000. For some who are hanging on, it won't make any difference because the profits aren't there, but for others it will make a big difference. More importantly, it's a message. It's a signal of how important small business is to us and the understanding of what it can mean to our economy.

With what we're intending to do in working through employment standards and the regulatory world of Workers Compensation Board and those types of things, which often, as people build these things who've never been in small business and have no understanding of what another rule or another regulation means to you…. You don't have a human resources department to go and look after all these things, which some of the bigger corporations do. The human resources department is you, yourself. You've probably already put ten, 12, 13 hours in. You've got to put the extra hour or two hours in to look after that human resources concern. They're important. You can't just leave that.

Where it's a rule and a regulation that's foisted upon you — perhaps not well thought out; many times not well thought out — the cost to small business is huge. We, as the Minister of State for Deregulation is doing, are working to reduce that type of regulatory burden on small business to unfetter them, to free them, to let them get on with what it is they do best: the building and development of their business.

Returning that entrepreneurship to the province is huge, because we chased that spirit out of this province. We chased that ideal of being able to go, and, yes, you can go and you can make a profit — a wonderful world…. You can make a profit. Or, in fact, you can go broke, but that's an opportunity to do one or the other.

It isn't done on the backs of the people that work with you. You need those people. They're huge. They are the most important resource assets you have within your small business, and we've built up over these ten years an attitude that it was them against us. Whoever "them" was and whoever "us" was, it was more that there would be divisions than it was that we would work together.

Small business now has an opportunity to grow. It has an opportunity to blossom here in the province. I look at my own community — four central little communities: Lake Cowichan, the city of Duncan, Chemainus and Ladysmith. I was born and raised there and am proud to be an Islander and proud to be from the Cowichan Valley, but I can tell you, hon. members,

never in all of my life have I seen the streets, buildings and small businesses in my communities in the most difficult situation as they've ever been, as it's been these last ten years. They're crying out for help, and they're not standing there with their hands out. They just want us to get out of the way. They want government to get its regulatory regime out of the way so they can get on with doing those things they do best.

I look at Lake Cowichan, a great little community up there. It had a shellacking in the forest industry. The forest sector has taken a huge hit from ten years of a regime of a Forest Practices Code that put an extra billion dollars on the industry in the way of additional costs. Softwood lumber has caused us untold harm in the central area of Vancouver Island, but I can see things starting to flourish in Lake Cowichan. We've got a community there that's been active and strong. We've got a mayor and a municipal council that are there and working hard to rebuild that community and to encourage the entrepreneurship to come alive again.

Duncan. You know, Duncan for years was the crossroads where the E&N would come through, and a strong agricultural base has now developed a very strong and vibrant wine industry. One day we'll rival that which takes place up in the Okanagan. We have nine wineries that are coming on, and it's a great wine. It's an industry that builds beautifully into the tourist industry on Vancouver Island, which also will build.

That's entrepreneurship again. That's people within the agricultural sector going out and finding those very special, small eco-regions where you can grow grapes and produce what you need so that you can develop a good wine.

You take our little community of Chemainus that learned a long time ago how it is you rebuild in the face of adversity. It took the arts and built with the arts a strong and vibrant tourist industry, one that needs to be rejuvenated again. But with that understanding that….

You know, we often talk about tourism. We say that if we have a tourism industry, then we can't have a mining industry, or we can't have a forestry industry. We can't have heavy industry. But, in fact, we can. What we have within the industry that's here on Vancouver Island is an opportunity to take, again, another asset and develop it into the tourist industry while it's an active heavy industrial sector.

Take our little community of Ladysmith, the town of Ladysmith, and the Festival of Lights. The activity that goes on in the Festival of Lights now brings to that community on the third Thursday, I think it is, of November approximately 15,000 people for the light-up that takes place. It's absolutely phenomenal. Busloads of people are now coming over from Washington State and from the mainland for that event. It packs the town — a huge event. Then again, what you have there is the gutsiness of individuals, of people coming together and building their community and, from that, the development of small business.

Maple Bay is a little adjunct off to the side, a beautiful little enclave of our community. It's got some of the greatest diving that you can find — beach diving, scuba diving — in the world. That great diver, Jacques Cousteau, once wrote about the beauty of diving at Maple Bay. I'm fortunate enough to go diving there. The life that's in that bay….

Even a greater story than that is the little community of Crofton, my home, where I live. There we have a pulp mill, a paper mill. We have the tugs and the ferries, the ships and the barges that come and go. You can sit on your sundeck and watch this activity that takes place. It's good British Columbia industry that's taking place. We have a new company that's taken over. NorskeCanada has taken over that pulp and paper operation, and I see optimism there. I see investment. I see an understanding of what the pulp and paper industry means to us. I see the opportunity for expansion in that facility.

But the real story in all of that is during all the years of environmental calamity that was going on, which people were concerned about, the steps that have been taken and the investment that's been had in that particular operation have now greatly restored life to the waters. When you dive in and around the waters of Vesuvius and Stuart Channel, the life that's there in the ocean today is just incredible. There's tiny, tiny life right at the beginning of the food chain. The crabs and the prawns that have come back, the sea life and the plant life that's there in abundance are all part of a renewal and part of the fact that, yes, you can have manufacturing, you can have heavy industry, you can have a tourist industry and agricultural industry in virtually a small geographical area such as the Cowichan Valley — a beautiful future for us all.

If I climb to the top of Mount Provost — which is that very unique mountain, as I drive through the Cowichan Valley, with the two humps to it — and I stand at the top of that mountain and look out at the view that you have over Cowichan Bay and Quamichan Lake, Somenos Lake, the town of Duncan, up through the valley to Lake Cowichan and over to Chemainus, quite frankly, I don't believe I have ever seen a sight as beautiful and as plentiful as what God created from the top of that mountain, and I've travelled much of the world. It's absolutely stunning. It makes you stand back, when you're up there, and pause for a moment to just reflect about how much we have — not only what I have in the valley that I live in and what we have on Vancouver Island, but what we have in all of this great province, how much we have to be thankful for, and how much more we can do and how better we can do it, as this government builds to bring about a new era in British Columbia.

Bringing about that new era is through the whole aspect of individual responsibility. We waned from that. We became a province that turned to government to do everything. If there was a problem, bring in a law. If it wasn't right, bring in a regulation — always turning to government as though somehow government had the answer and government knew what was

We weren't mistaken, actually. We made that decision this past May, and we decided that once again we as a society have to take individual responsibility. It isn't government. Government is only one portion of how society builds itself. It's there to provide a certain level of service and a certain order. Most importantly, what we have to do as government is make sure that we're encouraging individual responsibility, entrepreneurship — the aspect of taking responsibility for your own life.

We must be there as a government to protect the most vulnerable. We must be there to ensure that for those who have difficulties beyond their own control, there are people there to help them. We as a government must make sure that our services provide for that but not be out front, not be saying that all of what will happen in the province will be done by us as government. Heavens, no. No, we want to be back. We want to be quiet. We want to be out of the way. We want to once again encourage the individual to be able to take advantage of the great prospects and the opportunities that are here in this grand province and to flourish on their own and with one another in building together.

When we look across this province, we look at the forestry sector and what's facing us — both with the softwood lumber and the tasks that the Minister of Forests has in regards to tenure reform and new stumpage regulation and the softwood lumber issue that's there. One would think: by golly, the forestry sector — what a mess. How bad it is. Is there a future? Yes, there is a future. This is the greatest resource one could ever be blessed with. For us to have it here in our confines of this great province, we are very fortunate indeed — far from it being sunset. Yes, it's in need of change.

The best counter we could ever come up with, in regards to softwood lumber, is to go and flourish in other markets, to build the Chinese market, to build new markets in India, to develop new products in finished form here in this province and to ship them elsewhere, to take prefab homes that we could build right here on Vancouver Island and have them shipped to the Philippines. There are people today who, because of the change in government, are looking to do just those types of things. There's a strong and bright future in the forestry sector.

The tourism industry. My goodness. The very first part of the tourism industry, in coming to British Columbia if you fly into the Vancouver International Airport…. There is absolutely not another area that one could fly into that has the magnificence of flying into Vancouver. You can go around the world. You can fly into Britain. You can fly into Cape Town. You can fly into Sydney. None of them — bar none — has the beauty and the drama of what it's like to fly into that international airport here in British Columbia. What a grand opening, what a grand introduction to what tourism can be here in this province and how we need to build on it.

You know, sometimes we look too big. Sometimes we look at tourism as though it's got to be a huge megaproject. I think it's wonderful that we're bidding — and hopefully we'll be successful in the bid — for the Winter Olympics, but if you look at our own little areas and how we can generate small business and entrepreneurship in that way in building the tourist industry, there's a thousand things that can be done.

Golfing alone…. Unfortunately, I've had very little time to golf in the last year or so. My game wasn't very good even when I golfed a little bit, but now it's even worse. One benefit about that is that I keep getting golf balls for Christmas, and now I'm really ahead in the number of golf balls I have, because I'm not golfing. The bag's really getting loaded with golf balls, but I'll quickly dispense with that the very first opportunity that I get to go golfing.

I was in Vancouver at a conference about a year or so ago, and we had an opportunity in the afternoon to go golfing. One of the guys said: "Look, there's a whole pile of courses around here on the lower mainland. They're beautiful courses. And he listed off a number. "Let's go off to one of them." Four of us took off, and away we went.

We drove an hour, and we finally got to the golf course and had a wonderful time and a wonderful game, and then we drove an hour back to the hotel. On the way back, of course, the hour's drive was in traffic, bumper-to-bumper. That's fine; that's great. That happens.

I said: "You know, from my little community in Chemainus, if you took a pencil and drew a circle around an hour's drive out from that community, the number of golf courses from Qualicum to Victoria that are long; the big ones that are short; the executive ones…." The beauty of each one of those golf courses — you know, the difference in respect to the degree of difficulty one could find there…. The variety was tremendous.

The hour's drive from my little community of Chemainus, which happens to have a very nice little golf course, is exquisite. Up and over the Malahat, coming here to Victoria — what a phenomenal drive. There you are at the top of the Malahat, looking over the Saanich Peninsula, the Saanich Inlet. You know, you could actually have a conversation driving through the wonderful constituency of Malahat–Juan de Fuca. Going the other way, up through Nanaimo all the way up to Qualicum, a number of golf courses are there and along the coastline — the beauty that surrounds you just in that drive.

Do we see ourselves as a little golfing mecca? You know the way we'd look at it at home? We'd say: "Well, we only have one golf course." Maybe we have three. We have the Mount Brenton golf course, the Cowichan golf course, the Duncan Meadows golf course and the March Meadows golf course. That would be four — okay. Stick with me.

Quite frankly, I bet you we have 35 to 40 golf courses in that hour's drive, so we've got a golfing mecca. You can fly into Vancouver and have that great view, if you're a golfer from some other place. Perhaps you're from Japan and are coming here to Canada. You can flip over to the Island to the Cassidy Airport, and you've got the pick of wherever you'd like. Not only do you have the opportunity of a number of golf courses to play on, but you've got a beautiful hour's drive to be able to get there. We need to look at things differently in that respect.

The mining industry on Vancouver Island, as I mentioned earlier, used to be a very large contributor to our economy. I think there may be another day for that. We're going to have to change our thinking, though, on some of that. We've come to this notion that mining is okay if it's not in British Columbia. That's basically what we have said over the last ten years. We've said to the mining industry: "Thank you for your $4 billion contribution, but no longer do we need you here in British Columbia. By the way, thank you to the mining industry for the $75,000 to $80,000 that you may pay per job — per good union job — in the mining industry, but we no longer need those jobs here in the province." That's what the former government said to the mining industry.

We have a tremendous opportunity here in British Columbia. I feel — as I'm sure my colleagues in the House feel — that this budget that was presented here several days ago is the first step of many steps that need to be taken, which the people of the province have asked us to undertake in rebuilding the economy of the province, the social service side of the province, and once again making British Columbia a have province which we all can be proud of, and a leader here in this great country of Canada.

Hon. L. Stephens: I'm very pleased to rise and take my place in the debate today in support of our government's budget, but before I do that, I want to thank my family. I want to take this opportunity to do that: my children first and foremost, for the support and encouragement they have placed in me over these past 11 years. Having three grandchildren, too, gives for me new meaning and purpose and importance to the critical and crucial work that we do here in this place.

As everyone in the House knows, we as elected members representing our constituents could not do this job without the understanding and support of our families. If it weren't for them, many of us wouldn't be here. For all of us who depend so much on our families for support, I think we need to make sure that we say it and that we let them know how much we appreciate that support as often as we possibly can.

I also want to thank the constituents of Langley who have shown their faith in me over these past 11 years as well — first in 1991, again in 1996 and then in 2001. I feel very honoured and privileged to have been able to represent such a wonderful, caring community in this magnificent building over those past 11 years. Just as they have shown their faith in me, I pledge once again to act in their best interests and the best interests of all people in British Columbia as we move forward to build a strong and vibrant economy that will allow us to provide the important and critical social services we all need and deserve. I'm thrilled to be standing here today not only as the MLA for Langley but also as the Minister of State for Women's Equality.

I want to take this opportunity to state that the foundation for the throne speech delivered by Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor was grounded in a new era of hope and prosperity for British Columbia. Last spring British Columbians gave our government an overwhelming mandate for change. We are acting on that mandate to build a solid foundation for economic and social renewal. Our government was elected to lead the province forward and to break new ground in search of brighter horizons. Our government's priorities will not waver, and our mission will not be altered. In the throne speech our government made it clear that it would not break its trust with people. We will revitalize British Columbia's economy, restore sound fiscal management, and put patients and students first.

The central mission for our government is to revitalize the economy just as quickly as possible. The sobering events of September 11 have impacted our lives in many ways, and the global economy is still reeling from the impact. Our provincial economy has been hit especially hard. However, our government has a solid plan to turn our provincial economy around. The steps we have taken and will continue to take will make our economy more competitive, diversified and attractive to investors.

Last summer we acted upon all of the 22 commitments we vowed to undertake in our first 90 days. The Attorney General has appointed an independent task force to review the options, models, costs and effectiveness of public sector pay equity legislation. The task force will be making its recommendations at the end of this month, and we look forward to hearing what those recommendations may be.

The throne speech also spoke of our commitment to engage all British Columbians in discussion of the principles to guide the provincial government's negotiating mandate in treaty talks. A referendum will be conducted later this spring by mail-in ballot that will put forward questions that have been approved by this assembly. Those questions will build on the work done by the Select Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs. As the throne speech clearly stated, our government's aim is to help all voters become informed about the referendum questions and the issues they address in as fair and neutral a manner as possible.

The throne speech also spoke of our government's commitment to giving local governments more autonomy and better planning and revenue tools to enhance community stability. My colleague the Minister of State for Community Charter has been working diligently with the Community Charter Council, which was ap-

pointed by legislation this spring. The council will table its report, including draft legislation, in a White Paper that will be publicly released during this session.

All of these initiatives will help pave the way towards greater prosperity. Our government has done its best to focus its scarce resources where they are needed most: on patients, students and the most vulnerable. Our government also remains committed to long-term improvement in services for women, children and families, including developing a sustainable child care strategy that will be partnership-driven, community-focused and targeted to those most in need.

In the past eight months our government has done much to refocus health care funding on patients' needs. We have restructured regional health governance and delivery to provide greater flexibility and strategic planning of health resources. We gave health authorities new tools to find savings and efficiencies. More nurses are being trained. Significantly higher wages, along with Canada's lowest income tax rates, are serving as powerful incentives to attract and retain skilled nurses. The Community Care Facility Act will be substantially improved to establish a more responsive, results-based framework for community care that provides greater flexibility for individual care and consistent care standards. Those standards will not be compromised. The health and safety of seniors, youth and children will be protected.

We've also acted on our election commitment to provide greater flexibility and local autonomy to elected school boards. New legislated class-size limits will ensure that students' needs are better protected without the rigidity that prevented commonsense solutions at the school and district levels. We will establish new mechanisms to give parents real and meaningful input into education delivery and quality in our schools and greater control and choice for their children.

Our government understands that the needs of patients and students must come first, and that is exactly what our throne speech outlined and what the budget will deliver. I want to congratulate the Minister of Finance for his hard work in preparing this very important budget. For the first time, three-year forecasts were set out for each individual ministry. The budget speech outlines our blueprint for B.C., a blueprint that consists of eliminating the deficit, building a strong and vibrant economy, and serving British Columbians well by getting government right. Restoring sound fiscal management, revitalizing British Columbia's economy and addressing patient and student needs are our government's top goals for the year ahead as it moves toward a balanced budget in 2004-05.

Eliminating the deficit as quickly as possible will avoid burdening future generations of British Columbians with rapidly escalating debt-interest costs. The plan is designed to bring government expenditures into line with revenues over the next three years through planned, phased spending reductions and measures to stimulate the economy. Fundamental restructuring of government will position the province to obtain the maximum benefit from increased economic activity when the economy improves, and it will.

The previous government believed in big government. We do not. We have moved to reduce the size of government. The previous government believed in excessive job security in public service contracts. We do not. Instead, we believe in fair wages and benefits that are comparable to other jurisdictions. The previous government believed in excessive government spending. We believe in revitalizing British Columbia's economy by getting government right. Ultimately, our government's three-year plan will lead to renewed hope and prosperity for British Columbians.

The budget speech clearly reflects that British Columbia must become a province where a vibrant, job-creating economy supports individuals and families to live in responsible, inclusive and caring communities. The challenges we face are huge, but British Columbia has been in tough times before, and every time the people of British Columbia have responded with strength and imagination. We've come through those tough times stronger than before.

Eight months ago people voted for change. They voted to revitalize the economy, restore sound fiscal management and put those patients and those students first. Change is never easy, but deep down people know that although change may be difficult and challenging, we won't get to where we need to be without it. And it all starts with revitalizing our economy. This is our government's central mission, because we know that revitalizing prosperity is the foundation for sustaining and renewing our essential public services. We will do that, and we will do what needs to be done to revitalize our economy after a decade of decline.

We will reduce the red-tape burden on B.C. businesses by one-third over the next two and a half years. We've already eliminated business subsidies. We're consulting on changes to employment standards, workers compensation and the Labour Code, and we'll initiate changes in the next year to provide greater flexibility, fairness and efficiency for employers and employees alike.

Our Minister of Forests is working aggressively with the federal government to resolve the softwood lumber dispute. Regardless, we are going to press on with reforms to forest policy, including market-based stumpage.

The Energy Policy Task Force has been consulting with the public and will be issuing a final report next month. Steps will taken to enhance the Oil and Gas Commission and foster new opportunities in mineral exploration by updating and streamlining the major project assessment process.

We will increase access to Crown land and resources through improvements to the process for evaluating and improving applications. We are also

working with the private sector to increase public-private partnerships. All of these initiatives and more will help revitalize our economy.

By far the biggest fiscal challenge facing the province is in health care. In our first budget for this next year funding will increase to 41 percent, a 7 percentage-point increase, to $10.4 billion. The reason is simple. People want and need the best-quality health care services available, and by putting patients' needs first, that is exactly what we will do.

Most importantly to me, Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of State for Women's Equality in the Ministry of Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services, I have the responsibility to ensure that the needs and concerns of all women in British Columbia are addressed. In our ministry's three-year service plan, we have pledged to address systemic barriers affecting women today. Our ministry's strong community focus means we can develop integrated and coordinated programs that address all areas of women's lives. This focus has shaped our ministry's priorities for women, including aboriginal women, women with disabilities, and immigrant and visible minority women, because the women from these groups have unique and very difficult obstacles to overcome. A strong emphasis will be placed on community services to address those needs. This new approach will help us build strong communities through strong and effective delivery of programs.

As the Minister of State for Women's Equality, I am committed to focusing my vision for women's services on three intertwined areas that are of primary importance to women today: poverty and economic opportunities, women-centred health care, and personal safety and security. There is much work to be done. Women's equality programs are vital to the safety and success of our province.

Violence against women is a major threat to women's health and economic security, and I look forward to working with the Attorney General to help formulate the prevention-of-domestic-violence legislation. We are also committed to developing and implementing a safer community strategy for women in provincial emergency shelters and transition houses. A provincewide perspective for delivering women's services is part of our government's agenda, and our government has protected funding to transition houses, safe homes, second-stage housing and counselling services for women and children who witness abuse, as well as programs for the prevention of violence against women.

Women will have a support system in all places across this province. Women will not have to stay in violent relationships. Women do have a choice. They do have a place to go.

I also look forward to working with the four Health ministers in making sure that the health needs of women are addressed in all regions of the province. We need to ensure that government programs address issues relating to women's economic and social equity and that essential priority services for women remain in place.

A key lesson I've learned over the years is that economic equality really is the cornerstone of equality overall. Women represent one-third of the self-employed workforce in British Columbia. Women-led firms are creating jobs at four times the national average, and we recognize that these are important sources of job growth. That's why we've committed to boosting investment in technological innovation and research in B.C. through reductions in taxes and red tape, and that is why the initiatives laid out in the budget are so important. We must generate economic opportunities for women.

Safe, affordable and accessible child care, family-friendly workplaces, education and training are the keys to breaking the cycle of poverty and creating more economic opportunities for women. Our government is also committed to developing a long-term child care plan that will be partnership driven, community focused, fiscally sustainable and targeted to families who need it the most.

In September we launched a comprehensive child care consultation with British Columbians all across the province. I visited 12 communities, we sent out 20,000 surveys, and the results will be printed on our website shortly. Our government felt that the most effective way to develop a sustainable child care strategy was to listen to the voices of communities. What we heard from our communities will shape our child care plans for the future. A coordinated, integrated and sustainable approach will be developed to target those families and to encourage the expansion of safe, affordable child care spaces.

My goal is to work to improve the lives of all women, to enable them to reach their greatest potential and to live free from discrimination, violence, harassment and poverty. I look forward to working with the private and community service sectors to develop innovative, community-based choices that can build the capacity of families and communities to care for their most vulnerable family members and neighbours.

The throne speech, the budget speech and the three-year service plans are part of our government's openness, accountability and commitment to rebuilding the greatness of this magnificent province. Mr. Speaker, we've laid out our blueprint for prosperity for the next three years, and we will fulfil our mandate.

S. Orr: Many new ideas have entered and been introduced into this Legislature since the new government was formed in May 2001 — ideas that have brought us into the twenty-first century. We have introduced the use of laptop computers in this House, enabling the members who choose to, to work in the twenty-first century environment but still enjoy the feeling of the wonderful heritage and history of this chamber.

One of the most significant things that has happened in this House that is new, something that has never been done before but something that has been the accepted best practice throughout the world by

organizations, businesses and governments — something that the previous administration never did…. Mr. Speaker, we have introduced the first-ever three-year strategic plan for government. Finally, we have joined the twenty-first century, and we have done what every good organization, every successful business and every forward-thinking government has done elsewhere.

We have laid out a responsible, realistic, straightforward and I would even say visionary budget — yes, Mr. Speaker — and a three-year strategic plan. In all the organizations that I have been involved with in the past decade, not-for-profit organizations and for-profit organizations, we always laid out a strategic plan. This is a standard practice and absolutely essential if you want to be successful.

To be honest, it would have been much easier to have just done what has been done in the past — go from budget to budget, react to what seems politically easier and hope that everything worked out okay. Yes, it would have been easier, but it would not have been the responsible way to proceed. I would suggest it was that kind of fiscal irresponsibility that got the previous administration into the mess they left this government in.

My analogy of the past decade is a simple one. I say that because I, like the millions of taxpayers in this province that have lived through this last decade, could only assess the situation from the sidelines. We could only assess what was going on from a very practical point of view. I compared it to building a house. The NDP in 1991 inherited a fairly healthy piece of land and a substantial house. They could have done very many things with this valuable asset to make it grow and become even more valuable. But, no, they decided what they really wanted to do was renovate. They called in their friends and started renovating without a plan, adding on and installing expensive extras without a proper budget in place.

Things got out of control. Nobody had taken the time to figure out what all this was costing. Can we afford it? Do we really need it? Finally, before the renovation is even completed, the bills start rolling in. Now they have to pay Peter and take from Peter to pay Paul. They kept thinking that if they just kept shuffling things around, they could keep the creditors at bay. We all know we can only do that for so long, and then the house of cards starts to tumble. That is what happened.

Now this government has had to take over that fallen-down house of cards and start to rebuild it. We have had to look at the huge, unplanned renovation that we cannot afford and try to figure out a way to get things back to that valuable asset we had a decade ago.

I realize this is a simple analogy of a very complex problem, but it illustrates what a tough job we have been left with. However, I believe that with a proper plan, it can be done. This province had lived without a plan for ten years. That is now all over.

We have had some very difficult decisions, ones that have given me and many of my colleagues many sleepless nights — without protesters. Tough decisions had to be made to get us back on track. You know what is the best? We have a solid, achievable plan — a three-year strategic plan for everyone to see. We have the determination to follow through with that plan, and in 2004 we will have a true, honest balanced budget. We will be offering the taxpayers of this province real accountability for their money.

I want to quote you something from Richard Rees, the CEO of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of British Columbia. We all know these people are very conservative bean-counters that the province relies on to help it with its finances. We rely on and trust these people. The quote is: "The silver lining" — on this budget — "according to the CAs, is that the government has used fiscally conservative assumptions and risk-management strategies in the budget, along with presenting three-year plans and incorporating a $750 million contingency fund to act as a cushion against unforeseen risks."

"[The Finance minister] has provided the public with a budget process that should inspire confidence in the numbers," said Rees. "While it may not be the sexiest part of the budget, the bar continues to be raised on sound financial management in this province."

I want to talk about a very important part of this budget, a part that's very important to me and my riding of Victoria-Hillside. I want to talk about social issues. I have had a daily diet served up to me by the opposition about how they represent the most vulnerable people in this province. I listen, and I am frustrated and angry at some of things I hear. I find it offensive that these very special British Columbians are constantly being used for political posturing. I find it offensive that the opposition have the audacity to believe that they are the only members in this House that care for the less fortunate in our society. That is the furthest thing from the truth. I have never worked with so many people who have been so committed to protecting services for the most vulnerable, in light of the terrible mess we have been left to straighten out.

I have volunteered for many years on social issues. It is my passion, it is my pride, and it is my pleasure. The people in our society who are very vulnerable are also very proud, and this government is committed to help the most vulnerable. We said it, and we are doing it.

When I was elected, it was my main goal to make sure I opened a community office in Victoria-Hillside that served the needs of not only everyone in my riding but especially the most in need. My staff, Vikki and Trish, and myself do this every day with kindness and understanding. My staff dedicate their working days to helping the most in need.

Just to set the record straight, let's just remind everyone what we have protected. Let's just remind everyone about our commitment to the genuinely most vulnerable, and let's remind everyone we have done this in the most difficult of financial times. To name a few things, we have protected community schools, lunch programs, school-based youth workers, seniors bus passes, transition houses, second-stage housing, safe

housing, counselling for abused women and children, funding to educate the general public on the seriousness of the violence against women, Stopping the Violence programs and child care. We are working on policy development on women-centred health and policy development to address poverty issues and economic opportunity.

Federal, provincial and territorial initiatives. In this budget we protected 230,000 low-income British Columbians, who will now pay less or no MSP premiums at all. In the area of childhood development, in 2002 we are spending $51 million. The NDP, the previous leader, spent $39 million. By 2005 this government will have spent $243 million on early childhood development. We have just put out an RFP, a request for proposal, for $4.7 million to implement an individualized funding option to support families of children under six with autism. For the genuinely most vulnerable people who are on disability benefits level 2 and continuous assistance clients, we have raised their earning exemptions from $200 to $300.

The list goes on. All of these programs are crucially important to my riding of Victoria-Hillside and the social issues I believe in. Again, I cannot reiterate it over and over again. The two members of the official opposition are absolutely not the only people who are dedicated to social issues. Again, I will repeat: I find that offensive.

When I listen to the opposition talk, I wonder how one can forget so much in nine months. I have only been working at this job for nine months, and yet I find myself being blamed, accused, threatened for things that I wasn't even here for — when bad decisions were being made and money was being wasted. I guess I'm supposed to say: "Well, that's just politics." Well, Mr. Speaker, that isn't just politics. Bad decisions were made — bad decisions that cost everybody, including the genuinely most vulnerable.

Imagine if those bad decisions had not been made. Imagine how many more services we could have put into place for the most vulnerable. Imagine where this province would be today. But imagine how terrible things would be today if the NDP had won the last election. Given their past history, I cannot imagine what they would have done to get themselves out of the mess they put us in. I have no doubt that their union boss friends would have been protected, but I would suggest that anyone outside that tent, the most vulnerable and the working poor, probably would not have fared so well.

Anyway, thank goodness I do not have to worry about that. I am elected to a government that does have a plan, a three-year strategic plan — the first ever — to bring our financial house back into order.

Once this province starts to grow again, the genuinely most vulnerable in our society will also benefit. This government recognizes that there will always be a segment of our society that will need taking care of, and we are committed to that. But it takes revenue, and it takes proper planning. These very special British Columbians, the genuinely most vulnerable, are relying on us to stick to our plan so that we can take care of them.

I for one wholly support the budget and the fiscal plan laid out in front of us. This is the first document to come out that is putting us back on the course to recovery. Thank goodness — finally, a three-year plan.

J. Bray: Mr. Speaker, I am truly honoured and pleased to be able to respond to the budget speech. I also had the privilege of doing the same to the throne speech when Her Honour was in this House a few weeks ago.

I want to echo what my colleague finished with, which is the fact that this budget sets out a plan. Unlike the last ten years where we endured crisis management and political posturing, we now actually have set out a budget that sets targets, sets measures, will hold ministers accountable and will ensure that the services that British Columbians are contracting with us to provide are provided and provided in the most cost-effective and efficient ways possible.

I cannot stress the importance of service plans with respect to the delivery of government services. That's why I was so pleased that it was part of the speech that the Finance minister gave.

As you may well be aware, previous to my current position I spent 13 years as a very proud member of the provincial civil service. The last five years of that was spent working in a headquarters setting here in Victoria for the Ministry of Human Resources. Although one of the most confusing things was understanding who your minister-of-the-day was, because the previous government changed them so often, the other most difficult part about policy development, budget-setting, target-setting and policy-writing was trying to understand what it was the government wanted you to do. What did the government actually want the ministry you worked in to do?

They had business lenses and gender lenses and disability lenses. They had lenses all over the place for how you developed policy, but you never actually knew what your core business was or the targets that you were trying to achieve.

Of course, in business terms that's quite well understood. Ministries that deal with industry and business know that it's a process that business does when they set out their own agendas. Business thinks three years out, five years out or even ten years out when they develop budgets, set forth their action plans, make the decisions on investment and hiring and where they're going to put their capital plant — all those types of things.

But in the ministries that provide services to people, it's not quite that easy. You are providing service, meeting changing needs, changing demographics and changing priorities, and so it is even more important in those ministries that you have clear objectives so that the staff you work with, the policy you write, the legislation you set forth in this House and the budgets you

present are all working in harmony toward those goals and those outcomes. So, in ministries that provide those services, it is critical that they plan well in advance of the current year.

I can recall many times working late on Thursdays and Fridays and coming in on weekends, scrambling to get together briefing material for the previous government because nobody had a plan. They were trying to fill the needs of budget speeches and throne speeches without a clear objective.

I remember, earlier than that, when I was a front-line financial assistance worker. I'd be out in the field serving my clients, and I wouldn't know whether my job was to provide greater income assistance or to increase eligibility requirements, whether or not I was supposed to focus on people's disabilities or on people who were the most employable. There was nothing that was overriding in what we were trying to achieve.

When I worked at the regional level — in the regional office, most recently — that became apparent, because we still had to do planning regionally. But we did not know what we were supposed to do to match a provincial plan, which meant that regionally we were planning in the dark. The following year everything would change. We'd have to change our planning but still wouldn't know what the outcome was supposed to be. It created difficult situations for staff and ultimately in the service ministries, and meant reduced service for clients.

I was so pleased to see the Minister of Finance, along with his budget speech, submit the three-year service plans for all the ministries — multi-year, living documents that will ensure that when ministries are doing their work, they're holding themselves accountable. The public can look at those service plans and those performance measures and hold them accountable. Most importantly, from a policy and planning perspective, when things are working well, government makes sure it doesn't throw the baby out with the bathwater when it makes adjustments, because it's measuring its success and can build on that success. And when mistakes are being made, when things aren't running well, we will know what areas need to be fixed and can work on fixing them.

These three-year service plans are not one-time documents that are part of some advertising plan, as we saw the previous government do quite frequently. They are, in fact, living documents. They provide guidance for ministry staff who are working here in Victoria in the headquarters setting. They provide guidance for regional staff who are delivering services out in the communities. They provide guides and plans for the general public to know what they can expect and to have communication with all members of this House if they see gaps in that service plan in their community.

It is an exciting change to the way this province has been governed over the last 20 years, and I say it's a welcome change. I'm proud to be part of a government that is committed to it.

Mr. Speaker, the members of the opposition like to continually do their Chicken Little speech: the sky is falling; everything is rotten; the world is crumbling. I realize that is their role in this House, but I wish that sometimes they would also recognize what's actually in the material they're criticizing, rather than taking the approach of trying to get the best headlines in the Province, the Sun or in some other newspaper.

For instance, the Ministry of Children and Family Development's budget has gone up a little bit. They are moving, in their three-year plan, from a top-down, policy-driven, inflexible, imprecise process of providing services for families and children into a community-driven, community-governed and community-responsive approach that will ensure that all of the great services that the community currently provides are enhanced with staff from the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It will ensure that our social workers, who are among the best-trained in the country, will be part of the solution and part of the community that's helping to raise children and support families. It won't be this outside agency that comes flying in because a report has been made, takes an action that may break down a lot of work that's been done in the community and then have five or six different overseeing bodies criticize that decision, which means the social worker, the family and the community support agencies who may have been working for that family for months or years are left without clear guidance.

This service plan that the Ministry of Children and Family Development has put forward is one of the most progressive that any provincial government has ever put forth. It's not about saving money. It's about providing better service and ensuring we have a way to measure that success child by child, family by family, and not, as the opposition would like to do it, headline by headline.

The minister should be congratulated for taking the approach that's based on the research and science that's out there and for working with the staff that have been within the ministry for many years to come up with a comprehensive service plan that will ensure families and children are receiving better service. We, in fact, support the notion that it takes a village to raise a child. We're actually empowering that village. We're empowering that community.

It is because the Minister of Finance included all of his cabinet colleagues in the development of this budget through the service plan process that their resources are in the budget to deliver on those promises and outcomes. The support is in that budget. I think the Finance minister should be congratulated.

The Ministry of Education. There's a lot of talk about that recently in the press and in the public. Funding for education has been protected. In fact, it's even gone up slightly. Despite the fact that we have a record deficit — and we certainly do — funding for education for our K-to-12 students as well as our post-secondary students has been protected. Why? Because during the election we said that education was a priority. We said

that we wanted to deliver a top-notch education system in this province. Why? Because the Minister of Finance engaged the Minister of Education on the development of a service plan that would deliver that, then provided the resources for the Minister of Education to do so. Why? Because we know the importance of education. The Minister of Finance has ensured that we deliver on that.

We've also given school boards more flexibility and greater tools to actually work within their own communities, with their own parents, their own teachers, their own volunteers and their own students to deliver on that. Quite frankly, the needs of the schools here in Victoria may be quite different from the needs of the schools in North Vancouver and then again different from the needs of the schools in Kimberley. Rather than Victoria and politicians governing that whole process, we've actually allowed school boards the flexibility and autonomy to achieve those goals.

We have general guidelines. We have general outcomes that we expect, and we have service contracts with each school district to make sure they make improvements in the areas that are commonly identified. The Finance minister has ensured through his budget that the resources will be there this year, next year and the year after that, because we have three-year service plans and we have three-year funding envelopes for the Ministry of Education. For the first time, the Education ministry will not be involved in minute budget details for every school district in the province. Instead, it will set those broad criteria and allow the school districts to meet the needs of the students — not just in the school district, not just in the community, but in each and every classroom.

We've ensured through legislation that parents are guaranteed their right to be involved in their children's education. All the research concludes the exact same thing: when parents are involved in their children's education, their educational attainment is improved.

The Finance minister has ensured that the resources are there in the budget. The Education minister has ensured that school districts have the autonomy to meet their local needs, and this Legislature has ensured that we've enshrined the right of parents to be full partners in the education process. The result will be better education for every child in this province. I think that's a fantastic achievement.

I'm proud, as a private member, to have been involved in the development of this budget and to have had my input not just in the hallways, not just the odd time that I speak in the House here, but on a daily basis as a member of a government caucus committee where I have been able to actually help in critiquing the service plans of various ministries. Every one of my colleagues has had the same opportunity. We've been able to bring up regional issues, local issues, as well as issues pertaining to areas of particular expertise that we may bring to this Legislature. The Minister of Finance did not just introduce a budget that was news to all of us in its general scope — because we were all involved with it. Certainly, we saw the details on the day of the budget speech, but we were part of it.

That has never happened in a Legislature in this country, ever, where private members were part of that process and successfully part of that process — not just in a token manner, not just in a manner that made us all feel good, but in a real, material, tangible way. That's the difference between the way we govern this province and the way any other government in the past has done so. It's something that we can all be proud of. It's something that ensures that we represent our constituents on a daily basis in the governing of this province.

There are some other things with the Ministry of Education and the budget that are important. It's important that we get this information out, because the members of the opposition will not do this. They might get misinformation out, but they certainly won't get the information out.

This budget eliminates the PST collected on school supplies that are raised through fundraising by the parent associations, the PACs. That is an additional 7.5 percent that can go towards supplying schools. It rewards PACs' involvement, parents' involvement on behalf of their children. What does that mean, ultimately? It means that the children are rewarded for the activity.

Now, the involvement of PACs in schools is critical. This budget ensures that the resources are there and that PACs can be involved, and teachers, principals and students can be involved. I don't think there's any question around this province that all of those individuals care equally and deeply about the education of our children.

The members of the opposition also like to stand up and talk about health care. Well, so do we. In fact, along with education, health care was one of the key components of our election platform. We said that we would protect health care funding over the coming years. Well, we protected it and then some. In fact, this budget increases health care funding by 7.32 percent. The budget will now provide well over $10 billion on the delivery of health care in this province — well over $10 billion. That's not a government that doesn't care about health care, as the opposition members would have us believe. That's not a government that isn't paying attention to the needs and issues of communities, as the opposition members would have us believe.

The Finance minister, in working with his colleagues, the various ministers who are involved with health, has realized that the cost pressures simply are too great. What would be affected by wage increases? What would be affected by doctors' settlements? What would be affected by the increasing costs of technologies? Patient care — and we are committed to putting patients at the top of the list at the delivery of health care. They're not part of the list. They are the only consideration when government looks to providing sustainable health care now and in the future.

Despite the fact that revenues have decreased, despite the fact that economic growth has not been very strong in North America — let alone in British Columbia — the Finance minister still ensured that there was an additional 7.3 percent in the budget for health care. That is an amazing achievement.

Although I didn't agree with all of it, several weekends ago we passed legislation that will ensure that health authorities can manage the system better, manage it so that patients are put first. Every decision made by a health authority, every decision made by the Ministry of Health and every decision made by the doctors, nurses and paramedicals starts, continues and ends with the patient first.

This budget ensures that the resources are there, and we have ensured legislation is there so that the system is managed so that the patient is the only consideration that needs to be made. Obviously, there are challenges, and health authorities will be tasked with dealing with those, but the resources are there in the budget.

Now, this budget also recognizes the importance of small and medium business. Here in Victoria small and medium business is the business. Tourist operators; small motels as well as some of the large hotels, of course; various tourist attractions around Victoria; the retailers; the service providers, both for profit and not-for-profit; the small manufacturing; and the small high-tech startups all drive the economy of the capital region and all derive their ability to compete so close to the United States based on the parameters that government creates.

There's no question that the previous government over the last ten years had one sole focus, and that was to be the largest union organizer in the province. Not that there's anything wrong with unions, but that was where their focus was. If they could add on regulations, if they could add on red tape, if they could collect more fees, if they could do all those activities so that they could work on their core constituency, that was great. But as I've heard from many of my colleagues, especially those who border Alberta, that has simply created a situation intolerable to small and medium business.

The member for Vancouver-Hastings and the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant like to rail on about our big corporate backers and about how the only people we're concerned about are big business. The reality is that it is small and medium business that hires most of the people in this province. It's small and medium business that produces most of the goods in this province. It's small and medium business that pays most of the taxes in this province. It's small and medium business that ensures that our towns and communities stay strong and healthy. We're going to make sure that small and medium business comes first on our economic agenda, because that's what will make this province strong.

This budget recognizes that small and medium business also competes with Washington State, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario, and that as capital becomes more fluid, as the types of businesses that people become involved in are less capital- and plant-specific and more knowledge- and information-based, the fact is that many small and medium businesses can close up their IBM notepads, hop on a bus and head east or south, never to come back. With that goes their ingenuity, their entrepreneurship, their innovation, their ability to hire, their ability to pay taxes, their ability to produce products and their ability to deliver services. It all leaves the province. We don't just lose that one person or those two or three people; we lose all the potential that those small and medium business operators present for British Columbia.

We have to be competitive. We have to make sure that those people — the people who'll drive the economy here — stay here. We have to make sure they stay in this province so that all of our graduates from the great post-secondary institutions that we have in this province have employment waiting for them. We want to create an economy where businesses are thriving and where people are getting recruited before they graduate from university or college or vocational colleges, because the demand in this province is so great. We want to make sure that the generation that's operating business now stays so that the generation coming up has something to look forward to right here in this province. This budget recognizes the need for that competitiveness.

Raising the small business income tax threshold from $200,000 to $300,000 makes us competitive. We're not leading; we're just not at the bottom anymore. Reducing personal and corporate income tax helps ensure that we're competitive on that front. Eliminating the tax on machinery and equipment and phasing out the corporate capital tax ensure that small and medium business can compete with our neighbours to the east and to the south on a fair and level playing field. We don't have to be the best in terms of our government regulations and our tax scheme, because we're already the best province. We already have the best resources. We already have the best people. We just have to give them a level playing field, and they'll do the rest when government gets out of their way.

That is why the Minister of State for Deregulation's commitment to reducing red tape and regulation is also so important. It's not just taxes, and it's not just access to Crown lands that makes it important. It's not just access to qualified students who are graduating. It is also the ability to focus on the business that you do and not on the business of making government happy because of all the forms you have to fill out, all the multiple permits you have to apply for, all the licences you have to get and all the fees you have to pay to keep whatever system we're trying to keep going, going. The best thing we can do is make sure that our regulations are results-based. If they don't serve a purpose, we don't need them.

We trust small and medium business owners in this province. We trust that they have the best interests of

the environment at heart. We trust that they have the best interests of their employees at heart. We trust that they have the best interests of consumers at heart. Now, that doesn't mean we have to be devoid of regulation. That doesn't mean we have to be devoid of checks and balances in our system. It means we have to ensure that the regulations are only triggered when they infringe on those issues, not because we assume they're going to ahead of time.

We don't need to create hoop after hoop that a small business or an entrepreneurial person trying to get started has to jump through because we think they might do something wrong. We need to ensure that we are creating an environment that protects employees, that protects the environment, that protects consumers but also allows for that entrepreneur who is prepared to take out a second mortgage, who is prepared to go without income, who is prepared to work 70 or 80 hours a week so they can see their dream come alive.

When their dream comes alive, they pay taxes. When their dream comes alive, they hire a student. When their dream comes alive, they expand and have to go to a new capital plant that has to be built. Who builds that? Other people in the economy, who are prepared now to go to work to build that plant. Who pays for it? The consumer who is buying that product or service. All government has to do is ensure that the consumer is protected, that the environment is protected and that the employees are protected. If we provide that framework, that small or medium business person, that entrepreneur, will take care of the rest.

This budget ensures that the resources are there and directs governments to provide the kind of results-based regulatory framework that encourages small and medium business. It also sends a clear signal to larger companies that British Columbia cares about the environment, that it cares about employees, but that it wants business back here. We want the kind of investment in our forestry sector, in our mining sector, in our aquaculture sector that will produce long-term, high-paying, sustainable jobs. It is those jobs and that economy that ensure small communities on the coast and in the interior don't just survive but that they thrive.

Members of the opposition always talked about the struggles on the coast and their strategies for helping those communities survive. That was their crisis management approach. We don't want communities just to survive. We don't want families just to survive. We want them to thrive. We want them to be proud to be in their coastal communities. We want them to be proud to be in the north. We want to make sure that they have the ability to expand beyond their wildest dreams, that they can live up to their own expectations rather than be dampened by government's lack of expectations. That, Mr. Speaker, is how the previous government ran this province.

The members of the opposition like to stand at various points here or in the media and decry all the problems that have occurred because of this government. Well, I don't pretend to know about every community in the province, but I can tell you about Victoria. I can tell you what's happening in this city and what's happened since we became government. The nominal unemployment rate is generally figured to be somewhere around 4 or 4.2 percent. The Leader of the Opposition stands up and says how drastic things are in Victoria. Well, our unemployment rate, seasonally adjusted, is now at 6.2 percent — just barely above nominal unemployment, below the national average, the lowest in the province. That's despite the fact that we are, in fact, going through a workforce adjustment strategy. It's 6.2 percent.

Now, last year it was a half a point higher, so despite what the members of the opposition will have you believe, Victoria's unemployment rate has gone down. Why has it gone down? Because the high-tech sector now believes, for the first time in a decade, that there's a government that understands the importance of that sector, that there's a government that understands the importance of getting out of the way of innovation. The Premier's Technology Council signals very clearly that we want to bring high-tech here. In fact, we want to be one of the top ten high-tech sectors by the year 2006.

The high-tech sector in Victoria is growing. It's growing strongly. We're rivalling all other areas of the country in terms of growth. That's reflected in our unemployment rate going down.

The tax cuts introduced last year. Oh well, the members of the opposition like to spend a lot of time on that. Of course, I'm always confused, Mr. Speaker, because three weeks ago they were criticizing us for tax cuts — those were the worst things — and now they're talking about the fact that there's a small increase in tobacco tax, and that's the worst thing. I wish they could get their criticism straight, but that's probably another discussion.

Despite the fact that there has been a North American slowdown, consumers have refused to participate in that economic slowdown. In fact, despite the workforce adjustment announcements, the realities that Victoria is facing with respect to civil servants, over half the merchants in the Victoria area who responded to a retailer survey indicated higher consumer sales in November and December of this year than in the same period a year ago. In other words, despite the doom and gloom the opposition members talked about, merchants and retailers did better.

Housing starts — up 45 percent last year, despite the doom and gloom. We all know — and I know that the Leader of the Opposition, who was Finance minister for a week or two, understands — one of the key indicators of the strength and capacity of your economy is, in fact, housing starts. When housing starts are strong, that means there's confidence in the economy. That means people are here, they're setting down roots, and they're prepared to invest for 20 or 30 years in a mortgage. That drives the economy. Of course, every house that's built means 2.5 permanent full-time jobs. So although any individual person may only work part

of the year in the construction trade, that actually is a huge increase in the number of people working.

V. Anderson: I reflect today that it's been a ten-year pilgrimage that I entered into through this legislative chamber. This will be the tenth year I've stood up to talk about the conditions of life of the people of our province and a throne speech and a budget speech to try to respond to those conditions.

It was 1981 when I first got involved in the formal political process, driven to it particularly by the needs of low-income people within our province that I worked with on a daily basis as a minister in the church. It was in 1983 that I was part of those who brought together the beginning of the Vancouver Food Bank — within two months, 1,000 people. Now there are hundreds of thousands across the province who depend on food banks for their daily food.

We went through the depression of the 1980s, and we went through the struggles of the 1990s. Not a great deal seems to have changed in the community out there, except that as my colleagues have been sharing with you this afternoon, we do have a change in government and a change in direction.

The voices I hear and the concerns out there that we're recognizing and responding to are like the ones that are recorded in the Jewish Western Bulletin. It tells about, in my own particular riding in Vancouver, the kinds of concerns that are there. I'd like to just quote part of the concerns in that bulletin of February 8 this year: "Jewish communal organizations are bracing for major challenges in the face of cuts by the provincial government. With reductions in government social programs, volunteer agencies provincewide are preparing for a wave of new clients and greater demand for services."

That's the kind of thing I hear, also, from First United Church and from all the agencies in downtown Vancouver and across the province. I hear it also from the workers in all the different government agencies who are dealing with the people in the front line of the community, the most vulnerable.

The struggles that have been building up over the months and years, over these last ten years, have continued to compound in the lives of the most vulnerable. They have become more difficult. They have been promised results again and again, and the results have not come. They have had the experience that every time there was a new promise, things got worse. That's the kind of circumstance we still have in our community today; that's the kind of circumstance of which we speak here.

Those of us who have worked within this government for the last ten years to bring this kind of government into being can see that there is a promise in the future, but the transition is not going to be easy. We need to put a priority in our thinking on the most vulnerable, because when the promises that we're making, and the changes that we hope will come about economically and socially, do happen, those who are most vulnerable normally will be the last to receive the benefits of those changes.

Some people talk about the trickle-down economy. I want to stress that in our planning and transition, we need to take that into account and see if we can't do it in a different way this time so that those who have the greatest need don't get the last of the results but can get some of the benefits of the results much earlier in the process.

When we talk about budgets, we talk about dollars and cents, and often we lose the essence of what we're trying to discuss. Very few people, I expect — maybe one in a thousand in our community — when they've read about the budget in the paper and heard about it on the radio and television, have had presented to them the values on which that budget is being built. Without understanding the principles and values upon which that budget is built, it's difficult for them to understand the process that is now taking place.

The Attorney General the other day shared the values, and I'd like to share them again. The core processes and principles are fundamentally important, because only by these can we judge the directions and the success of what we undertake. It is true: you could have a very prosperous economy, and the prosperity could be, as has happened in some places in the world, felt only by those at one level.

We're not talking about a prosperous economy for one group of people; we're talking about a prosperous economy that benefits all of the people of the province. That's not an easy task to fulfil, and it will not happen overnight.

The goals. There are three main goals that we have in our principles in building this new economy and new province. The first has been mentioned. It is a strong and vibrant provincial economy.

I put it in the sense of a family budget. In the thirties when my father had to leave Saskatchewan because there was no longer an economy to form his business, his first priority was to move to another location where he could set up a business — a barbershop — and earn enough money to then bring the family to join him. That's what he did, and that's what we're trying to do as a government: set up the business framework so that all of the businesses within the families within the province can prosper.

To set up a business and an economic system is not enough. The second major goal is to support the significant infrastructure by which the social life of the communities can be strong and vital.

As soon as my father got his business together, he brought his family. In our family life, the business made our family life possible, gave us a place to live, gave us clothes for our backs, gave us an opportunity to settle into a new community and to go to school and to church and to have the things that were so important in our family life. You have the financial structure which must be in place and which we're working at.

We have the social structure which must be in place and which our other members have been talking about — health and education, children and families programs, human resources programs — all of these working in a relationship to each other so they build on each other and make, eventually, the services available that people of our community need. And so we have the third goal: safe, healthy communities and a sustainable environment.

What we have said within this government's structure is that life in the province takes place in communities. We're proud of the community we come from, no matter what the name of it is. That's where we play. That's where we go to school. That's where we have our hospital. That's where we bank. That's where we have our recreation — in our local communities. And so we put a structure in place, along with the community charter, that builds strength into local communities rather than taking strength away from communities, which has happened over the last number of years.

We want to put strength back into communities, put businesses back into communities, put recreation and health and education back into communities so that within these communities people can have the family and social life which are so important to them. It's in communities that we care for each other. It's not a government system that cares for us; it's our neighbours that care for us. Neighbour caring for neighbour is the process by which our country has been built. This is what we need to move back to, and this is what our government is planning that we should do.

Upon those four core building principles there are some value systems that need to be in place as well. One of these is that there must be integrity — the integrity to make decisions that matter and that are consistent, professional and fair. We must have integrity where we can believe what people are telling us. They can be open and frank and aboveboard and be able to follow through, and we can have some trust in them.

Within that we must have fiscal responsibility, and that's a fiscal responsibility right across the board in our professionals, our businesses, our government. It even goes to question whether we should be doing business with one another under the table so that we don't pay our regular taxes. What we want to say is that fiscal responsibility begins in the family, as they are fiscally responsible with each other, as they have integrity with each other and with their neighbours and their communities. Fiscal responsibility and integrity is a way of life which we want to say is what we must have if our province is to grow.

Therefore, we must be accountable to each other within our communities so that we can have an effective and credible government in our local community and in our provincial and federal communities.

One of the ways in which we are accountable to each other is through our volunteer agencies and our volunteer community activities. Over the past number of years these volunteer activities have been challenged. We're saying to them: "No, you have a place. You have an important place." Volunteer agencies have a place within our hospitals. Volunteer agencies have a place within our schools. Volunteer agencies have a place within our recreation. We have built our history within Canada as neighbour helps neighbour and as we volunteer one with the other — in the Red Cross, the Cancer Society, the United Way, the Boys and Girls Clubs, the Boy Scouts, the Girl Guides, in the Legion, the Elks and Rotary. We can go on and on. These are the essence of the social structure of our community of which we are a part.

We're saying it is not the government's place to do the work of these community agencies but to provide a sustainable environment in which these activities can go on according to people's undertakings. That kind of interaction with the citizens of the province, one with each other, at whatever level they may be involved in, is dependent upon respect — to treat all citizens equitably, compassionately and respectfully. We must have that kind of respect for each other — respect our similarities and respect our differences.

Within that, one of the realities of our Canadian system is that we must have choice. We must have the opportunities so citizens can choose their own self-development. They can participate in whatever activity is important to them, always with the condition that they must not take away from others the same kind of concern and opportunity.

We had a big rally on the lawn here last Saturday. We had rallies back in the eighties, and we had other rallies across the province. Back in 1984, I had the opportunity to speak to the unemployed rally — a little smaller than the one here but with the same concerns and the same reality of people who were struggling with the changes of the depression through which we were going in that period of time.

I'd simply like to read that speech, because it's as relevant today as it was then. As someone said when I mentioned this: "That's too bad." Here's what I said in 1984:

That was ten years ago — well, 1984. It was more than that — 16 years ago. We haven't really changed that much in reality. During the last year as I visited in the downtown at many meetings that were held, the community was telling me that things have got worse and worse, and for many people they have. So we need to give ourselves some goals. I think in our values here we have expressed a set of goals that are very similar to what I undertook back in 1984 when I first offered myself as a possible person to run for government.

I'd like to go over those goals again, because I've had a lot of people who knew me back then say to me: "What happened to you? Why are you still supporting this particular government? Why haven't you quit? Are you not Christian any longer? Do you no longer believe in the things that were part of yourself?" I simply say to them that I took a risk when I began a process to rebuild the Liberal Party of British Columbia. I'm in that same risk by staying in it and continuing to build as part of it.

This is what I said when I first met with the group of people who might have nominated me at that time in 1984:

These are the things that I listed at that particular time, which, interestingly enough, have been said in other ways by all of the speakers who went before me today.

That was the vision of 1984. It's the vision that has driven me to work within the Liberal Party from that time to this. It's the vision that drives me to continue to work within our party at the present time and to go back and say that the values are fundamentally important. I repeat the goals and the values that we have given as part of the budget and the throne speech: a strong and vibrant provincial economy that benefits all for a better economy than they've had in the past; a supportive social infrastructure that gives us better social relationships as we live with each other in a community; safe, healthy communities and a sustainable environment so that we are safe, proud and healthy in the community in which we live — whether it's rural, north, urban, south or whatever it may be.

I grew up in small communities. I grew up in the small communities in the north of Saskatchewan, and I wouldn't have traded that for the city life for which we had to leave in the Depression. They are the core values that I mentioned earlier, and I highlight them again because they must be fundamental in what we do, in everything that we undertake.

Integrity. To make decisions in a manner that is consistent, professional, fair and balanced.

Accountability. To enhance the efficiency, effectiveness and credibility of government.

Respect. To treat all citizens equally, equitably, compassionately and respectfully.

I come back to where I began: with a concern for the people that is reflected in the Jewish community concern and the First United Church concern and are part of every community in our province, the 10 to 20 percent of those people who are most vulnerable and have been left on the edge of society by no fault of their own — by no fault of their own. There's a phrase we know well in the church: there but for the grace of God go I. I would stress in our consciousness that that group of people must get first in our thinking and in our planning and not last, as they traditionally are.

When we are valued by the success of what we do as a government, it will not in the final analysis be by the success of our businesses or the economic reality that we achieve. It will be by the reality of whether those who have need of us most have been elevated to the area of prior consideration, and their condition has grown so that they can say: "Thank God there was change in this province." If we fail them, regardless of what else we do, we have failed. We cannot and we dare not fail them.

I. Chong: I'm privileged to take my place and respond to the budget speech, which was delivered almost a week ago, last Tuesday. That in itself was a remarkable event because, for the first time, all of us in this chamber knew when the budget was coming. In so many years gone by, while we sat here as members of the opposition, never did we know when we would return to this chamber to hear the throne speech, and never did we know when we would be privileged to hear a budget speech. But we knew well in advance — last summer, when we adjourned — that in fact we would be seeing a budget on February 19. The Minister of Finance delivered on that, and I'm very proud that we have a government that kept its word and has a fixed legislative agenda to ensure that we can all participate and know what is happening in this chamber.

In addition to the budget speech, I was very pleased to hear the minister table some very important documents: service plans. For so long, when we were in opposition, minister after minister would come into the budget estimates debate and — well, I shouldn't say never; we'll give them credit — once in a while present service plans. Oftentimes we saw service plans and annual reports — coincidentally enough — after the budget estimates had just occurred, so we were never really able to hold them to account. We were never really able to make sure that they in fact did what they said they would do. Now we have a budget. Now we have service plans — three-year service plans — with which we, as private members, will be able to hold our ministers accountable. I assure you that each and every private member will do that. Our ministers expect that from each and every one of us.

We all represent diverse communities. We all represent people in our communities that expect us to be here in this chamber and give voice to their concerns. That's what we intend to do, unlike members of the opposition, whom I've been very disappointed in over the last two weeks, hearing them speak rather selectively on some areas and not always representing all of their constituents.

These three-year service plans are a good thing because they are long-term plans. As I mentioned in my reply to the throne speech, a long-term plan is much better than the short-term, quick-fix, band-aid solutions that we were so used to in the five years that I was here as an opposition member.

I was very disappointed, again, to hear the members from the opposition selectively choose communities that some of us represent as if the people in our communities were all of one type. I know that the Leader of the Opposition found it very easy to choose particular neighbourhoods that she thought were more affluent than others. I had to tell her that I represent a community, Oak Bay–Gordon Head, that has affordable housing with low-incomes families, that has a middle-class neighbourhood and, yes, that has some people living there who are more comfortable than others. There are many, many seniors and retired people there. I represent a very diverse community and, in addition, a huge number of transient people, in that I have a college and a university in my riding. There are so many people that I represent. I find it actually reprehensible for her to take umbrage and attack the people that I represent.

I have several other things I wish to comment on, on the budget speech and the strategic plan that was introduced. I want to talk a little bit more about the service plans. I also want to respond to comments made about press releases. But noting the time, I would like to move adjournment of the debate and resume my position at the next sitting.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, pursuant to standing order 25, I must interrupt the proceedings at this time for a division to take place on the amendment of the Solicitor General to Motion 4 on the orders of the day. A division has been called.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, the question is the amendment moved by the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General to Motion 4, which reads as follows:

	YEAS — 61
Coell	Hogg	Halsey-Brandt
Whittred	Cheema	Hansen
J. Reid	Bruce	van Dongen
Barisoff	Nettleton	Roddick
Wilson	Masi	Lee
Thorpe	Plant	Collins
Bond	de Jong	Nebbeling
Stephens	Abbott	Neufeld
Coleman	Chong	Penner
Jarvis	Anderson	Orr
Harris	Nuraney	Brenzinger
Belsey	Bell	Long
Mayencourt	Trumper	R. Stewart
Hayer	Christensen	Krueger
Bray	Les	Locke
Nijjar	Bhullar	Wong
Bloy	MacKay	Cobb
K. Stewart	Visser	Brice
Sultan	Hamilton	Sahota
Hawes	Kerr	Manhas
	Hunter

	NAYS — 2
MacPhail		Kwan