Hansard -- Wednesday, February 25, 2004 p.m. -- Vol. 20, No. 16 (HTML)


CONTENTS

	Routine Proceedings
		Page

Introductions by Members		8803

Statements (Standing Order 25B)		8803
	2004 B.C. Winter Games
	G. Trumper
	Mountain pine beetle and wood products
	D. MacKay
	Economic development in Powell River–Sunshine Coast
	H. Long

Oral Questions		8804
	Disability benefits eligibility review and auditor general's report
	J. Kwan
	Hon. S. Hagen
	Hiring of Doug Walls by Children and Family Development ministry
	J. MacPhail
	Hon. S. Hagen
	Hiring of Doug Walls and release of Children and Family Development ministry audit
	J. MacPhail
	Hon. C. Clark
	Crown prosecutors' salaries
	P. Nettleton
	Hon. G. Plant

Committee of Supply		8807
	Supplementary Estimates: Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries
	J. MacPhail
	Hon. J. van Dongen
	P. Nettleton

Introduction and First Reading of Bills		8813
	Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3) (Bill 9)
	Hon. G. Collins

Second Reading of Bills		8813
	Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3) (Bill 9)
	Hon. G. Collins

Committee of the Whole House		8813
	Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3) (Bill 9)

Report and Third Reading of Bills		8813
	Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3) (Bill 9)

Introduction and First Reading of Bills		8813
	Ministerial Accountability Bases Act, 2003-2004 (Bill 10)
	Hon. G. Collins

Budget Debate (continued)		8814
	K. Johnston
	G. Halsey-Brandt
	Hon. J. van Dongen
	D. Hayer
	Hon. S. Brice
	W. Cobb

Hon. G. Campbell: I just wanted to recognize and welcome back the former member for Richmond Centre. Mr. Doug Symons is joining us today. He served for two terms in this House. Actually, I'm surprised that Doug isn't sitting on this side, just to see what it's like. But welcome back, Doug.

K. Manhas: I am proud to introduce to the House today a bright and enthusiastic, dedicated group of Young Liberals from my community in Port Coquitlam–Burke Mountain. They are here with the Port Coquitlam–Coquitlam B.C. youth association. They are coming to take a look at how we run our business here in Victoria and how the public policy process works. I'd like to introduce the president, Chris Sandve; and also from my riding, Imran Hemani, director of finance; and Cassandra van Aswegen, director of policy. Would the House please make them very welcome.

Hon. G. Plant: Today we're joined in the gallery by the chief legislative counsel for the government of British Columbia, Brian Greer. We're also joined by his mother, Judy Greer, and his aunt Eileen Prittie. I hope that the House will make all of these people very welcome.

R. Stewart: It's my pleasure, as well, to introduce some Young Liberals who are visiting from my community. Speaking with these young people, it is clear that their parents have raised them very well. These students are Nathaniel Blackmore, Grandy Chiu and Christina Stewart.

Hon. R. Neufeld: Well, it's a pleasure for me…. As you know, it's not very often we get someone from northeastern British Columbia down here. It's great to have someone here that I can introduce today, a councillor from the city of Fort St. John: Julie Vander Linden. Would the House please make her welcome.

Hon. J. Les: Today in the members' gallery I'd like to acknowledge a special visitor from the European Union, His Excellency Eric Hayes. He is the newly appointed ambassador and head of delegation for the European Commission. This is the ambassador's first official visit to British Columbia, and I am pleased that he has travelled here today to discover the many opportunities that our beautiful province presents. He is here with Mr. Frank Deeg, his principal adviser. Would the House please make them both feel very welcome.

Hon. C. Clark: I am delighted to introduce to you today Chris Carter, who is a very active member in the youth advisory team in my riding. It is a group of anywhere between 20 and 100 young people who come together quarterly to offer me advice about the issues that are important to young people, to students and people under the age of 25 in Port Moody–Westwood. I hope the House will make Chris welcome if they see him in the hallway.

Hon. G. Abbott: In the gallery today is an old friend and professor of mine from University of Victoria days, Dr. Paddy Smith. At the time I knew him, when I was first a legislative intern here back in 1976 or sometime after the birth of Christ…. Paddy has since been a professor at Simon Fraser University. He's back here today. I suspect there's some conjunction between what appears to be the newest crop of legislative interns and Paddy's presence. Correct?

Hon. S. Hagen: In the gallery today are 51 grade 11 students from Georges P. Vanier Secondary School in Courtenay together with their teachers Mr. Dave Neill, Ms. Joan Longstone and Mr. John Caswell and a parent, Ms. Joan Jacobson. Would the House please join me in making them welcome.

G. Trumper: Just a few weeks ago we celebrated the fact that the 2010 Winter Olympics and Paralympic Games are just six short years away. The Olympic spirit is taking over the entire province, but I have to tell you that that spirit has been in the Alberni Valley for quite some time as we prepare to host the 2004 B.C. Winter Games. This will be the first time Port Alberni has hosted the B.C. Winter Games, but we have hosted the B.C. Summer Games, the Disability Games and the B.C. Seniors Games in the past.

The games have the community buzzing as talented athletes arrive from all over the province to take part. This is sport played for pride, not for money, as is often the case these days. The games will run from February 26, tomorrow, to February 29. Athletes will compete in more than 20 events from hockey and skiing to weightlifting and table tennis.

This is a great event not only for the athletes but for the volunteers. Let's not forget the role volunteers play in making an event like this successful. We couldn't do it without them. Their efforts will not be rewarded with medals, but when those medals are awarded, they can and should feel as though they played a big part in making that athlete's dream a reality.

The 2004 B.C. Winter Games in Port Alberni start tomorrow, and some of the athletes may even be part

of the 2010 Olympics. If you want an early taste of that Olympic spirit, I urge you to come and check out the action.

D. MacKay: Today I'd like to spend a few minutes and talk about the mountain pine beetle. It's a topic we've discussed several times in this chamber before. The mountain pine beetle is about six millimetres long, about the size of a grain of rice. It has a one-year life cycle. It's presently destroying our pine forests throughout British Columbia. To date, in excess of 160 million cubic metres of wood have been infected by this little bug.

The result of the adult beetle, who lives for one year, is a fungus that it deposits into the sapwood. That fungus, when it is left in the sapwood and the tree dies, causes the tree to have a blue stain in it. This is called denim wood by a young woman from Quesnel. She has called this wood denim wood, and it's done very well.

Today I am pleased to introduce into this House some wood from those infected trees. This wood has been transformed into speaking podiums for the members of this chamber to use. I would like to thank my friend Ray Brakenbury in Smithers for the great job he did in transforming these pieces of wood into the products that will be used for years by members of this House. I'd ask you to notice the blue stain in the wood that I have here on the podium, the one back here, and there's another one someplace in the chamber.

The climate for investment in Powell River and the Sunshine Coast is warm and inviting. The Sunshine Coast was named because of the weather, but I want everybody to know that the Sunshine Coast would also like to be known to provide big opportunities and bright futures for investors.

Today I am inviting my businessmen and women to consider setting up a shop in Powell River and the Sunshine Coast. The people of Powell River have a vision for a sawmill in Powell River. That sawmill could work closely with the already existing Norske pulp mill, and Powell River could become an even bigger hub for forestry.

The pulp mill is doing a brisk business in Powell River. In fact, it has just announced that NorskeCanada is investing $7.5 million in Powell River in its operation to support higher-value paper products. I want to thank Russ Horner and his team for having trust in Powell River.

The investment will upgrade No. 10 paper machine in Powell River to enable it to produce high-gloss paper. There is a great opportunity for business in Powell River and the Sunshine Coast. Picture this: through Premier Campbell's hard work, we have started shipping wood to China. Some of that wood could be cut, even processed, in Powell River and easily shipped to Southeast Asia. Isolated from the rest of the province geographically, Powell River and the Sunshine Coast are wide open for business.

Triton Logging knows it, so much so that Martha Stewart came and featured a Triton in Powell River operating on her global television show. They have prospered in Powell River, and so can you. Powell River and the Sunshine Coast are ready to help business and to flourish in the future.

J. Kwan: It's true confessions time. The members opposite won't admit it, but they read the pundits of our fine newspapers daily for clues as to how well they're doing. Is their spin finding root in the public mind? Is Andy getting the job done? Well, today here's what they're saying. Mike Smyth on NW: "They just flushed five million precious taxpayers' dollars down the tube." Or Vaughn Palmer: "The Liberals deserve all the blame both for the waste of tax dollars and for adding to the suffering of some of our most unfortunate citizens."

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please, hon. members. Let us hear the question.

J. Kwan: Will the minister admit today, after having a night to sleep on it, that he was wrong — that the government's cruel and ham-fisted disability review was just plain wrong?

Hon. S. Hagen: For those two members opposite to talk about wasting money is the most ridiculous thing that's ever been talked about in this House. How many beds would the $500 million they wasted on the fast ferries have provided?

Hon. S. Hagen: …has said consistently that the review that was undertaken by the Ministry of Human Resources was never about decreasing costs. The review was undertaken to make sure that the resources

we're providing go to the people who really need them. This is about fairness to our clients.

This was about gathering information. Under the NDP, the clients' files were virtually empty. There was no information. The information provided by the medical people to our ministry personnel included issues like…. We now have important details of our clients' health conditions which we didn't have before, including an in-depth knowledge of conditions of our clients dealing with mental illness. As I mentioned yesterday, people with mental illness have now been added to this category. We're the second province in Canada to do that.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a supplementary question.

J. Kwan: The auditor general's report is very clear. The government expected to take some 6,000 to 9,500 people off of disability assistance. But the minister says B.C.'s independent auditor general is wrong. Let me quote from an internal ministry plan obtained by the opposition. The ministry expects "that about 9,130 disability clients" — that's 20 percent of the caseload —"will not meet the new criteria." Right in the minister's own planning documents.

To the Minister of Human Resources: why is the minister attacking the credibility of B.C.'s independent auditor general when his own internal documents prove that the auditor general is the one telling the truth?

Hon. S. Hagen: The truth of the matter is that actually 8,000 more clients have been added to the rolls.

Hon. S. Hagen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You should try and keep them under control a bit. It's difficult to speak sometimes.

Not only have we added 8,000 people with disabilities to the rolls, but we have added people with mental illness to those same rolls. We've increased those rolls as well. We've also doubled the earnings exemption from $200 to $400. We now have 62,000 people on the rolls that we're helping every month, and the total amount of money paid by the taxpayers to those people totals about $500 million a year. That's what we're doing.

I want to say that in addition to the benefits to the clients, we now have a solid understanding of our clients' ability to carry out daily activities — information which helps us create programs and policies to meet our clients' needs. This is all about service to our clients.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant has a further supplementary.

J. Kwan: The truth is that this government wasted $5 million to kick 46 people off income assistance. Yesterday this minister stood in this House and said the auditor general is wrong. Well, the auditor general didn't just make up his report. He interviewed officials. He sifted through thousands of pieces of paper and information to delay the report as well, because he wanted to confirm the facts from the ministry.

Let me quote from some of that material in the government's own communications plan, developed in anticipation of the review, which was leaked to the opposition. That plan warned the government that "many clients with disabilities, especially those with mental disorders, will become alarmed and/or confused when they receive letters from the ministry." It turns out that's exactly what the auditor general found.

Again to the minister: can he explain why, despite the warnings from his own government's officials, his government pushed ahead anyway and blew $5 million of taxpayers' money down the tube to kick 46 people off income assistance and, in the process, created much anxiety for those who are most vulnerable in our communities?

Hon. S. Hagen: The member opposite in her diatribe mentioned anxiety. I have to tell you that the anxiety that was created was created by those two members throwing unofficial numbers out and creating anxiety among the clients we deal with. The minister previous to me has been consistent, as I've been consistent, in saying that in fact the review was never about reducing costs. It was actually about making sure the people who need the money most get the money. I can tell you that I think the taxpayers of the province, who pay out $500 million a year to these clients, have a right to know that we're actually directing….

Hon. S. Hagen: I think the taxpayers of this province, who pay out $500 million a year to our clients, have a right to know that that money is being directed to the people who need it the most.

J. MacPhail: The Minister of Human Resources continues to stonewall and, in fact, dig a hole deeper and deeper. He continues to deny the facts and hide the truth. Let me remind him what the Premier had to say in this House about his kind of behaviour. I hope I get this quote right. It's a quote from the Premier in this House on August 22, 2001: "…openness beats hidden-

ness every time" — a quote that might explain why the Premier's got a new-found interest in literacy.

Again to the Premier: if openness beats hiddenness, maybe he will stand up now and tell British Columbians how his friend and political supporter Doug Walls got a six-figure salary from the government with no competition, no notice, no announcement and no scrutiny.

Hon. S. Hagen: Certainly, this side of the House and all of the members of the Liberal Party agree with openness and agree exactly with what the Premier has said. There is nothing more open than an auditor general's report. All of the facts are in there. All of the facts are in there — what the money was spent on, how many people are affected.

I would like to say — and remind the people of British Columbia again — that we are here to supply…

Hon. S. Hagen: …services to people who need those services. We're dedicated to focusing the money to the people who need it the most.

J. MacPhail: The opposition has so little time to hold this government to account. Perhaps they could listen. The question was about Doug Walls. I was going to compare this government to Paul Martin and Alfonso Gagliano for taking their spin, but I don't know who we could compare them to, given that last answer. It had nothing to do with the question.

In addition to being a member of the Premier's family, Mr. Walls was well known to several of the cabinet members. The Minister of Advanced Education and the Minister of State for Mining were both handpicked by Mr. Walls to stand as candidates in the last election. In fact, we understand they were very close to Mr. Walls. He was also, as we understand, a very close friend of the former Minister of Children and Family Development. In fact, I understand they had an upstairs-downstairs relationship in where they held their offices. It's inconceivable that the Premier didn't know what Mr. Walls was up to.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order. Let us have the question, please, hon. member.

J. MacPhail: …$214,000 for a contract to head the interim community living authority, must have been aware of that. The Premier must have been aware of that. He was under investigation for fraud at the time.

HIRING OF DOUG WALLS AND
RELEASE OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY
DEVELOPMENT MINISTRY AUDIT

J. MacPhail: Yes, Mr. Speaker. To the Premier: if openness beats hiddenness, to quote him, can he tell British Columbians why he's keeping them in the dark about an audit into the misuse and abuse of tax dollars by Liberal insider Doug Walls? Is he afraid of what it will say? Is that why he's not going to release the full report?

Hon. C. Clark: If this member is indeed interested in holding the government accountable, I would make three suggestions to her.

(1) Show up for things like response to the budget speech and actually make a speech about that in the House.

(2) She could do her research and get her facts straight when she stands up in question period.

(3) She could make sure that when she's got a question, she asks it of the right minister once in a while.

I will say this in answer to her question, now that she's finally figured out who to actually ask the question of. This whole matter is under review by the comptroller general. He is looking at it as a result of a request by the Premier. This Premier and this government acted immediately…

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Will the members of the opposition please come to order.

Hon. C. Clark: …to make sure that a full and complete audit is done of this entire matter, and the Premier has gone further. He will be releasing all of the conclusions of the report and making sure that as much information as can be shared…

Hon. C. Clark: …without violating the principles of the law respecting privacy and information, which that member and that member's government introduced into this House, are not violated....

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please, so we may hear the question. Order, please.

P. Nettleton: Crown prosecutors in British Columbia have warned that the Attorney General's rejection of the Taylor report detailing recommendations for terms and conditions of their employment may lead to a major disruption of the justice system in this province.

On February 15 of the year 2000, the Attorney General, then B.C. Liberal Attorney General critic, wrote to Attorney General Ujjal Dosanjh stating: "I am deeply alarmed at the disruption in the courts of British Columbia resulting from job action by Crown prosecutors. Your refusal to accept any responsibility for the almost 400 dedicated individuals is remarkable. Crown prosecutors need an advocate at the cabinet table. Instead of supporting them or offering constructive leadership in resolving these issues," he goes on to say, "you wring your hands and pass the buck."

My question is: has the Attorney General, now that he is the Attorney General, advocated on behalf of Crown prosecutors to cabinet on these issues?

Hon. G. Plant: As a result of the labour disruption that occurred in February of 2000, the prosecutors and the then government entered into a process. That process led step by step to a point at which there was an arbitration panel appointed, and it was part of the agreement between the Crown and government that the Crown would be bound by the arbitration result but government would not be.

In my view, and for the reasons that are set out in the letter that I tabled in the House some days ago, the Crown had failed to make out a case for market adjustments. The average prosecutor in British Columbia earns $108,000 a year. That is a reasonable salary. We do not have a problem with retention. We do not have a problem with recruitment. I think we have a great prosecution service in British Columbia, and I am confident that in the weeks and months ahead of us, the prosecutors of British Columbia will continue to discharge their duties to the people of British Columbia in helping keep all of our communities safe.

Hon. G. Collins presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: supplementary estimates (No. 3) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2004.

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

The Chair: I call committee to order, and if the members would retain their seats, we're going to distribute the information to you.

J. MacPhail: Mr. Chair, I request a recess. This is the first time I've seen it. It's rather substantial. Could we have a 15-minute recess, please?

J. MacPhail: Could the minister please explain the necessity for this supplementary estimate?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries is requesting supplementary estimates of $27.3 million. We request these funds to address dramatic income losses to livestock industries following the discovery of BSE, mad cow disease, in an Alberta cow. The discovery of BSE on May 20, 2003, shut down all major borders to export of live cattle and processed meat. The loss of that major export market created a dramatic loss of income for B.C.'s cattle industries.

There are two parts to this request for supplementary estimates: $10.5 million to help, as quickly as possible, those farmers and ranchers who have lost money already; in addition to that, $16.8 million to cover B.C.'s portion of additional claims expected to come in under the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program, known as CAIS. The increase in claims is expected due to the BSE crisis.

In terms of the programs, I'll address the $10.5 million first. These funds will be directed to programs that will restimulate the industry following the loss of in-

ternational markets. That funding will be disbursed through three initiatives that will assist producers experiencing immediate financial losses and pressures: the BSE recovery program, the steer and heifer market transition program, and the Canada–B.C. cull animal program. These three programs are all related to income losses experienced by farmers since the BSE discovery and will be paid based on actual claims filed by farmers and ranchers.

The BSE recovery program will cost British Columbia up to $3.2 million and will bring combined federal-provincial funding of $8 million to producers. This program helped to get the market moving again when the U.S. border was first shut down.

The steer and heifer market transition program will cost B.C. up to $1.3 million and supports producers who were not able to market their animals by August 31, 2003, when the BSE recovery program ended. That was the joint federal-provincial program. The Canada–B.C. cull animal program will cost up to $6 million and will compensate producers for the extremely low prices received for cull cows following the discovery of BSE. Cull animals are cattle ready for slaughter but for which there may not be a market, such as older dairy and beef cows.

Finally, the CAIS program. Beyond this immediate assistance, we also seek $16.8 million to make sure B.C. farmers are fully covered under the new CAIS program as a result of the BSE crisis. The additional funding will cover the estimated incremental cost of BSE to agriculture risk management programs under the national ag policy or agriculture policy framework. That's the five-year agreement involving the provincial governments and the federal government. These funds address overall drops in farm income that the farmers and ranchers may have experienced since the BSE outbreak. Funds will be paid out based on actual claims filed. It is important to point out that payments farmers receive under the three BSE–specific programs that I talked about will count as farm income when we determine what payments they are entitled to under the overall program, the CAIS program.

J. MacPhail: As I understand it, $8 million from the first tranche, $1.3 million from the second tranche and $6 million from the third tranche of the CAIS program has been spent or is about to be spent?

Hon. J. van Dongen: First of all, I just want to clarify the member's numbers. The numbers on the $10.5 million are 3.2 million of provincial dollars, 1.3 million of provincial dollars and six million of provincial dollars. So just to clarify that, some of those dollars have been paid out to producers. The $3.2 million, for example, which was on the BSE recovery program, was a joint federal-provincial program. It was announced in July 2003 and covered animals that were slaughtered up to approximately September 1 or August 31. Those dollars are being paid out. Similarly, the other programs have started, and a portion of those dollars has been paid out based on claims made through the proper forms.

J. MacPhail: The $16.8 million is for farmers for future coverage under CAIS, as I understand it.

Hon. J. van Dongen: The $16.8 million is under the CAIS program, which is one of the risk management programs in the current five-year federal-provincial agreement. The $16.8 million represents our best estimate of claims that would relate to the current fiscal year — the 2003-04 fiscal year.

J. MacPhail: Can the minister describe for me a range or an average claim that's been submitted?

Hon. J. van Dongen: Could I just get some clarification, Mr. Chair? Is the member asking about the CAIS program or the other three programs, in terms of an average claim?

Hon. J. van Dongen: Under the CAIS program, part of the agreement between the federal and provincial governments was to do an advance payment starting in the fall. That advance payment is calculated to be 50 percent of the ultimate claim, which will be claimed based on income tax returns for the year, and they would be claimed in the future. The idea was to get some cash to the producers.

The average estimated claim is in the range of $22,000 to $25,000. That includes both federal and provincial dollars. The advance payments that have been made are in the range of $12,500, of which 40 percent would be provincial money. So that would be approximately $5,000 for an average claim on the cash advance of provincial dollars.

J. MacPhail: How many claims have been made, and what is the anticipated number of claims the ministry is forecasting for '03-04?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The number of ranchers who have made claims under CAIS on the interim program is 125. We anticipate approximately 4,000 claims overall under that program for the calendar year 2003.

J. MacPhail: Does the minister have any idea, perhaps through conversing with ranchers, about why the claims are not coming in? Is there a reason for that?

Hon. J. van Dongen: We have promoted the interim program with ranchers. A lot of ranchers, first of all, have not been on these programs. Secondly, this is a new program, so they're not familiar with it. Certainly, the interim advance payment is a new aspect of the program that was put in place as a direct result of the

BSE situation, so it's a case of getting ranchers informed of it, which we have done.

We have been out doing a series of meetings throughout British Columbia through August and early September, all of which I attended along with staff. We've done a series of workshops to help inform and assist them in terms of the claims. The full claim cannot be made until the ranchers actually have their income tax return, so some of them may opt to do it a little bit later.

J. MacPhail: Through you, Mr. Chair, I would request a copy of the form, please, that the ranchers must fill out in order to make their claims. Is the application usually done by the rancher himself or herself, or is assistance needed — an accountant or lawyer?

Hon. J. van Dongen: We would be pleased to provide the member with a copy of the application form. The application involves a two-page form for most ranchers. It involves an inventory of the cattle in their operation, which the rancher would normally do himself, and it involves five years of income tax returns. Now, some ranchers may do their own income tax returns, and some may hire an accountant. The income tax returns have to be done in any event, so that is something they will have available to them. This program is actually quite a bit simpler than the previous program it replaced in terms of the application forms and the process ranchers and farmers have to go through.

J. MacPhail: Is the provincial portion of this program standardized across Canada?

Hon. J. van Dongen: Yes, the program is standardized across Canada. The CAIS program is a joint federal-provincial program, and it has all the same requirements in all provinces.

J. MacPhail: Is there any cross-application of the CAIS program if, indeed, chicken farmers need access to a similar program?

Hon. J. van Dongen: Chicken farmers would be eligible to apply under the program, but given the fact that they're under a regulated marketing system, the circumstances normally wouldn't develop whereby they would have a need to apply and would be eligible to collect any dollars under the program.

J. MacPhail: Could the minister please expand on that for those of us who are not as familiar with the market system as he is? Why would that preclude them from being eligible?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The chicken farmers are eligible, but because they're under a regulated market — they have a marketing board; they have a formula pricing system; they have a quota system whereby they have a responsibility and a right to supply the market with a certain amount of product on a daily or monthly basis — the circumstances wouldn't normally develop unless there is an absolute crisis on that individual farmer in the industry. We wouldn't normally expect to see that.

J. MacPhail: Has the minister been in touch with the Chicken Marketing Board in order to provide that reassurance or to have agreement that his point of view is accepted by the chicken farmers as well? That's question No. 1. Question No. 2: are all aspects of chicken farming market board–regulated?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The issue of eligibility has nothing to do with whether I have an opinion about a marketing system or not. They're either eligible or they're not. If the circumstances develop where they may be in need of assistance, they have the ability to apply. This supplementary estimates is strictly related to BSE and the beef cattle industry and the events that have transpired and the impacts on our farmers and ranchers since May 20, which actually got significantly more difficult on December 23. That's what this supplementary estimates relates to.

J. MacPhail: I understand that, but there have been events that have unfolded related to chicken farming that are similar to — or at least in the public's mind…. What I am exploring is the similarity or differences in order to provide answers for the public. Are all aspects of chicken farming regulated by market boards?

Hon. J. van Dongen: All aspects of the chicken industry and all chicken enterprises come under the framework of the regulated marketing system. There are various rules that apply in various situations. There is a small exemption level, and then there are various other regulations that apply in that sector. Again, I want to reiterate that this supplementary estimates is about the impact of BSE on beef producers.

J. MacPhail: This is just exploratory, but since the outbreak of avian flu on a chicken farm, has there been no necessity for discussion about assistance to chicken farmers in the same way that the government is assisting cattle ranchers?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The situation of one farm in Abbotsford that was found to have a case of avian flu is being dealt with under the federal Health of Animals Act, whereby that farmer is being compensated for the market value of his flock, which the Canadian Food Inspection Agency issued an order to have destroyed. That is the situation there. It is one farm. There is no evidence or indication that situation exists on any other farm. There is no risk to human health from that situation. We don't expect that farm would be facing any claims under the CAIS program at the present time.

J. MacPhail: The determination of $27 million for the fiscal year '03-04, which is about five weeks away

from finishing, was based on what? Is it based on a conclusion, an opening of the borders? What's the anticipated time of opening the American border, with this estimate?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The $16.8 million was based on estimates and calculations that were done independently both by our ministry and by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. We arrived at that estimate based on work done in those two ministries independently. That represents our best estimate of incremental claims under that program for the 2003 calendar year.

In terms of expectations for the border opening, certainly there was somewhat of a delay and an uncertainty introduced by the December 23 incident, which was not part of the calculation that was done. But in just meeting with other provinces, meeting with people in Washington D.C. and talking to the senior people in the agencies in the United States, we feel there is room for some hope and optimism for an effort by both countries to work together to harmonize whatever amendments or changes need to be made in the rules and regulations around border movement and to move towards, initially, a further partial opening of the border for meat and live animals and then, subsequent to that, a further opening in an effort to get to a fully open border and a fully integrated market, which we've always had between Canada and the United States.

There is recognition in the United States and in Canada that there will be no opportunity for either of our countries to enter into discussions with other countries, such as Japan and Korea, who have closed their borders to North American product. We need to get on the same page. We need to get our trade moving again. We need to get to a fully integrated market, and then both Canada and the United States will be in a better position to negotiate with those other countries.

There is a certain amount of incentive there for the United States to engage in whatever discussions are necessary to get the border open. Our expectation is that probably some time next week, the USDA will reopen the comment period for the proposal that was made last November for opening the border for movement of live cattle under 30 months and a number of other aspects of that proposed rule. The comment period will be anywhere from 15 to 30 days. That will reinitiate that process with a view and the hope of getting a decision from the USDA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, on that aspect some time after that. The timing of that will be tougher to predict, but certainly we expect the proposal to go back into a comment period shortly. That period would be 15 to 30 days, and then the USDA would make their decision.

J. MacPhail: The Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries attended Washington recently — in the last week or so. Perhaps the minister could tell us who led the delegation, who attended and who he met with. Did he meet with the Secretary of Agriculture?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The delegation from Canada involved seven or eight provinces. There were ministers in attendance from British Columbia and Alberta. Saskatchewan was represented by an elected person other than the Minister of Agriculture, who wasn't able to be there. The minister from Manitoba was there, the Minister of Agriculture from Ontario was there, and there were representatives there from New Brunswick. The minister from Nova Scotia was there. It was a Canadian delegation led by Minister Rosann Wowchuk from Manitoba, who is currently the lead provincial minister, and we had one or two staff with us.

We went there mainly to meet with our counterparts at the state level. They are part of a national organization in the United States that is called the North American State Directors of Agriculture. They were represented by virtually all of the states. There were 48 or 49 directors of agriculture there. They have a regular meeting at this point in the year. They have a standing invitation to provincial ministers of agriculture in Canada to attend their meeting.

We met on Sunday morning with officials from the Canadian embassy and had a full discussion with them about their assessment of the situation. They have been doing a lot of work on behalf of Canada and Canadian beef producers. Then in the afternoon we participated as full participants in a four-hour discussion on the issue of BSE with the NASDA people. As I said, we were fully involved in that.

The following day we met with senior officials in APHIS. That is the equivalent of our Canadian Food Inspection Agency. This is the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in the United States. We met with senior officials there who were also in attendance on the previous day, but we had a private meeting with them to talk about how they saw things and how they saw things unfolding.

We also met with officials from the national beef producers association in the United States. We met with representatives of the meat packing industry in the United States and officials in the food processing sector generally. Some of our delegation were also able to meet with elected members of the agricultural committees in the House of Representatives.

We had a full range of meetings with a number of different parties and came away relatively optimistic and hopeful that Canada and the United States are in the same boat on this issue. We need to collaborate. We need to work together. We need to harmonize our regulatory systems. We need to harmonize our responses to the BSE issue and move forward. Certainly, my conclusion is that there is sufficient motivation in the United States that we can look forward to moving ahead on this file. As I said, the only thing that might be a little bit in question is the timing, but the ultimate goal, I think, is quite clear in terms of where everybody feels they need to go.

I think it's also significant that a resolution that the NASDA organization had initiated in September at their Boise, Idaho, meeting, which was a very protec-

tionist response to the May 20 BSE cow in Canada, had gone through a number of different stages. On Sunday afternoon in the meeting it was completely pulled off the table and withdrawn in recognition of the fact that the United States really was in the same situation as Canada and had to move forward and deal with the issues in a constructive way, work out the harmonized regulations with Canada and then turn around and get markets such as Japan and Korea opened up to the North American market.

The other thing that will probably happen next week is that there will be some improvement in the flow of cattle under 30 months from the United States to Mexico. It's part of an evolving situation.

I think we're moving in the right direction. Listening to the discussion at the NASDA meeting reminds me of where we were last July in terms of our grappling with the problem. I think it was a very productive session. We had a very good dialogue between the elected representatives in the United States and Canada, and I look forward to further collaborative work on the regulations so that we can get trade flowing again as it should be.

J. MacPhail: In order to ask my next question, I must ask the minister…. I don't understand the acronym NASDA.

Hon. J. van Dongen: I did mention it is the North American state directors of agriculture. It is an organization of all of our counterparts at the state level.

J. MacPhail: Who accompanied you from the federal government — our Canadian federal government?

Hon. J. van Dongen: We didn't have anyone with us from the federal government. The federal minister had met with his counterpart, Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman, on January 16. This was a provincial initiative, because the provincial ministers of agriculture have a standing invitation to come to the NASDA meetings. My understanding is that the invitation does not necessarily extend to the federal minister in Canada.

J. MacPhail: It is my understanding, though, that the border will be opened when the federal levels of government both in the United States and in Canada agree. It has to be an agreement at the federal level.

Hon. J. van Dongen: Yes, the member is absolutely correct that those details have to be worked out at the federal level, but it is a fact that the state directors of agriculture have a significant influence on the decisions in the United States. In fact, the United States has more authority and responsibility on food safety issues at the state level than we do provincially in Canada. They are big players in the federal decision in the United States.

Certainly, we have been aware of this over the course of working through this process — that the people in the U.S. Department of Agriculture consult very closely with the state directors. In fact, in the September meeting, for example, it was quite a surprise to some of the directors of agriculture in the United States that the consumer had supported the Canadian beef industry as well as it had, with a 62 percent increase in consumption in July over the previous year, 72 percent in August and a levelling off or certainly a maintenance of beef consumption after that compared to last year. It was very useful for us to be there to impart that information to them, because that was certainly news to them.

Those sorts of things are necessary to help build confidence of the elected people in the state governments and the consumers in the United States to allow the federal agencies to move forward in making the decisions they know they need to make.

J. MacPhail: What are alternate plans that the government is contemplating if the border does not open?

Hon. J. van Dongen: We do have some discussion going on between the federal government in Canada and the provincial governments, where we are looking at the possibility of some enhancement to the overall agriculture policy framework — in particular the risk management programs. In fact, the four western ministers wrote to the federal minister about three weeks ago on that issue and indicated to the federal minister that we felt the federal government needed to come to the table with additional funding if there was going to be additional funding for any enhancements around something called negative margins on these programs.

On the CAIS program, it would be the federal government that would have to come to the table on those dollars. There's nothing — no further decisions — at this point. We feel that the workings of the CAIS program will provide a reasonable level of assistance in the foreseeable future and confidence to the cattle industry.

J. MacPhail: What are the communication arrangements between the federal Minister of Agriculture and the provincial ministers of agriculture as this unfolds?

Hon. J. van Dongen: The federal minister has communicated with provincial ministers on a very regular basis with regular conference calls updating us on issues that they're working on. There have also been regular calls at the staff level. For example, at the assistant deputy ministers' level and the deputy ministers' level, there have been very regular conference calls. We have had, under the previous minister, regular face-to-face meetings — certainly more since May 20 than we've had in the past.

There has been a lot of activity by Premiers, as well, starting with the Western Premiers' Conference in Kelowna in June. There has been a lot of activity even with Premiers and state Governors on this issue. Our

Premier worked with western state Governors on this issue in terms of trying to foster the need to get the border open. There have been a lot of communications with the federal government between the Prime Minister and our Premier, between the federal Minister of Agriculture and provincial ministers and all of their counterparts across the border.

J. MacPhail: My final question in this area is something that I learned from the cattle ranchers during the prebudget consultation tour in the fall of 2003, where I was accompanied by about nine or ten of my Liberal government caucus colleagues. Ranchers came before us and said they were having trouble getting, I believe — and I hope my terminology is right — Crown leases for grazing in order to support their cattle that were remaining alive and in Canada, in British Columbia, as a result of the closed border. Can the minister explain what improvements he has made, his government has made, in approving Crown leases for grazing to cope with the expanded herds as a result of the BSE closed border?

Hon. J. van Dongen: Certainly. I think the member is referring to the concern last fall about trying to get some flexibility on behalf of the ranching industry as to when cattle would be removed off Crown range. We did discuss and our staff discussed with their counterparts in the Ministry of Forests, who actually manage that Crown range, the idea of having some flexibility in how we manage that removal of animals from the Crown range. That was done.

I think that in most cases there were some satisfactory arrangements made to provide some additional flexibility for ranchers. There was also a decision made by our government to defer the requirement for ranchers to make payment for their range fees until April 1, 2004. So they got a deferral on their range fees as well.

This is certainly an ongoing issue in the sense that there are larger numbers of cattle on ranches. We will continue to work with the range managers in the Ministry of Forests to try and provide as much flexibility and as good utilization as possible of the forage production on Crown range.

J. Kwan: Visiting us in front of the legislative building today is a group called Faith in Action. They are a group of people from many different faith communities in Victoria who share a concern for the poor and the vulnerable in our society. Because they believe in living in a compassionate and respectful way with one another, their first focus is to envision an income assistance program in this province that recognizes the dignity and worth of all citizens. They've been here since noon today, and they will be here until midnight. In fact, at 10 o'clock tonight the Anglican Church will be serving the Eucharist. They invite anyone who joins in their vision to visit them throughout the course of the day and to join them at 10 o'clock tonight.

P. Nettleton: I would just like this opportunity to be on record in terms of the supplementary estimates with respect to the allocation of funds to BSE, mad cow, and an industry in crisis — an industry that's certainly well represented in my riding of Prince George–Omineca. I am supportive, in fact, of the allocation of these additional funds. This is an issue that I've certainly followed and been involved in, in some detail. I have, as well, a private member's statement next Monday to which the minister will be responding, which lays out in some detail my perspective from having worked with people in the industry within my riding and having been in contact with the ministry and others with respect to this crisis.

For the record and for the moment, I would like to say that indeed I am supportive of these additional moneys that are being designated for this crisis. I do know, in fact, that the minister has had to work very hard. Indeed, he has a reputation for being a minister that does work hard. I know he's worked hard to get these additional moneys through treasury and through cabinet and so forth. For that we are all thankful. As well, I share his perspective with respect to the federal government and the need for leadership nationally for this industry that is in crisis. Indeed, the feds can and should do more.

I will on Monday, Mr. Chair, for the interest of members, lay out my perspective with respect to this crisis, which is somewhat different from the minister's in some respects. I look forward to that Monday of next week. Again, as I say, I will be supportive. I will be supporting the allocation of these funds for BSE.

Hon. G. Collins: Forthwith, Mr. Speaker. I move that the report of the resolution from the Committee of Supply on February 25, 2004, be now received, taken as read and agreed to.

Hon. G. Collins: I move that there be granted from and out of the consolidated revenue fund the sum of $27.3 million. This sum is in addition to that authorized to be paid under section 1 of the Supply Act, 2003-2004, and is granted to Her Majesty towards defraying the charges and expenses of the public service of the province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2004.

Hon. G. Collins presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3).

Hon. G. Collins: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Mr. Speaker: Hon. members, if you wish to distribute the bill, we could wait for a moment or two. Okay. Just remain in your seats, please, while we distribute the bill.

Hon. G. Collins: With regard to first reading of Bill 9, the use of supplementary estimates is consistent with the spirit of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. This supply bill is introduced to provide supply for the operation of government programs for the 2003-04 fiscal year, as outlined in the supplementary estimates (No. 3) tabled earlier today.

The bill will provide the additional funds required to defray the charges and expenses of the public purse of the province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2004.

In accordance with the established practice, the government seeks to move this bill through all stages this day.

Mr. Speaker: In keeping with the practice of this House, the bill will be permitted to advance through all stages in one sitting.

Bill 9 introduced, read a first time and ordered to proceed to second reading forthwith.

Hon. G. Collins: I move that the bill now be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Bill 9, Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3), read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Hon. G. Collins: I move the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Bill 9, Supply Act, 2003-2004 (Supplementary Estimates No. 3) reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. G. Collins presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Ministerial Accountability Bases Act, 2003-2004.

Hon. G. Collins: Bill 10 provides for an increase in the amount of operating expenses for the purposes of

ministerial accountability under the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act to account for the disaster relief costs that we've experienced this last year. The Ministerial Accountability Bases Act, 2003-2004, makes provision to increase the operating expenses for ministerial accountability for the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, the Minister of Forests, and the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General.

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

Bill 10 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

K. Johnston: I'm delighted to stand today and respond to the budget. You know, when I first got involved in running back in 2001, I was happy to bring forward and live a document called the New Era document that the government is living by and living up to.

As we walked around and talked to constituents and as we promoted the ideas in that document, there were a lot of good ideas put forward, and to date, I believe we've delivered on 90 percent of those commitments and initiatives. For me, two of the major new-era promises from that document that were extremely critical had to do with the finances of this province.

Those promises said this. A B.C. Liberal government will pass real balanced-budget legislation to make balanced budgets mandatory by our third full budget and will pass real truth-in-budgeting legislation that ensures all provincial finances are fully, accurately and honestly reported under generally accepted accounting principles. With this budget this government has done that.

For the fifth time in 25 years in British Columbia, we have a balanced budget. We have a real balanced budget, not a fudge-it budget — not a budget like the last NDP budget, which used accounting entries to claim it was balanced and left an unbelievable inherited deficit of $3.4 billion for the next year. That is not often stressed enough, and I want to stress it again. To use an analogy, it is like buying a house from somebody. They tell you everything is absolutely perfect with the structure of the home. They tell you there's nothing that needs to be done. Then you'll be handed the keys of this particular home as you move in. You open the door, and the inside is absolutely trashed.

The NDP government left a deficit, a structural deficit. Most people, I can understand…. It is not a common phrase that rolls off the tongue. A structural deficit was one they lumbered the incoming government with. For the first year we had a $3.4 billion deficit strictly because of settlements and wages and no planning and revenue reductions. That's what we inherited.

For this budget to be balanced at this time is, in my opinion, an absolutely positive step and a real achievement — a real balanced budget using real, recognized accounting practices, generally accepted accounting practices. In accountant-ese, what that really means is that all of the Crown corporations, agencies, public schools, hospitals, universities and colleges will in fact be part of the budget, will in fact be reported on. There are no outside agencies which, in the past…. Most governments do keep them separate; they keep Crown corporations and other things outside the realm of the reporting. This is open and transparent government and reporting.

The Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services released their report following their consultations around the province. That committee does a lot of hard work listening to the people of British Columbia. They heard from 216 individuals and organizations as they travelled and listened in the province. The number one thing they heard was to stay the course and balance the budget. What they actually said in that report and what came out of the report was: "We recommend that the government stay the course on eliminating the annual deficit."

Many people in the House have already talked about validators, about outside organizations coming forward and supporting this budget. The Vancouver Board of Trade also gave their support to staying the course and eliminating the deficit in 2004-05. On February 17 they gave a report card that I think really summarizes…. I'm just going to read from the media release of that report card: "Board of Trade Gives Balanced Budget an A." "The Vancouver Board of Trade's provincial government budget and finance task force has given the…government an overall A following today's release of the…provincial budget. 'The balanced budget is a tremendous achievement,' said Darcy Rezac, managing director of the board."

They rated it on four criteria: on economic vision they applied an A; tax competitiveness, a B-plus; spending control, an A-plus; and debt management, a B-plus. I think that speaks to the work that's been done, certainly by the Finance minister and this government, in balancing the budget.

Other groups also validated the budget. The CAs said: "You made a promise, and we believe you will stick to it. The single most important outcome for 2004-05 is a set of balanced books…. Our support for you in this regard is unwavering." The B.C. Retail Council — again, I'll tell you what they said: "We strongly support balancing the budget in 2004-05." The Canadian Taxpayers Federation said: "It is absolutely imperative that this budget be balanced in 2004-05."

I believe the government has listened to the majority of people in British Columbia. They have listened to the majority of hard-working British Columbians, who understand that you cannot live beyond your means, whether it be government or at home. They understand that you must pay as you go. They understand that we cannot pile debt on our children and on our children's children. They understand that government itself has no money. The government is entrusted to do the best thing they can with the people's money.

Hard-working British Columbians manage their personal finances, understanding that you cannot spend money you do not have. You cannot keep borrowing from the bank without the ability to repay the bank. Why does anybody out there think it's any different for government? Do we have in government some magic vault in the basement where we can go down and print our own money or grab our own money? I haven't seen it yet. I've been here three years.

Except for the head of the BCMA and a few others, British Columbians understand there is no golden goose sitting in the basement.

Many of us have been just very, very fascinated…. In fact, I'm reading a book right now on the concept of time travel. The concept has been the subject of numerous books, movies and scientific ponderings. My perception is, and I notice….

I think the NDP are big fans of time travel. Last week they issued a provincial budget through a group they gave $200,000 to in the dying days of their mandate. I've read it — very interesting reading. I personally have coined it the "NDP time machine budget." This is a budget where the NDP travels back in time to the not so heady days of 1991 to 2000, when they drove the most prosperous province in Canada into the ground.

The NDP finance wizards, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives gang, are the ones promoting this time machine budget. I often wonder if they've used up all $200,000 given to them by the NDP on this one report. The CCPA have jumped into the time machine and are trying to take the province back to the days of deficit and debt. Some of the highlights of the time machine budget include not balancing the budget until 2010, which of course would immensely increase the debt, a very nice legacy for our children and for the children of many people in the future — paying hundreds of millions of dollars of interest to the bank instead of into health care and education.

Another fun feature is the immediate 5-cents-a-litre increase in gas tax. Increasing taxes on small business, once again promoting small business moving to other provinces…. A 40 percent tax increase for people earning $60,000 — an outright attack on what would be middle-income earners. How would we keep nurses, teachers, public sector employees and anybody else in that range motivated to work in British Columbia? The NDP budget also wants to increase red tape and to dictate to business, creating a climate of total uncertainty.

Out of that budget I take this — and this is direct from the time machine budget: "The system should provide a range of tax credits, but only for those companies that are willing to meet provincial economic, social and environmental objectives." That absolutely frightens me — words like that. What they're effectively saying is: "If you don't run your business or take care of your affairs the way we tell you to run them, like a good little boy or girl, we will not support you. We will not be supportive of you."

It was with total disbelief that I read the NDP budget. I really hope there aren't a lot of people that subscribe to those writings. British Columbians do not want to return to the dark days of NDP despair.

In talking to the people with their feet on the ground, in talking to the people of my constituency, there is the belief and the confidence that government is there to act responsibly with the taxpayers' money. Of course, recent events at the federal level have certainly gotten our attention and outraged a lot of us. The wanton disregard for prudence and waste of resources is not something any of us subscribe to. I'm sure all provincial politicians, regardless of party, are doing their best to ensure that this type of thing does not occur provincially. That is why I agree with accountability standards — with the move to generally accepted accounting principles.

British Columbia is the first government in Canada to legislate this accountability. It is an extremely, extremely positive step, because it gives us a basic, uniform standard for financial budget reporting, and it gives us the ability to offer true accountability to the people of British Columbia.

Enough about the past and the dark days of the NDP policy. What does this budget do for the future of British Columbia? Why is this budget important to British Columbians? There are many issues, and probably the foremost on most people's mind these days is health. With an aging population, the demands on our health care system continue to grow. Progress is being made in the health care field. Just a few examples. The Vancouver coastal health authority is creating a single acute care network within the region. Instead of every hospital trying to be everything to every single person, expertise and resources are being directed in certain areas, and this will provide better and improved patient services.

A new $90 million academic ambulatory care centre is being developed next to Vancouver General Hospital to provide improved access to one-stop out-patient care for up to 600,000 patients annually — a positive step. Community dialysis units are now in place, providing patients with care closer to where they live. An initiative to reduce emergency room congestion has resulted in a 25 percent reduction in the wait time for patients who are in emergency and need to be placed in a bed at VGH.

Just a few days ago the provincial health services authority received a presentation from Dr. Gavin Stuart, dean of the University of British Columbia's school of medicine. He said that currently there are 128 first-year spots available for medical students at UBC. With UBC's expansion and new medical schools coming on stream at UVic and the University of Northern British Columbia, by 2010 there will be a total of 192 spots at UBC and a further 32 first-year spots at each of University of Victoria and University of Northern B.C.

Much has been done to improve our health care system, but make no mistake: with health care eating up 42 percent of our spending, we are under tremendous pressure. Since the spring of 2001 we have added $2 billion to health care to meet patient needs. Over the next two years another billion dollars will go into the health care system. The government is committed to ensuring that more of every health care dollar goes directly to patient care.

Progress is being made; 38,000 additional surgeries were performed in British Columbia last year. Having our house in fiscal order gives us the ability to make those choices, to put more money into health care.

Education is a building block of our society. Vancouver-Fraserview, my constituency, has two of Vancouver's largest high schools — David Thompson and Killarney — and about 15 elementary schools. Balancing the budget gives us the opportunity to build on student successes. Improving student outcomes is the goal of this government's education policy. We are investing in the future; we are investing in our students. The K-to-12 education budget will be increased by $313 million over three years to improve achievement, promote literacy and make schools safer. The government has refocused education and emphasized student achievement, parent participation and choice.

By 2004-05 funding per student will be $530 higher than in the spring of 2001. At Killarney Secondary in Vancouver-Fraserview, with a population of about 2,000 students, there has been some bad press lately because of some violent incidents that have occurred. But I would like to do something that is not really reported on in the papers because it's not bad news. I'd like to acknowledge the vast majority of those students, contributing students in our society. They are the real face of the school system. They are the real face of British Columbia.

Last year at Killarney I had a tour of the music program, which got a digitized, synthesized recording studio, electronic stimulators, the touring bands program and everything. This is a school with over 1,000 of the 2,000 students involved in music and drama. This is a school that is developing well-rounded students.

I also had the opportunity to meet with five grade 11 students who were part of a national writing contest. Actually, one of the Killarney students, a Ms. Hobbs, won the contest in Ottawa with an essay on "What Being a Canadian Citizen Means to Me."

There's another school in the riding — a high school called David Thompson, also with about 2,000 students. This is a school with over 250 students in service clubs contributing to the community. This is a school with such initiatives as a robotics development team raising awareness for entry into engineering programs.

These students are showing us a path to a very bright future. I believe great things are happening in our K-to-12 system, and I believe these students are proof of that.

I will continue to work to try to make sure that education builds on success. I will also continue my quest to ensure that programs such as inner-city Community LINK funding, extremely important programs which are recognized as a development tool in our younger students…. I will make sure that I will continue to fight for these programs. I will continue to bring to government the concerns of parents on the education side and, as I said, promote the importance of the inner-city Community LINK program with my fellow Vancouver MLAs.

Earlier I spoke about the well-rounded secondary graduates coming out of our school system, but these students must have somewhere to go upon graduation. They must have opportunities at the post-secondary level. That is why I am delighted that funding for advanced education will increase by $105 million in the next three years. The province will create almost 12,000 new student spaces by 2007, rising to more than 25,000 by 2010. Access to advanced education is critical to our economic and social future.

I believe having a bar of 75 percent to get into post-secondary education is a reasonable amount. Currently, many students are struggling with the high 90 percent averages that are often required to get in. These are unrealistic in my mind, so I'm very happy that is also an initiative.

A well-educated workforce attracts investment and in turn funds our economic growth, which allows us to continue to balance the budget and, more importantly, provide health care and education to our citizens. It is closing the circle of social responsibility.

Crime is an issue of importance to all residents of British Columbia, especially property crime in the greater Vancouver regional district. We have all been touched by the tentacles of property crime. Recently — myself, actually, personally — my wife's car door was ripped completely off in a public parking lot, with $1,000 worth of damage, and there was absolutely nothing in it. This story is not exclusive to me. It's common every single day — every single day in our society.

This is another story. Last week a friend of mine had a car — a 1973 Ford Escort which, frankly, was in pretty rough shape — taken right out of his carport. The point is that it does not seem to matter what the value of your car or asset or thing in your house is, or what the end benefits of crime are. Everyone and everything seem to be at risk.

I am hopeful that we can focus more energy on some of the crime-fighting initiatives that the Solicitor

General has brought forward. I know that the balanced budget will give us an opportunity to put more into community policing and crime prevention.

In 2005-06 government will share 75 percent of all traffic fine revenues with municipalities to improve community policing and crime prevention. I am hopeful that more can be done to make the punishment fit the crime in terms of the sentencing of property crime offenders. We must work with the federal government to address the problem of treating property crime offenders properly in the courts.

Budget 2004 is a budget of building a very strong foundation for the future. Over the past few years which led to this balanced budget, the work of restructuring government has produced benefits such as being number one in job growth — 159,000 jobs over the past two years — number one in housing growth, number one in small business confidence and the number one destination for new investor immigrants.

It is clear that the government's plan is working. I support that plan. I support this balanced budget for my children's future and all the children of British Columbia. I really appreciate the opportunity to have these words.

G. Halsey-Brandt: It's a pleasure to rise in response to Budget 2004 this afternoon. Just before I start, I would like to thank the member for Bulkley Valley–Stikine for these beautiful new podiums that we have in the House this afternoon. It's the first chance I've had to use it. It just shows you the creativity of British Columbians. With the destruction and the pine beetle in central and northern British Columbia, when people put their minds to work to get around that problem, it's amazing what they can come up with on these beautiful projects. Again, thank you very much to our member and the people in that riding who make these.

I also want to thank the Minister of Finance and his staff. I can just imagine the amount of time and effort they put into preparation of the budget this year, working with all the ministries, particularly under the new regulations that we are publishing our budget under. I know the tremendous effort that goes into putting this together. I would like to thank them.

When I spoke to this House — I think it was about three and perhaps a minor budget speech ago — about three years ago, I remember talking about the decade of decline that we had just gone through in British Columbia under the previous government. I remember commenting that this government was committed to rebuilding the province and that we had, indeed, an economic plan.

In my professional life before I entered politics and became a mayor and then, of course, an MLA, I was in city planning. Planning is all about having targets and setting a direction so that you can reach your goal — whether it be a small town, a neighbourhood, a city or a province that you're planning for. This government has a financial plan and budgetary targets. We have set a direction, and we have indicators along the way to measure our progress.

In reflecting back, what did our B.C. Liberal government set as a target for the budget, and what financial direction did we establish when we were first elected in May 2001? I want to highlight a few of our commitments from that time. The member who just spoke previously, the member for Vancouver-Fraserview, touched on these, but I think it's important, because politicians are often judged in terms of what they do in living up to their promises.

Our commitments in 2001. We said it was a new era of accountability. Our plan will deliver real transparent and accountable government. We were going to do several things in the financial realm. We were going to pass real balanced-budget legislation, make balanced budgets mandatory by our third full budget and hold all ministers individually accountable.

We were going to pass real truth-in-budgeting legislation that ensures all provincial finances are fully, accurately and honestly reported under generally accepted accounting principles. We were going to honestly balance the budget without cutting funding for health care or for education.

We were going to establish service plans that included measurable performance standards and targets for all the programs and that are annually audited and published for all taxpayers to see. We were going to require Crown corporations to be directly accountable to a committee of the Legislature for their financial management and their budget plans. Of course, we were going to establish a fixed date for tabling the annual provincial budget.

Well, we have indeed lived up to our commitments. This budget for 2004-05 is balanced. The finances are reported under generally accepted accounting principles. We have a fixed date for tabling the annual budget, which of course is the third Tuesday in February. We have protected health care and education. In fact, we've increased those budgets substantially. All our ministries have service plans of what their programs are and what their budgets and their staff resources are, and they're all based on a three-year forecast. These measurables are open and transparent and available for everyone to examine on the ministry websites.

Part of the reason I ran in the last election was to work to turn around the economic decline that B.C. was experiencing. This was necessary because as we all know, without a good economy, we cannot have first-class social services. It is growth in the business sector that indeed creates the jobs, and believe it or not, this area is the one that pays the taxes that give government the money to pay for health care, education and other social services.

In my constituency of Richmond Centre, economic development had come to a standstill in 2001. My constituents were looking to their elected member and our government to get the economy going again. To deal

with the economy, we had a plan: limit spending to what we can afford, eliminate the deficit and, as the economy grows, increase revenues that we can use for social services.

As soon as possible after the election, we gave everyone a 25 percent reduction in personal income taxes, we reduced corporate taxes, and we carried out dozens of other tax cuts. We reduced and in many instances eliminated red tape and unnecessary regulations. We made British Columbia competitive again for capital and labour in North America.

We stopped the flight of people from the province. We stopped the flight of capital. We left hard-earned dollars in the pockets of British Columbians so that they could decide where to spend them. Let them make their own choices instead of government making choices for our citizens. This plan has certainly worked over the past three years.

To underline our progress, I want to outline some important economic indicators. B.C. created 1,000 new jobs in January, building on the 83,400 jobs created in 2003. Total job creation in B.C. since December 2001, just after we were elected, now stands at 159,900. That record of job creation is indeed, I think, a record in Canada, and one that allows…. I would like to congratulate the Minister of Human Resources on the work we have done for people in British Columbia on social assistance. This record of job creation allows them to get off of social assistance and have jobs in the province of British Columbia.

Building permits — record growth again in 2003. The value of building permits issued by B.C. municipalities in 2003 was up 13 percent over 2002 — twice the national average, here in British Columbia. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation forecasts that B.C. will be one of only two provinces to see continued growth of housing starts in 2004. Again, I just want to point out that this is January 2004. Our housing starts were up 94 percent over the same month of January in 2003 — indeed, an almost 100 percent increase in housing starts in British Columbia, January over January.

Just as an aside, my son bought a house last weekend. He's taking possession very, very soon, so he's added to the statistics. As a matter of fact, he just graduated from university last spring. He got his first full-time job in September. He's bought a new house, and he's getting married in the fall, so it's all coming together. It's certainly a measure of success for him, and I think we've laid the groundwork for him and all our children here in British Columbia.

In terms of business, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business has found small and medium-sized businesses in British Columbia are now more optimistic about their business prospects over the next year than anywhere else in Canada. The number of small businesses in B.C. has increased over 3 percent in 2002, following — listen to it — three consecutive years of decline before that under the previous administration. Small businesses account, as we know, for 98 percent of all B.C. businesses and over 58 percent of all private sector jobs here in British Columbia, and we certainly couldn't do it without them.

Another exciting figure. Aftertax family income in B.C. jumped 4.7 percent in 2001, the third-strongest increase in Canada and the largest increase in aftertax income for B.C. families in the last two decades. This was our tax cuts at work.

Another figure that's been used in this House several times over the past few days was that for the first time people are moving back into our province — the first time over the last six years. We saw a net inflow of over 2,600 people from the rest of Canada coming into British Columbia in the third quarter of 2003.

Finally, a comment from the Conference Board of Canada, which released their report just last Friday. "British Columbia's economy will expand by 3.1 percent" — this is for 2004 — "thanks to a stronger domestic economy and exports to the hotter U.S. economy," the Conference Board of Canada forecast on Friday. The province is expected to post even stronger growth numbers in 2005 thanks to a rebound in tourism, manufacturing, the forest industry and especially pulp and paper. The Conference Board expects significant job growth from British Columbia's service sector — in particular public administration, construction, wholesale and retail trade — which should exceed that in most other provinces and drive down the unemployment rate.

In my constituency and in fact throughout the city of Richmond under the last years of the NDP government in Victoria, instead of experiencing increased population growth from eastern Canada and overseas, which we had had for many years prior, many people were leaving. They were going to Alberta, to Ontario, back to Hong Kong, to Taiwan to look for jobs and — it's serious — if they were an entrepreneur, taking their capital with them. Businesses were boarded up, and young people were discouraged.

I'm glad to report that under our financial plan, confidence has returned. My constituency is excited about economic growth and development once again. A few economic indicators from our city that I've brought along this afternoon illustrate that point. The number of new building permits issued in 2003 as compared to 2002 — last year we were up by 14 percent to 1,600 new building permits. I mentioned jobs earlier and new business licenses issued. In 2003 over 2002 they were up almost 9 percent in the city of Richmond.

New jobs created in 2003 over 2002, and 2002 wasn't a bad year. We had 5,700 new jobs created in the city, and 6,900 in 2003, for a 21 percent increase in new jobs in our city. The unemployment rate, of course, went down from 7.9 percent in 2002 to 7.5 percent. As a matter of fact, in December 2003 it was 6.1 percent. The sale of single-family and multi-family homes in Richmond took off, and the prices have risen with them.

In addition to these economic indicators, the hustle of residential, commercial and industrial activity around the riding is striking. Yesterday the member for

North Vancouver–Lonsdale commented on the number of highrise construction cranes that have gone up in the south Lonsdale area. I'm pleased to report that indeed that is the case in Richmond. Because our community is flat — it's an island in the mouth of the Fraser River — they do stand out very clearly, a good indicator of economic growth. They've returned to our community under our government. There are a lot of new townhouses, as well, and single-family residential development.

We're very excited. We've got a new entertainment complex with a hotel opening in the north side of Richmond, just adjacent to the Oak Street Bridge, by the end of May. It's a new casino and a new entertainment centre. The hotel will be opened at the end of this year. We have a brand-new hotel opening in the centre of town, the La Quinta chain from the western United States. Certainly, I think they have confidence in the way our community is going in the future.

A huge new Aberdeen shopping centre. We had a soft opening just before Christmas. We've got an official opening July 1 — 380,000 square feet of new commercial retail space in this new shopping centre and a thousand parking stalls so people come from all over the lower mainland to visit that new shopping centre. Obviously, the developer and all those merchants going into that new, almost 400,000-square-foot mall have confidence in our economy to make that investment.

In the industrial sector, I would like to thank the Minister of Advanced Education. She had the opportunity to visit my riding last summer and made an exciting announcement for us on the B.C. aerospace strategy, a $20 million strategy around the province, specializing in terms of where the different campuses are — whether in Campbell River, Kelowna, Abbotsford, Dawson Creek or indeed Richmond.

We certainly have a shortage of students in the aerospace industry, and this new strategy will enable students to have additional spaces to graduate in that type of technology. I had the opportunity to have toured several of the actual plants at the airport that employ these students. They have such trouble finding enough students, and in fact they are opening up some of their own training programs.

We also had an exciting donation in the fall from WestJet Airlines of a Boeing 737-200 that was flying one week, and they donated it to BCIT aerospace campus the next week. The students could do their practicums on that plane so they could be right up to date with the latest expertise.

We had a very exciting announcement today, as a matter of fact, from YVR. They announced today a new $1.4 billion capital construction program at the airport. If this doesn't indicate confidence in the way British Columbia is going over the next few years, then nothing does. Right now we have a little over 14 million passengers a year going through that airport. They expect 23 million passengers a year going through that airport in nine years from now. So, they today announced an injection of $1.4 billion in capital into the airport. I just want to touch on what a couple of those things are.

There's a new international terminal expansion and upgrades. There's the RAV line, of course — the rapid transit line to the airport. There are upgrades to the domestic terminal and airfield projects. In fact, the runways are being upgraded. Baggage system expansion and upgrades, roads and parking and, of course, a lot of information technology — 5,200 person-years of employment announced today at YVR. We're thrilled about that, and I think we should be thrilled as a province.

Earlier this month MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates of Richmond announced a $140 million project in a Canadian space mission. MDA will lead a Canadian team to build a micro-satellite spacecraft platform for scientific and commercial purposes to be launched in 2007. Just last week MD Robotics, a subsidiary of MacDonald Dettwiler, won a contract to inspect a robotic rover and its scientific payload that is scheduled to be sent to Mars in 2009.

In addition to these exciting developments, the 2004 budget will have a direct impact on many other initiatives in my community. We're excited about the upcoming 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games because, apart from the games themselves, individual volunteers and the business community are looking forward to taking advantage of opportunities.

I would just like to take a moment to congratulate Mr. John Furlong, a resident of my constituency, on his selection as CEO of the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. He's a tremendous contributor to a lot of events, a lot of things that happen in the city, and I certainly think they picked the right man for that.

Perhaps the biggest community opportunity is the proposed Olympic broadcast centre. In the centre of Richmond we have a 135-acre piece of property that is owned by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. The Olympic committee would like to put the Olympic broadcast centre on this site. At the present time there are negotiations going on between Tourism Richmond, the federal government and the city of Richmond to acquire that property, and it's a real win-win situation.

Tourism Richmond now collects a 2 percent room tax for every hotel room in the city. One percent of that tax is going towards this trade and exhibition centre. The Olympic committee has also designated about $14 million or $15 million towards this Olympic broadcast centre. Here we have a real win-win for the Olympics in my community. Tourism Richmond is going to build a trade and exhibition centre. If we can use that centre for the Olympic broadcast centre and combine those uses, combine their finances, then we get two for the price of one, if I can say.

Another part that's not directly related to the Olympics, but it certainly is in terms of a deadline, is the new Vancouver-Richmond-Airport rapid transit line. Each partner, including the provincial government, has designated $300 million to that project. We have three bids in now that are being reviewed. We

expect it to be short-listed to two in the next couple of months and then a final bidder selected in the fall. We expect 100,000 riders on that new rapid transit line by 2010. It's going to move people. It's going to move people between the airport and downtown and Richmond, particularly to be there in time for the Olympic Games.

Budget 2004 inserts a total of $13 billion over the next three years to expand and update transportation infrastructure. A portion of this is $200 million from the CN Rail partnership that came out of our agreement with them. That money will be used to support transportation improvements around the province.

I just want to mention one that we're looking at in my constituency in terms of growth, where we're going in the future and the benefits of this budget for us. We have a 650-acre parcel of land in south Richmond against the Fraser River owned by Fraser Port. They're looking at putting in deep-sea shipping terminals along the edge of the river, and the backup land will be used for light industrial and heavy industrial uses.

There's going to have to be a new system of roadways put into this from Highway 91 and Highway 99, so we're very, very excited about working together with the Ministry of Transportation in doing that work to tie it into the regional transportation grid. I know the ministry is working with the city in terms of a traffic study now.

The funding for the new post-secondary spaces — 12,000 of them over the next three years and almost 25,000 by 2010. Like a lot of people in this chamber, my children have been to college or BCIT or university, and seats just weren't there for them. When I went to school a long, long time ago, it took four years to get your BA or your BSc. But now it's common to be five or six years, simply because the spaces aren't there.

Of course, as we know, the grade point average has gone up considerably — to 80, 85, 92 percent — and for a lot of us that would be a struggle to get into university. By creating these new spaces, we're going to get a lot of young people in our communities now being able to get into university. We have a 92 percent graduation rate from our secondary schools in our city, and 31 percent of those young people go on to university. We're very, very excited about this money that is there to help those young people get into university, from our community and others around the province, and also, as I mentioned earlier, to places like the BCIT Aerospace Technology Campus.

An increase in the homeowner grant threshold, as well, to $585,000 from $525,000 is going to assist many hundreds of residents in my community that are certainly hitting that threshold now. I was particularly excited to see the increase for seniors as , who will at least get a portion of the grant of their home up to $659,500 — an excellent protection for them, of course, against the significant increase in house values that we've had in the lower mainland over the past two years.

This budget also provides for an increase in the gas tax refund for persons with disabilities, and this is tremendously important in my community, which has a relatively large percentage of disabled people. I think that's because we have a large number of programs led by the Disability Resource Centre and the Richmond Committee on Disability, which train people with a disability to go out into the workforce.

I think it's partly because of our topography. Being a flat community, it's a little easier to get around. Also, the city has installed many, many methods in terms of their curbs and buildings and this sort of thing to enable everything in our city to be wheelchair-accessible. Often persons with disabilities work part-time because of that disability, and certainly this gas tax refund will help them, in fact, get to their places of work.

There are a host of additional budget measures that I would leave to others to explore, but I do want to take a moment to reflect on what others think of our government and of this budget. I turn to those who really do keep a critical eye on everything that happens in the province. I clipped out three snippets: one from the Vancouver Sun, one from the Vancouver Province and one from the Victoria Times Colonist — the three biggest dailies in British Columbia.

Finally, and this is from a real tough group. This group is the Certified General Accountants Association

Again, I would like to congratulate the Finance minister, because it's even more difficult. This year, for the first time, we had to incorporate schools, universities and hospitals — all those public sector–funded organizations — within our budget catchment.

The last three years have indeed been difficult for all of us in British Columbia. Our economy had gone through a decade of overspending, overtaxation and overregulation in the 1990s. World political and financial instability took a significant hit on September 11, 2001. As our relatively small economy is heavily based on natural resources and foreign trade, that event and the events that followed — of course, the war in Iraq, SARS, mad cow and the forest fires here in B.C. — were very difficult.

In spite of those setbacks, I am pleased our government, led by the Premier and the Finance minister, has stayed the course and lived up to our promise to balance the budget. We have also balanced the budget in a socially responsible way, looking after our health care sector, education, seniors, children and the most vulnerable in this province. By maintaining the financial course and through our fiscal policies, we've restored not only business confidence in B.C. but the confidence of the public that we are managing public programs in the best interests of all British Columbians.

Hon. J. van Dongen: It is with great pride today that I stand in this House to speak about our balanced budget. Certainly, the need for fiscal responsibility in government is one of the reasons I ran for public office.

Our government said a little over two and a half years ago that we would balance the books. We ran on this as an election promise, and one I was very pleased to embrace. We have delivered on that, despite having inherited a very significant deficit overhang from the previous government. The previous government had made commitments that they had not provided funding for. The previous government could only rely on unexpected and unplanned revenue windfalls to bolster its fiscal claims.

Our government has actually balanced the budget. We have brought spending under control, and our balanced-budget legislation ensures that all future budgets will also be on track and in the black. We owe this important achievement to the leadership of our Premier and the Minister of Finance, who have kept us focused on this important goal. Focus and discipline — that's what it takes to balance the budget and spend hard-earned taxpayers' dollars wisely.

To put it into context, consider this. The province's books are in the black after a year when we faced unprecedented costs to fight forest fires — almost $500 million — to protect families, workers and communities. We were confronted with an ongoing pine beetle epidemic. The softwood lumber dispute remains unresolved. We saw SARS, flooding and, closer to my own ministry, mad cow disease. In all, it was almost a billion-dollar hit that we have weathered this past year.

Balancing the books is all about bringing out the best in British Columbia. Balancing the books gives us choices and means we don't have to mortgage our children's future to deficit financing. In this budget, health care funding is going to enjoy a spending increase of more than a billion dollars over the next three years, in addition to all of the dollars we have put in, in the last two and a half years. That's real money to improve patient care.

I want to take a look at what all of this means for the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. We are certainly focused on bringing out the best in agriculture and in our seafood sector in British Columbia. Our ministry budget has been stabilized at $44.6 million. That means we have secure funding in place to share risk management with the industry through crop insurance and the new Canadian agricultural income stabilization program.

We're working with industry on collaborative approaches that build their sectors and provide them with the assistance they need when they need it. This was demonstrated this past year with the discovery of BSE in Alberta and again in Washington State. Our ministry worked alongside industry leaders like the B.C. Cattlemen's Association to provide the programs that would prove the most beneficial. I certainly want to highlight and express my appreciation to the leadership in the B.C. Cattlemen's Association. People like Agnes Jackson and David Borth have been invaluable in helping us work through this difficult issue.

For instance, we're paying ranchers and farmers support for their cull cow situation at $128 per eligible animal. To date we've paid out more than 1,200 claims totalling more than $2 million, and another 2,000 claims are being processed as we speak. It's all part of our $10.5 million commitment for the BSE recovery and cull cow programs.

On top of that, we're making good on our commitment last fall to farmers and ranchers, and we'll see another $16.8 million of incremental money provided under the CAIS program, the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program. Those are real dollars that are helping our farmers and ranchers in the Peace River region, the interior, the Kootenays, the Cariboo and many other rural areas of B.C. including Vancouver Island.

Our mission in the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries is for a competitive and profitable industry that provides safe, high-quality food for consumers and export markets. This vision impacts every British Columbian and every consumer of B.C. products. I am proud to be a part of a government whose mandate is to provide the people of B.C. and our export markets with safe and healthy world-class food products. I'm also honoured to be part of a government that has the determination and commitment to lay out a plan, make the difficult decisions to deliver on that plan and then stay the course until that plan begins to bear fruit.

The budget speech talked about bringing out the best in B.C., noting that the groundwork for growth had been laid and the foundation for achievement was being built. We are starting to achieve on numerous fronts, both as a government and as a ministry. Employment is up, with more than 83,000 jobs created last year alone. Building permits issued by B.C. municipalities were up 13 percent last year compared to 2002 — almost double the national figure. We even saw a net inflow of people from the rest of Canada moving into British Columbia in the third quarter of 2003 — the first time in six years that more people moved to B.C. from other provinces than moved out of B.C. That's an example of bringing out the best in our economy, and we're going to do more this year to build on that.

The Minister of Forests is making some very significant changes in forest policy to reform and help rebuild that vital industry. Introducing a market-based timber pricing system on the coast is revolutionary. Reallocating 20 percent of the annual allowable cut to small operators, local communities and first nations will help create jobs in the woods.

The Minister of Sustainable Resource Management is laying the foundation for economic revitalization with the land use plans he intends to deliver this year. Working with a diverse group of stakeholders and coming up with innovative solutions that balance economic, social and environmental goals will help bring certainty to the whole of the resource sector. That will mean reduced conflict, stability for our international markets and new working relationships with first nations.

At the same time, more than $300 million will be added to the education budget over the next three years, and that's considering an ongoing declining enrolment in K-to-12. Our government has committed to not cutting funding for health care and education. In fact, we're adding major dollars to these two priorities, recognizing their importance to all British Columbians.

As I highlighted earlier, in my own ministry we're also providing for people in need. Ranchers and farmers have faced unprecedented challenges this past year as a result of the discovery of BSE in Alberta and in Washington. This has meant the loss of markets, restricted border movement and pressures to cope with record numbers of cattle in our herds that had nowhere to go. The Premier and I have lobbied U.S. Governors, WTO trade leaders, ministers, Premiers and the Prime Minister, as well as consulted our industry and initiated actions to help mitigate damage and develop recovery options.

Our farmers are able to leverage significant assistance from the federal government, thanks to the fact that B.C. was one of the first provinces to sign on to the agricultural policy framework — a five-year, cost-shared $416 million deal to strengthen and renew agriculture in British Columbia. B.C.'s agriculture and food industry strengthens coastal and heartland communities, generating more than $20 billion in annual sales while supporting workers in transportation, packaging, sales and other industries. There are over 61,000 people employed in the farming community on over 20,000 farms.

Our ministry intends to continue working with the industry in the year ahead to foster new markets for B.C. cattle and beef, and we'll redouble our efforts to get the U.S. border fully opened to live cattle. We're looking forward to the continued implementation of the agriculture policy framework that will build the agriculture sector, in particular improving food safety and quality standards and on-farm environmental practices.

Aquaculture is also an area where we are trying to create a supportive business environment to allow for managed expansion of that industry. Strategies have been undertaken to ensure the full economic utilization of our marine fisheries and renewal of the wild seafood sector, continuing to build a sustainable aquaculture industry at the same time. Our ongoing focus is addressing concerns over water quality, management of wastes, fish health and a whole range of environmental issues.

Our goal is to get the most economic benefit possible from our fisheries — our wild fisheries and aquaculture industries — but not at the expense of the environment or the protection of our resources. In the same way that we are working on the land to protect our streams and rivers, we're also expanding our protection to encompass areas of our natural legacy in the ocean. Strengthening our relationship with federal and local governments, encouraging the federal government to clear a backlog of site relocations and new applications for shellfish and finfish aquaculture operations will help build jobs in coastal communities among first nations as well as all other communities on the coast. We're able to do all of this while still meeting our balanced-budget targets.

Our achievement in tabling a balanced budget cannot be overstated, and it's important to note that this budget is based on the most up-to-date generally accepted accounting principles for government entities. We've achieved that despite some remarkable challenges, as we've mentioned — SARS, the ongoing softwood lumber dispute, flooding and last year's forest fires. That's the merit of a government having a fiscal plan and sticking to it. No longer will we be mortgaging our children's future to deficit financing.

Thanks to our balanced-budget legislation, all future budgets will have to be balanced. This means re-

ducing interest payments as we reduce our deficit financing and ultimately begin to pay down our debt. That means there will be more dollars available for important social programs, more dollars for patients, more dollars for students and more dollars for people in need. That's what the last two and a half years have been about and what the Minister of Finance talked about in his budget speech — building a foundation for renewed prosperity into the future.

We have also removed the impediments to investment. We have cut costs and red tape. Personal income taxes have been lowered, and 27 tax relief measures have been implemented. We will continue to work to do more, making good on our commitments to reduce the regulatory burden by one-third, encouraging more investment and modernizing the regulatory framework not just in agriculture but in environmental management and in our resource sectors as well.

Bringing out the best in B.C. is an exciting initiative, an exciting thing to be working on in the future. We have the best resources. We have the best tourism industries. Most importantly, we have the best people living here, who help exemplify the best of British Columbia to the rest of the world. We have overcome many roadblocks in the past year, and we continue to build a better, stronger British Columbia for everyone because of the leadership of our government.

The time for uncertainty is over. The time for a brighter future is there with this balanced budget for all British Columbia citizens. Thank you for this opportunity.

D. Hayer: Last year I spent many weeks touring the province as a member of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. Our task was to hold budget consultation meetings with British Columbians across the province. We listened as people told us of their concerns, their hopes and their desires to see an economy that gives them security, prosperity and a bright future. We, as members of the Finance Committee, took those opinions, those thoughts, back to Victoria. Most of what we heard helped form the basis of this budget that we are speaking to today.

People told us they wanted stability and an economy that can sustain them and provide the jobs that will allow their families to prosper. This year's budget answers most of their concerns. It is balanced; it has surplus. Most of all, we have finally achieved in the government what everybody else must do: match their financial outflows with their financial incomes. We have made government, like everybody else, live within its means. That is truly a good thing.

This budget also speaks volumes about this government's keeping promises and meeting deadlines. One of the first acts of this government, when we were first elected, was to bring in balanced-budget legislation. This government not only said it would bring in a balanced budget in its third year of office, but it made it the law, and we have abided by that law.

We have also restored transparency and accountability in other areas of government — the first in Canada with fixed election dates and with free votes. The free votes allow the members to vote their conscience or their constituents' desires. We have also set up the Citizens' Assembly so ordinary people, randomly selected from across the province, will actually sit together without any political interference whatsoever and decide what kind of future and what kind of Legislature we will have to govern this province. This is again the first in Canada. This is accountability.

We have not only balanced the budget, but we have the added bonus of $100 million surplus for 2004-05, $275 million for 2005-06 and $300 million in 2006-07. In addition, a cushion of more than $400 million in each of the next three years will protect our balanced budget against unforeseen circumstances such as we faced in 2003.

Last year was incredible. British Columbians faced horrific and devastating forest fires. We had to endure cost overruns in the forest fire fighting budget in the magnitude of ten times what was forecast. We had SARS battering our tourism industry. We had BSE crippling our cattle industry. We had drought and we had massive flooding. We had a catastrophic pine beetle infestation destroying our forests and attacking the economic lifeblood of the forest-dependent communities.

On top of all that, our forest industry has had to struggle against the protectionist attitude of the Americans as they continue to impose import tariffs against our softwood. Yet through all that, we prevailed and we persevered. This budget shows just what government can do if it puts its mind and its promises on the line. We said we would do it, and we did it. We have exceeded even our own expectations. On February 17 we succeeded.

Last Tuesday British Columbia became the first province to introduce a balanced budget that complies with the legislated generally accepted accounting principles, known as GAAP, and by the law that was introduced by this government in 2001. All subsequent budgets will be balanced on that basis.

Last Tuesday we sent a very clear message to businesses, to the taxpayers and to potential investors that British Columbia has now turned the corner on fiscal prudence. We have turned the corner economically, and the rest of Canada is noticing. For the first time in six years, more people are now moving back to British Columbia. They are returning because this government has given them hope again — hope and the promise of a bright future in revitalizing the economy that is not only dynamic and growing but sustainable over the long haul. That is what is bringing families back to British Columbia — back home. Finally, they know that they can create the lifestyle they want in the best province in the country and that they can provide for their families right here.

What we have done during the past almost three years and with this budget is create the security and

the sustainability that families need to grow, to plan and to prosper. B.C. leads the nation in job creation, housing starts and both consumer and business confidence. This is further proof that the economy is recovering from the previous decade.

I know from my constituents, from the business people in my community and from talking to people whom I have met on my travels throughout the province and the many meetings I hold in my constituency that what they wanted from this government is a strong, growing, resilient economy. They want government to create that while keeping the tax burden at a reasonable level.

They want a government that encourages investment. This budget does just that. It encourages investment and business growth. We have in this province more than 340,000 small businesses. They represent 98 percent of the business in this province, and they create most of the jobs and most of the income that British Columbia's families rely on. Those incomes, those jobs, provide the revenue the government uses to provide the social safety net that British Columbians hold so precious.

This budget includes more than $1 billion in new health care spending, and that money will go to only one thing: improving patient care. It will not go to increases in salaries. It is targeted at the patients. That is what the health care system should be all about. As well, another $694 million will go into new construction, equipment and upgrading of existing health care facilities.

This budget contains money for our children and our future in the form of more money going into education. Some $313 million over the next three years is going into classrooms from kindergarten to grade 12, plus tens of millions of dollars have been allocated for seismic upgrading of the schools our children attend to ensure that they are safe and secure.

Another $105 million will go into advanced education over the next three years to improve access to higher education for our students and to help create future leaders and future entrepreneurs who will, in the years to come, create more jobs and more success in this province. This budget promises more spaces in our colleges, universities and institutions. That means more young people will have more opportunities to participate in the legacy of growth and success that this budget promises.

We have made a commitment to increase student spaces by 25,000 in the post-secondary institutions by 2010. The government will also lower the admission requirement to permit those with an average grade of 75 percent to gain access to our universities. That was particularly good news and certainly gives encouragement to the hard-working students, because now they know that if they work hard, the opportunity for an advanced education is in their reach.

As you know, improvements to the transportation infrastructure in this province are near and dear to me and to my constituents in Surrey-Tynehead. In fact, I know that if polls were held today, transportation challenges would rank right up there behind urban crime as the number one issue facing residents of the lower mainland. Therefore, I was very encouraged to hear the Finance minister announce increased spending on improvements to transportation.

I have spoken often on the difficulties facing our commuters and our business people trying to get goods to and from their business in an efficient and cost-effective manner. In fact, Surrey-Tynehead has the dubious honour of being home to the biggest traffic bottleneck in the province — the Port Mann Bridge. Because of our great and rapid growth, there are a number of other transportation infrastructure projects that need to be completed over time so that my constituents can get to and from work, home to their families and to events and shopping in the riding in a timely fashion rather than spending hours sitting in traffic.

I know that the Minister of Transportation is aware of these issues that challenge my constituents, as he represents the constituency immediately to the south of mine. I know that he knows — as did Minister Reid, who did an excellent job as Minister of Transportation — that improvements are needed at 152nd Street, 156th Street, 160th Street, 168th Street and 176th Street interchanges at Highway 1— to say nothing of the widening of the Fraser Highway and the freeway from Vancouver to Langley. The minister also knows of the necessity of twinning the Port Mann Bridge, of a new Fraser crossing between Port Kells and Maple Ridge, and of the completion of the South Fraser perimeter road, including all the Gateway projects.

I know this is a long wish list, and my constituents know that all of those improvements won't be done overnight. I also know that all the MLAs from the Surrey caucus support all these causes. This budget addresses some of these concerns with much-needed improvements to get our products moving and our commuters to their jobs and back home to their families in a timely fashion.

Of the $1.3 billion budgeted to be spent on transportation infrastructure throughout the province over the next three years, I found it very encouraging that about $460 million will be spent directly on improvements in the lower mainland. I know that will sit very well with my constituents.

I know that as this government develops its budget and manages the economy over the next few years, we will see even more improvements. People will be able to enjoy more quality time with their families, and businesses and consumers will benefit from lower transportation costs being levied against the products they buy.

Another important consumer item contained within this budget is the rising of the homeowner grant threshold. This, I know, is of great importance to the seniors who, while they have seen the value of their homes increase, have in turn seen their assessed values increase. For many, that latter aspect has tax implications. With the hot real estate market caused by re-

newed consumer and investor confidence in our economy, the assessed values are crossing the threshold at which homeowner grants begin to be reduced. However, this budget now increases that threshold from $525,000 to $585,000. That means 95 percent of people will continue to receive their full homeowner grant.

For seniors, the upper limit at which this homeowner's grant is cut off has been raised to $659,000. This will help those seniors who have been living in their homes for many years and are on fixed incomes. That is good news. It means that seniors not only save now, but when they finally do decide to sell their family home and move into more compact living quarters, the investment they'll receive from the sale will be larger and better able to assist them in their retirement homes.

Another targeted tax measure such as the scientific research and experimental development tax credit, which was due to be phased out this year, has been extended for an additional five years. This will encourage and support an industry that is dependent on innovation and responsible for growing the economy.

Port competitiveness programs are being expanded, as are programs designed to stimulate the film and television industry. Focused tax credits work towards stimulating progressive and innovative industry and will promote and stimulate the economy.

You know, every time I think about this budget, I am reminded of what some of the naysayers have been saying up till now. It didn't matter what this government did; there were those who forecast doom and gloom, who said we would have to make massive cuts to programs, to social services, and that there would be massive job layoffs. Well, this budget speaks for itself. There are no massive cuts forecast to make this budget work or to make this budget balanced. There are no huge job losses; there are no slash-and-burn policies. This is not an at-all-costs budget-balancing act. I will say, however, that it hasn't been easy. We have had to make some tough decisions to get where we are today, but our fiscal prudence and economic management has paid off. It has worked for this budget, and it will work for the next three to come.

Our plan — the plan we have stuck to since day one of this mandate — was to revitalize the economy, to restore sound fiscal management and to put patients, students and people in need first. This budget does just that.

I have talked about health care, I have talked about education, and I have talked about transportation improvements. Now I just want to say a few words about people in need. I was so encouraged to hear that there will be additional benefits forthcoming for those with disabilities. Those are people who in most circumstances, through absolutely no fault of their own, are unable to provide fully for themselves. This budget and this government have found some additional room for them. As a result of this budget, their lives and their families will be a little better off.

This budget is a powerful document, a powerful statement that British Columbia is finally back on its feet after a decade of decay. British Columbia has turned the corner. The future and opportunities are no longer bleak. In presenting the budget last week, the Minister of Finance proudly said that based on this year's budget forecast, that the best is yet to come. Well, I absolutely agree with that statement. I know my constituents are encouraged, and I know that everyone supports the promise of an improved economy, a government that balances the books and a province that is moving even closer to the wonderful opportunity the 2010 Olympics will bring to all British Columbians in every corner of this great province of ours.

Hon. S. Brice: It is an honour to stand here and take my place in this House, along with other members of this House, to reflect on the budget that has been introduced by the Minister of Finance.

What is a budget? A budget, of course, is the biggest policy statement our government will make. From the budget flows our priorities. From a budget we say, as the elected representatives, that this is where we feel the resources should be spent in order to achieve our goals.

This budget is a particularly important budget, because it marks a turning point in the province of British Columbia, and I'll reflect on that more in a moment. It's a budget, the third in the line that this particular government has brought into the House, that redresses a structural deficit that we were facing when we came into office. There have been some — the opposition and even those who would fancy themselves to be pundits — who have dismissed the idea of the structural deficit. My colleague the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries referred to it earlier as a deficit overflow, and I think that describes it well.

The economic review panel that looked at the books before we came into office confirmed that the previous government had prepared a budget that simply wasn't sustainable — there weren't the revenues to provide for the expenditures — and that there was a structural deficit. We had to address that early in our tenure.

This budget, the balanced budget we're all focusing on, is important in the context of the legislation we have brought in. A one-time wonder, a one-shot balanced budget, would not be prudent, would not provide the very firm fiscal floor on which to grow our economy.

Because we have brought in legislation that will require that all budgets be balanced henceforth, this budget has particular significance. It is the first of what will become quite routine. Those who follow us in this House in the years to come perhaps will look at Hansard and reflect rather amusingly that we made quite a lot of the fact that this budget is balanced. We can only hope that it will become so commonplace that legislators in the future won't find it remarkable that a budget is balanced. They will make an assumption that it will be balanced and that they will have to tailor the expenditures to meet the revenues.

Kudos, of course, to the Finance minister not only for introducing this balanced budget but for bringing

us to this point. The Premier and this government made a firm commitment to the public of British Columbia that we would bring in a balanced budget in '04-05 and that we would run our financial affairs in a prudent fashion. It has not been easy. The Finance minister has been unwavering and, throughout the period of time leading up to now, has had to balance many competing interests. I'm sure that all previous Finance ministers have had challenges, but this one really has risen to the challenge. He has taken a province that was in dreadful financial shape and has assured us, through this budget, a firm financial future.

We call it the balanced budget, but until the year unfolds, we cannot relax on that fact, because at this point, of course, it's a document. As the year unfolds, as revenues and expenditures are monitored, the budget must be balanced at the end of the year. This is forecasting a balanced budget. The budget in itself will be balanced only when the fiscal year is finished.

Why is this so important? Well, as has been said before in this House, to balance the budget means that in the future there will be options — options for legislators and for the public to consider, into the future, where emphasis should be put and what programs should be supported. As an example, because of the prudent management of this past year, there will be opportunities to redirect funding to areas that up until this time we hadn't been able to. There's going to be an opportunity to address wait-lists, which of course are extremely important to all members of the public. Health care is something that is of great concern not only to everyone in this House but to the public at large.

Because of prudent financial management, we're going to be able to offset some of the maintenance costs at the post-secondary institutions. We can improve literacy. We can establish arts and music institutions under LegaciesNow, and we can offset some financial commitments for 2010. That's because the past year was prudently managed. To be able to take some of that money that has been saved and put it toward other, good public policy is something that the public respects.

As we review this document, we try to express in words just why it is so significant to us. Some have used the words "turning point" or "turning the corner." Some describe it as a special moment or a defining moment. Each of us has tried to put into words just how significant this moment is.

I think that the Premier, the Finance minister and this government have upheld a commitment that we made to the public, and I guess that is why there is a sense in this chamber, as we discuss this budget, of excitement, a sort of controlled jubilation. Until the budget year is concluded, we won't know and we can't say with absolute 100 percent certainty, but I know there is no way that at the end of the fiscal year this budget will not remain in a balanced state. That is the commitment we made, and that is the commitment we will keep.

The fiscal leadership, of course, was after a decade of abysmal financial performance. Some have described it as the decade of decline. We have turned from that, and in this third budget…. Once again, it has to stay in context. The first budget that we brought in was, basically, face the facts and put the plan in action. I recall standing on that occasion as well, hearing members of this chamber talk about the financial straits that we found ourselves in and how we were going to set about to plan for the future.

That was followed by a second budget brought in by this government where changes were made. Of course change is tough. There were changes made in the delivery of health care, education, social services — all of the major expenditures. We were going through every single aspect of government and finding ways to deliver high-quality services in a more efficient manner. That was the second budget.

The third budget — this budget that we have before us today — is the one that will allow us to build on the strengths, build on the achievements that have been made and look out to the future. What are the results as we find ourselves here in this third of our budgets? Well, we find that B.C. is number one in job creation with 159,000 jobs — 159,000 people who are able to provide for themselves and their families, take their rightful place in B.C.'s society and be self-sufficient. So number one in job creation. Number one in new housing growth, up 21 percent. Number one in small business confidence, and number one destination for new investment. I would say that's a very fine achievement three years into this exercise.

Of course, that didn't just happen. It has been totally planned and part of a well-thought-out plan that we are now into our third year of. Mercifully, we are planning at least three years out — three years which are documented and many more years into the future. A budget is not just a beginning and an ending of government services. It is a fiscal year, but the services that we deliver to the public need to be provided in a sustainable, ongoing and predictable fashion.

To some of the details in the budget. One of the biggest fallacies that we hear — you hear some of these things repeated often enough; you hear people start repeating them back to you — is cuts to the health budget. Truly not accurate. All of us know that there have indeed been no cuts to the health budget. Increases to the health budget, in fact, are the truth of the matter.

We can throw all kinds of numbers around, but $10.6 billion and growing to $11.3 billion in this three-year budget cycle shows growth — large growth. In fact, at times it is a concern that health care costs continue to rise as quickly as they do. They have risen 36 percent since the 2000-01 budget — 36 percent growth on a huge base. That is a tremendous amount of money. We are targeting every dollar to direct patient care.

In this budget we're calling upon everyone who is involved in the delivery of health care to think of the

patients and think of how we can deliver the services most directly to the patient. Those who are involved in the health care field are being asked to consider that every increased dollar goes directly to patients and will not go to increases in salaries. We are calling upon people to think generously of the people they serve and to know there is no room, at this point, for increasing salaries — that we must target every dollar to increasing services, because the population is growing and, of course, the needs are growing.

The health authorities are on track to achieving a 7 percent reduction in administrative costs, and the total savings to date are $97.1 million by the '04-05 budget. I would say they have fulfilled our expectation of directing more dollars directly to the patient. They've saved an additional $43 million in program management, which is being reinvested — once again — directly in patient care.

One of the achievements in the health care field I would like to highlight here is the fact that not only are we increasing the budget, but we are performing more surgeries in this province. The volume is up 4.5 percent — 38,000 — over last year. Other significant medical procedures were performed last year compared to the year before. That's 38,000 more surgeries and other significant medical procedures up over the previous year.

We've been recruiting more nurses and doctors and doubling the number of medical school spaces from 128 to 224 by the year 2005. More doctors will now be educated and trained in B.C., improving the availability of and access to GPs and specialists for our own residents. Right here in Victoria, at the University of Victoria, they are going to be playing a very important part in that medical school in training doctors for the future. I know that all at the University of Victoria are thrilled to be a part of that great growth.

The nursing strategy — $59 million for recruitment, education, loan forgiveness and student bursaries to 3,000 nurses. We've created 547 seats in '03-04 and 1,813 since '01. When we came into office, we knew there was a severe shortage of nurses, and everything this government has done to address that has resulted in more professionals to serve our public.

In the time leading up to this budget, of course, and helping to redirect more dollars to those who need it the most, we introduced Fair Pharmacare, where benefits are no longer based on age but based on need. Now families with limited income and perhaps children with high medical costs can get assistance on the Fair Pharmacare plan that they couldn't before. With changes to MSP we lowered the premiums for 230,000 British Columbians.

I think we can all applaud any statistics that come out about cancer care in British Columbia. B.C. is a leader in cancer care. The B.C. Cancer Agency has some of the most favourable cancer survival rates in Canada. It continues to be recognized as a leader in cancer control across the country and a world leader in cancer research.

To an area that I now have responsibility for, mental health and addiction services. I would just take this opportunity to say how honoured I am to have been given this responsibility to build on the work of the former Minister of State for Mental Health, who paved the way for me. I have seen the great work that was done under his leadership and the relationships with the various agencies and authorities that deal with mental health and addiction services. I know the work he has done will provide me a great platform to work from.

Over the last period of time, this government has committed $138 million to build new facilities to replace the outdated institutional buildings at Riverview Hospital. Many have already seen in their communities these wonderful new facilities. There was Connolly Lodge in Coquitlam. Anyone going to that facility would say to themselves that it is of the highest quality, the most homelike, caring and very positive atmosphere — something that the old institutional nature of Riverview, despite the fabulous work of the staff there, wasn't able to provide simply because of the constraints of the facility. Of course, Iris House in Prince George is another great example; Seven Oaks in my own riding of Saanich South; South Hills in Kamloops; and Seven Sisters coming in Terrace and Royal Inland in Kamloops, both of those in progress.

The Ministry of Health Services now provides a total range of services to the citizens of our province. As for the Minister of State for Mental Health, the title and the responsibilities now reflect the reality. Addictions are added into the responsibilities because mental health and addictions go hand in hand. We can say that up to 70 percent of the people presenting at community health facilities have an addiction. The co-diagnosis is now recognized in the ministry, and the whole person is being served. We're not fracturing these issues because they don't present that way. People, when they have a mental health issue and an addiction, have to be treated as one.

We're putting more emphasis now on depression, and the provincial depression strategy and the provincial anxiety disorder strategy will provide a great road map for us to follow. The areas of depression and anxiety are a huge issue in society. This is, in many cases, a mental health issue that goes undiagnosed. People live unfulfilled lives. In the workplace they're not able to be productive. Until they can get recognized, diagnosed, treated and moved to a higher level of wellness, they won't be able to perform to their maximum. This is an area that we are really going to continue to put a lot of emphasis on.

The child and youth mental health plan, the first in Canada, is another great addition to the services that will be provided from government to the youngest members of our society who have anxiety and mental health issues. Early diagnosis is critical to ensuring they have the healthiest, fullest lives.

Each time I talk about health care, I like to put in my plug for preventive measures and to once again highlight the fact that we have a looming health issue. With so many children inactive and not eating properly, childhood obesity is an issue that is going to result in big increased costs to the health care system and much-reduced quality of life, as diabetes looms ahead for many of those children. In order to highlight the situation — I know there is more talk about this issue, but talk needs to be translated into changed behaviours — it is important to recognize that obesity-related illness costs the provincial economy as much as $830 million a year.

Statistics show that 47 percent of British Columbians are insufficiently active for optimal health benefits. Those costs, the costs of physical inactivity to the provincial economy, are approximately $500 million a year. We're going to be facing the fact that these costs are going to have an even bigger impact on the health care system and its costs than tobacco as we move through the years ahead.

So a plug for April 4. It has been designated as Physical Fitness Day in British Columbia. I know that all members of this House and hopefully those who are following these proceedings will make a point, when April 4 comes, of taking an opportunity to build fitness into their lives and into their future days in order to maintain their own health and to keep the costs to our health care system down.

Another area that I would like to put some attention to in my discussion on this budget is education. As the demographics shift in the population, we are having to respond in order to ensure that dollars flow to where the public needs it the most. Despite declining enrolments, our government continues to increase the dollars going to education because we know how incredibly important education is. It is the best health care plan. It is the best economic developer. It is the best investment that we can make, so despite the declining enrolment, we will be increasing the per-student costs at $532 per student per year.

We are committed to adding 25,000 additional post-secondary spaces by 2010. We're committed to 25,000 additional spaces. This will go to meeting the challenge of the fact that we don't have sufficient accommodation to meet the growing need for not only the students who are coming out of our educational system…. As education now is and will continue to be a lifelong experience, it is going to be critical that we continue to invest in post-secondary education. We are, and we are building for the future, and we're building a future where our students are already benefiting.

Already in British Columbia we are seeing that there are higher grade 7 math scores. There are improvements to grade 4 writing proficiency and grade 10 reading, generally higher marks in provincial exams and a record 79 percent graduation rate. Are we satisfied with 79 percent? No. Is it an improvement? Yes, it is. Can we do better? Absolutely. Each one of those children who comes into the system at kindergarten, filled with the joy and excitement of learning, must be encouraged, must be assisted to stay until they have completed their high school graduation. That gives them more options into their future. It allows them to then make choices about how they wish to spend their productive lives. It opens doors for them to go to post-secondary institutions, to go to trades training. It is the beginning of a productive and bright future for them.

Even with the declining enrolment in my own riding of Saanich South, we're fortunately in a position where there is new school construction going on. I have been at groundbreaking ceremonies at Colquitz and Spectrum schools and look forward to the experience at the Royal Oak Middle School in the near future.

Leading up to this budget, I had quite a few constituents contact me who were concerned about the homeowner grant and the fact that it wasn't going to meet their needs. I was very pleased to see that the homeowner grant was increased to $585,000.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to some of the highlights in this budget. I look forward to listening to the continued debate.

W. Cobb: It was a proud day last Tuesday, February 17, 2004, when the province and the Minister of Finance delivered the first truly balanced budget. We did what we said we would do. We balanced the budget, and we put the emphasis for extra funding on health care and education.

Why do I say truly balanced? In the past, previous governments said they delivered balanced budgets, but they were not according to generally accepted accounting practices, otherwise known as GAAP. Being a business person, I understand how a ledger works. It's easy to deliver figures on both sides of the ledger that are the same, but if they do not reflect reality…. In the past, items like hospital debt, school debt, payment for Island highways and fast ferries were not included in those figures. There was nothing in those budgets to pay that debt, or as I believe, there wasn't even anything in the budget to pay the interest on that debt.

Now, I know that the members of the opposition are not at the top of the gene pool when it comes to their ability to understand finances, but I find it hard to comprehend, even with that lack of understanding, that they could believe what they are saying is true when they continue to tell us they delivered a balanced budget.

What GAAP has really accomplished…. I'll read a comment that was made in the Vancouver Sun on what GAAP really is:

Let's look at what others like the chamber of commerce are saying about the budget. The B.C. Chamber of Commerce is giving full marks for providing the fiscal leadership required to balance the provincial budget. "This is a defining moment for this government and for all British Columbians," stated John Winter. "When elected, the B.C. Liberals promised they would balance the budget, and they put the legislative mechanism in place to hold themselves accountable," he said, referring to the statutory requirement to balance the budget, "and doing so under accounting principles widely accepted by major corporations." He also said: "B.C. isn't just open for business. We are very much back in business."

Of course, with the chamber of commerce comes small business. I had the opportunity to tour the southern part of my riding just before we came back into session and to visit many of the businesses in my area. As recently recorded through the chamber of commerce report, it indicated that businesses are very optimistic for the coming year and are excited about their future prospects. Many of them said to me during my tour that even with the adverse conditions we faced this last year with the fires and the drought, they don't ever want to go back to what we had in the last decade. Small businesses play a huge role in our economy. In much of rural B.C. and much of my riding, that's all there are — small businesses. There are no huge corporations.

I'd like to read some of the stats on small business and how important it is for British Columbia. B.C. has 347,900 small businesses. They provide 58 percent of the private sector jobs and pay a third of all wages. Mr. Speaker, 98 percent of the business in B.C. is classified as small business. I understand over 80 percent of those have five employees or less, so they're mini-businesses.

Small business contributes $36.64 billion to the provincial economy. That was way back in 2001, and we've increased since then. Twenty-eight percent of the GDP is from small businesses, higher than anywhere else in Canada, and 36 percent of our small businesses are owned by women, also the highest in Canada. There are 3,690 small businesses that export their products; $11.3 billion was exported from these small businesses and to international destinations. Thirty-four percent of the total value of goods exported from B.C. are from those small businesses.

Six out of ten people in the private sector work for small business. That was also in 2001 — almost one million British Columbians. Small businesses comprised 90 percent of the employers in high technology, the sector experiencing the fastest growth, and those are new smaller businesses.

What I will talk about in this budget is in the riding of Cariboo South and what it did to the forest industry. We all know about — and we've heard it many times — the need to revitalize their forest industry. We are doing that with some of the legislation passed last session, and in this budget we have included $176 million over three years to expand and enhance B.C.'s timber sales program to ensure the resources that I have in my riding are available and that they can get to market.

I am also pleased with the $6 million contribution to the small-scale salvage program. I was part of that committee which brought forward the recommendation and stressed the importance of this industry in the area. With the huge volume of beetle-infested forests in my riding, this should go a long way to help deal with the epidemic.

Once again, being reminded of the forest fires last summer, there will be another $6 million put toward the timely harvest of damaged timber both from the fires and from the trees already dead from the beetles.

With that, there were also some other comments made. The Canadian Federation of Independent Business stated — and this was in anticipation of the budget: "Recent survey results show that small businesses in British Columbia are now among the most optimistic in the country." Those small businesses are those salvage operators as well. "This is due in part to the tax and regulatory relief delivered in the past few years. But much more work remains to be done to translate this optimism into ongoing economic progress and to make British Columbia an economic leader in the country. The budget has the potential to be another step in the right direction." We did that.

Also talking about forestry and that industry, COFI had a response. I'll read their response. "It is only through prudent fiscal management that the government has been able to maintain the tax regime that takes the industry's global competitiveness into account," said John Allan, president and CEO of COFI. "We are pleased that the government has been able to balance the budget in difficult economic times, while setting the stage for a strong economic recovery." Allan also said that the forest industry has become increasingly sensitive to the cost of doing business as a result of the countervailing duties imposed by the United States and the appreciation of the Canadian dollar. COFI is encouraged by recent economic trends and demonstrates that B.C.'s economy is turning the corner and that the future looks promising.

There are many more benefits with this budget in bringing out the best in B.C., and my colleagues, all of them, have stated what we can do. They've most avidly and enthusiastically mentioned — and so they are expected to do — increased funding for health care and education, transportation infrastructure and job training — job training for our young, as well as welcoming people back home. Of course, there are the expanded opportunities as we move towards 2010 when it comes to sports, arts and music.

As I said, we as a Legislature and members of the B.C. Liberal Party are expected to champion what we are doing. What I want to do is mention what others are saying about what we have done and how they rate us, because at the end of the day they are the ones that

put us here and asked us to clean up the mess that was left by a decade of mismanagement.

I'm just going to continue to quote what other people are saying about us. If you look at the report, the overall grade they gave us on this budget was an A: the economic vision, A; spending control, A-plus; tax competitiveness, B-plus. Debt management, of course, which is a huge issue, is B-plus.

The Vancouver Board of Trade says the government has had a consistently strong economic vision. The board gives the government high marks for containing spending. Spending increases are focused on high priorities such as health care and education. "The budget sets a promise on a course for fiscal stability and prosperity, securing the health and education programs British Columbians expect. The government has done a good job. We have to be competitive and to establish an environment where business people are willing to invest again." That comes from the Coast Capital Savings. "They did what they said they would do," as many of us have said. We said what we'd do, and we did it. We balanced the budget. "They managed very difficult circumstances very well." That was also from the chamber of commerce.

"What they inherited was a supertanker headed for the rocks, and they stopped it. They turned it around." That also came from the Vancouver Board of Trade. "The budget marks a significant turning point in B.C. For the first time in decades the province is on a path of sustainable, balanced budgets, surpluses and competitive taxes." That was by the president of the B.C. Retail Merchants Association.

Finally, I guess the most astonishing of it all…. The best news for B.C. is not the fact that for the first time the budget books are balanced but that the Liberal government's disciplined fiscal planning is beginning to pay off. You heard that from my colleagues with the economic outlook, the business startups. We're number one in a number of cases.

Funding increases for health care and education are the real benefit of a disciplined government implementing the appropriate measures to boost the economy. The outcome will be more accessible money for education and health programs as well as many other services that B.C. taxpayers are entitled to.

Hon. G. Bruce: Noting the time, I would move that we adjourn debate of the budget speech.

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.

Official Report of

DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY