Hansard -- Wednesday, September 14, 2005 p.m. -- Vol. 1, No. 5 (HTML)


CONTENTS

	Routine Proceedings
		Page


Statements (Standing Order 25B)		63
	Assistance for commercial fishers
	G. Coons
	Ismaili Walk
	J. Nuraney
	Medical clinic in Surrey
	S. Hammell
	Government services for children
	V. Roddick
	Remediation of Gorge waterway
	M. Karagianis
	Fundraising for victims of Hurricane Katrina
	D. Hayer

Oral Questions		65
	Fees for school materials and programs
	J. Horgan
	Hon. S. Bond
	M. Farnworth
	Emergency preparedness and maintenance of Fraser River dikes
	G. Gentner
	Hon. J. Les
	Funding for emergency preparedness
	J. Brar
	Hon. J. Les
	Assistance for victims of Quesnel landslide
	B. Simpson
	Hon. I. Chong
	Future of Port Alice pulp mill
	C. Trevena
	Hon. C. Hansen
	Impact of government policies on Kamloops economy
	H. Lali
	Hon. C. Richmond
	Conservation officer for Golden
	N. Macdonald
	Hon. B. Penner
	Remuneration for rural paramedics
	C. Wyse
	Hon. G. Abbott

Budget Debate		69
	Hon. C. Taylor
	J. Kwan

Introduction and First Reading of Bills		74
	Revenue Statutes Amendment Act, 2005 (Bill 2) Budget Measures Implementation Act (No. 2), 2005 (Bill 3)
	Hon. C. Taylor

Tabling Documents		75
	September update budget and fiscal plan
	Budget consultation paper
	Government's service plans and strategic plan, 2005-2006, 2007-2008

G. Coons: I rise to make a statement about the commercial fishing industry. Our Pacific coast of Canada is truly unique. Here over 29,000 kilometres of coastline are bordered by an area with a vital link to one of the most precious resources, our wild salmon.

In my hometown of Prince Rupert the great abundance of fish, at one time greater than probably anywhere else in the world, enabled Prince Rupert to be the finest port on the Pacific coast, if not in the world. But now, as we all realize, commercial fishers who rely on the lucrative sockeye salmon runs from the Skeena River and the Fraser River are reeling. They're reeling from unprecedented management actions in their fishery.

These moves have created a growing sense of despair not only about the future of the industry but about the crisis that looms. These men and women struggle to support their families with the threat of bankruptcies and apprehended boats looming just around the corner. The long tradition of providing for your families with the abundant supply of fresh salmon has been all but lost to distant memories for this season.

It's time to throw our total support behind the plea for immediate federal compensation by these hard-working and courageous workers. Employment insurance qualification standards mean that many of our constituents throughout coastal communities and provincewide will not be able to collect EI this year, because they have not made at least $5,000. This seems ludicrous to me, as this system penalizes individuals who are already suffering due to poor runs or for whatever reason.

I have many friends and colleagues involved in the fishing industry. They desperately need help in this time of need. Federal assistance had been available for farmers on the prairies in time of need. Why not the same for British Columbians? Federal Fisheries Minister Geoff Regan has indicated that although the government has not compensated commercial fishers for missed fishing opportunities in the past, he would discuss it with his colleagues.

I hope that this assembly soon takes a stance to support the call by the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union for mortgage and insurance costs to be paid by EI as well as full EI benefits for all fishers and deckhands who tried to fish this year, regardless of whether they attain the qualifications levels for compensation. Why do we need to do this? Because it's right.

J. Nuraney: Canadians and British Columbians are known for their kindness and generosity towards charities and humanitarian causes. In times of need we have always responded to the call to help others. Each year community groups and philanthropic organizations across the province raise tens of thousands of dollars for worthy causes.

One such group, the Ismaili Muslim community, has prided itself in supporting such efforts. Each year they organize two very popular walks: the World Partnership Walk on behalf of the Aga Khan Development Network, the world's largest private non-denominational development agency; and the Ismaili Walk, an initiative to raise funds in partnership with local organizations for worthy causes in the lower mainland.

The Ismaili Walk takes place in Vancouver each September and benefits a local non-profit organization. The walk was founded in 1991 and is partnered with local hospitals, the Vancouver Public Library, Simon Fraser University, the food bank, Habitat for Humanity and the Crisis Centre of Greater Vancouver to raise funds to further the mandate of the partner non-profit organization. To date the walk has raised over $1.8 million for local community organizations. For the third year in a row the Ismaili Walk for Kids took place last Sunday in Stanley Park and raised $200,000 for this laudable cause. Our government, through its partnership initiatives, will match this fund to give it an extra impetus.

As a member of the Ismaili Muslim community, I feel very proud of our community's achievements, and I congratulate the organizers and the participants in this great event.

S. Hammell: I rise to make a statement in this House regarding a remarkable non-profit society that serves a unique community in the city of Surrey. The Surrey HIV/AIDS Centre Society in the Whalley area operates a medical clinic; a needle exchange; and services to people with HIV/AIDS, including a food bank and counselling.

The medical centre attends to the needs of people who have homes and jobs but primarily serves the poorest in our city, who are more than often homeless or in ill health. Those of us in this chamber are, I'm sure, aware of the close correlation between a person's health and the wealth of the individual. This medical clinic serves people with HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, hepatitis B and a host of other ailments that often accompany the mentally ill, substance abusers, the homeless and people in poverty. The medical clinic treats 150 AIDS patients monthly, 50 people on anti-retroviral

drugs, 50 methadone patients and about two dozen people who drop in for emergency medical care.

The needle exchange, which is part of this clinic, passes out about 15,000 needles per month as addicts exchange dirty needles for clean ones. This medical clinic diverts an estimated 5,000 visits a year from the overworked emergency ward at Surrey Memorial Hospital and manages this discrete population and the needs of many patients that can be difficult to serve in any other setting.

This medical clinic serves all of us well. Unfortunately, the needle exchange and the medical clinic are being forced to close in an effort to clean up the Whalley area and get rid of undesirable persons. If we closed our eyes and wished hard, we'd all be back in Kansas. I urge the House to join me in trying to ensure that this centre stays open and serves the people of Surrey.

Mr. Speaker: I just want to remind members that they're two-minute statements.

V. Roddick: It's an exciting time in homes across the province. For many youngsters it has been the first time ever heading off to school. But it's more than a matter of physically getting to school. There are extra costs for supplies, and those costs are some that families have difficulty meeting. That's why every family on income assistance received in their August cheque a school startup supplement of $42 for each child aged five to 11 and $58 for each child aged 12 to 18 — a helping hand for those attending school for the first time.

We invested more than $1.3 million in the school startup supplement last year. I chose the word "invested" carefully, because — make no mistake — this is an investment. It's an investment in a better future for our children. Like the record-level funding we've put into the entire education system, it's an investment in a better future for our province.

This government knows that taking care of our children's health and well-being is key in helping them learn and grow to their fullest potential. Our Healthy Kids program increased health supports for children in need. We've raised prescription eyeglass coverage so kids who need new glasses get them each year. We've increased payment amounts for dental services so that low-income families have better access. We've been able to make these important investments today because we did what we said we would do. We have rebuilt B.C.'s economy, and our most vulnerable, no matter what their age, are sharing the benefits.

M. Karagianis: I would like to make a statement today about an event in my community. The magnificent Gorge waterway is one of Victoria's greatest assets. In the mid-1990s an inspired Esquimalt resident by the name of Mr. John Roe was walking along the waterway with his 11-year-old son Wesley when he realized that the Gorge had become a repository for discarded shopping carts, sunken boats, garbage, compost and all of the litter and debris that our society creates every day.

For years the garbage had been allowed to accumulate, effectively killing off the natural life of the waterway and endangering the birds, the fish, and all of the wildlife that lived along it. John immediately took action, formed the Veins of Life Watershed and began to haul garbage out of the waterway. His vision was to make the Gorge swimmable for human beings and inhabitable for wildlife by the year 2000, for the millennium.

John Roe and the Veins of Life were successful in that mission. But John and the Veins had a further vision: to clean up the storm drain-off that was running into the waterway and halt the flow of chemical and oil drainage from the surrounding communities into the beautiful waterway.

This year the Gorge park, a 28.8-acre park in Esquimalt, will celebrate its 100th birthday. To commemorate this auspicious occasion, Esquimalt has embarked on an innovative environmental project that will be the showplace for the region and an excellent educational tool for students. An old creekbed, culverted and turned into a storm drain many years ago, is now being daylighted. This storm drain has for decades allowed runoff from a large part of Esquimalt to flow into the Gorge with its mix of chemicals, detergents, oil and other pollutants.

The daylighting project will remove the storm drains and re-create a streambed providing a meandering phytoremediation field that will clean the runoff naturally and allow a natural wetland to develop, once again attracting a thriving population of birds, wildlife and native plants into the park. The project will be completed in November of this year and will be a unique destination for visitors. I hope every member here has a chance to come visit the site when it's completed. I'm sure everyone here will join me in congratulating Esquimalt on this landmark celebration and on its foresight in embarking on this project.

D. Hayer: We have all heard about the devastation and human suffering brought by Hurricane Katrina, but many of us have not thought much about the incredible relief efforts and fundraising that is going on throughout the world and even in our own communities. I want to pay special tribute to those donating their time and money to this massive effort to aid those stricken by this disaster.

The Red Cross and the Salvation Army have played a great part, but one of the principal fundraisers in greater Vancouver is the Tzu Chi Foundation. Recently I met with the CEO Gary Ho and the volunteers. I had

the privilege of touring the Tzu Chi Canada Discovery of Humanity in Tsunami Relief exhibition at the Plaza of Nations. I was so impressed with their efforts. They have already raised more than $1 million U.S. for the Katrina disaster. It is surely needed for these victims, many of whom lived in poverty before the disaster and now face even more hardship.

I was impressed to read in the newspaper this weekend that young Surrey girls Brenna Thiessen and her friends Shannon Charters and Katrina Wishinski raised an incredible amount of more than $1,700 for those victims with a simple but overwhelmingly successful lemonade stand. If those children, who I'm so proud of, can do that, then all of us in this House can pitch in, as well, to help the shattered lives of so many in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi. This terrible hurricane will continue to take its toll in human suffering for many months, and we need to help those who need it most. I know that if we faced a similar disaster, our neighbours to the south would not hesitate to help us.

J. Horgan: I want to thank everyone for joining me today for my inaugural question. I appreciate you all coming out for that.

The B.C. School Act states clearly that educational resource materials necessary to participate in an educational program be free of charge. But as a result of government underfunding, school boards in some areas of the province have been charging fees for these services. Can the Minister of Education please tell this House which school boards are charging fees for educational materials?

Hon. S. Bond: In fact, the member opposite is correct. The school board does state very clearly that educational materials that are required in the course of graduation are to be provided free of charge to students. There are provisions for school boards to make arrangements to charge fees for some aspects of a child's education. But let's be perfectly clear. This government has committed $150 million in this year alone, the single largest increase in over a decade, which brings education funding to its highest level ever in the province — and that at a time when enrolment is declining. In fact, we've lost 30,000 students.

J. Horgan: That makes six months now that that announcement has been made. You made it in January. You made it in February. You made it in March. You made it in April, August and now in September. I'm confident the member from Langara will be making a similar announcement in a few moments. But the Supreme Court has ruled that levying fees for student participation and programs is illegal. It continues in this province to this day. In some cases as much as $920 can be levied against a student to complete a program for graduation. Will the minister stand up on behalf of school boards and say she will adequately fund education in this province so that these fees can be reduced or eliminated?

Hon. S. Bond: In fact, I understand the original ruling actually took place under the previous NDP government.

One of the things that we are doing…. I am, as is the member opposite, concerned that when students attend our schools they receive the kind of excellent opportunity they deserve in this province. In fact, we believe that so much that we've made it one of the great goals of this province, to ensure that we have the most literate, best-educated province on the continent. And we have demonstrated that — $150 million. This budget is at the largest it's been in the history of this province at a time when enrolment continues to decline.

J. Horgan: Yes, Mr. Speaker. And I want to thank the minister for highlighting that golden goal. I share her enthusiasm for education in this province, but I want to ask her why it is that in districts like school district 63 a student can be paying an additional charge to take a food safety course or computer skills or other vocational training and get a better education than those kids that are unable to pay that fee. To the minister: is the creation of a two-tiered education system the end result of your programs over the past four years?

Hon. S. Bond: We care that the students of this province get an excellent education. Under the ruling that is clear in the School Act, there is provision for school districts — and, actually, school boards who are in the best position to make those decisions — to charge for some goods and services.

We intend to continue to fund education at record levels in this province. We will continue to give school boards the authority and the autonomy they require to deliver the best possible education outcomes, and in fact, we expect to hold school boards accountable for maintaining their authority under the School Act.

M. Farnworth: Despite the minister's comments, many parents are facing increasing costs in ensuring that their children can take advantage of the educational opportunities and, hopefully, achieve the golden goal that the member talks about. For example, students in Mission have to pay $20 for a locker, a $100 deposit to play soccer, $10 for drama, $25 to take art, $10 for the school band, $55 just to participate in gym class. You talk about wanting to make children fitter and the best educated.

To the minister: do you really believe that the examples just listed are optional, that they're not part of a

well-rounded educational experience that all British Columbians should be able to achieve, regardless of income?

Hon. S. Bond: As I understand, as the member opposite would well know, the initial ruling was made after a 1997 discussion about this. In fact, we are asking school boards to comply with what is expected of them under the School Act. I have asked my deputy to ensure that superintendents are aware and that boards comply. The ruling does provide for some provision for school districts to actually utilize fees where that's appropriate.

Let me make it perfectly clear. We are committed to having a top-notch public education system for every student in this province, and in fact, we will insist…

Hon. S. Bond: …that school boards uphold the School Act, as it is clear they must.

M. Farnworth: To the minister: regardless of the ruling, you've set out that one of the great golden goals is the best education system in this country. That means every student being able to take advantage of the opportunity — whether it's in sports, whether it's in arts, whether it's in education. Because of your government's lack of funding in those areas, parents are being forced to pay fees. If you funded the school boards properly, they wouldn't have to pay those fees.

Will the minister commit to funding the education system properly so that the pockets of parents are not picked to pay fees so their students or their kids can take advantage of the opportunities they should be taking advantage of?

Hon. S. Bond: In fact, let's make the point once again for the member opposite. This year alone in the province of British Columbia we are adding $150 million to the public education budget. That, in fact, is the largest increase in over a decade in British Columbia, bringing funding to a record high.

What are school boards doing with that? We're seeing countless school districts add programs for children in arts. We're seeing record dollars being spent in terms of special education. We are meeting the needs of students across this province because we've chosen to invest in public education at a level that is unprecedented British Columbia.

G. Gentner: Can the minister responsible for emergency preparedness provide us with a detailed accounting of the steps he has taken in the last two weeks to ensure that the province is prepared for a natural disaster?

Hon. J. Les: I would point out to the member opposite that appropriate emergency planning is going to be more than a two-week process. In fact, I am very proud of the emergency planning personnel and the emergency plans that we have here in British Columbia. That was demonstrated recently when our urban search and rescue team was the first internationally to be called to Louisiana to assist with Hurricane Katrina. We also saw two years ago, with the forest fire situation in the Kelowna area, how competently that was handled by our emergency program as well. I'm confident that we have the plans in place and the personnel in place to look after British Columbians in the event of an emergency.

G. Gentner: I appreciate the minister's earth-shattering confidence, but before the earth underneath his feet is removed, I remind him that similar assurances were provided to our neighbours south of the border.

Dikes along the Fraser River provide protection against flooding. Can the minister provide a status report on the repair of those dikes? What specific assurances can he give that they will survive a significant earthquake?

Hon. J. Les: The member brings up an issue that we have been acutely aware of for a considerable amount of time. We have been working with the federal government to take those steps that ensure that the dikes remain intact and that the rivers are managed in a way that allows them to carry the water capacity required.

I should also point out to the member that as various emergency events happen in different places around the world, we are always eager to learn from those experiences so that we can continue to build an effective emergency management system here in British Columbia.

J. Brar: The member for Surrey-Tynehead made a very moving statement this afternoon about what happened south of the border. The questions are being asked to the Minister of Public Safety. The response I hear is: two weeks are not enough. This government has been there for the last four years. The minister is also saying that he has enough funding there. I note that in the last budget, tabled in February of this year, the government cut the emergency preparedness budget. Can the minister explain what that budget was for? And can he explain: why was it cut?

Hon. J. Les: As I've just indicated to the members opposite, we have an emergency management system and plan in place in British Columbia that is the envy

of many other places. We've been recognized by numerous people, especially in the recent several years, for supplying excellent emergency management services.

J. Brar: What I hear from the other side is: there is no problem. That's what I hear in the response from the minister — that we are ready for anything. That's exactly what happened in the U.S.A. That was exactly the administration's response in the U.S.A.

In the last year of the former government's budget for emergency preparedness, the total budget was $20 million. This government cut that budget by almost $5 million a year. Again to the minister: what justification can he provide for cutting that budget, and can he tell us if he has learned anything from the tragedy that happened on the other side of the border?

Hon. J. Les: Again, as I indicated earlier, emergency preparedness is a continuous learning exercise. We learn from all of the events where emergency personnel are required. We continue to do that, and I am sure the plans and the personnel that we have in place are adequate to look after the emergency situations that might arise in British Columbia.

B. Simpson: My wife has been trying to get me to move back to the Island for some time, so….

In August of this year the provincial government committed $6 million to the city of North Vancouver to permit them to purchase nine homes that were devastated by the slide, which unfortunately killed one person. The city of Quesnel, in which I reside, has a large slide area on the west side of town involving 750 homes. Those homes cannot get building permits to repair them, because an engineer won't sign off and the city of Quesnel will not allow those building permits to be issued. The residents are caught in a catch-22.

The city of Quesnel has asked the province for assistance. Will the Minister of Community Services please inform the House what she intends to do to assist the hundreds of residents in Quesnel who have asked for her help?

Hon. I. Chong: I thank the member for his question because I, too, am very concerned about the challenges that are being faced by the west Quesnel homeowners. I can advise this member that they have applied for a grant under the B.C. community water infrastructure program grant. That is currently being reviewed. We are reviewing that in conjunction with our provincial emergency response program team, and I am not able to advise how soon that answer will be available. But we in fact have received it, and we will continue to work through that review.

Mr. Speaker: I'll move you back. The member for Cariboo North has a supplemental.

B. Simpson: I do wish to thank the minister for recognizing the special circumstances in Quesnel and for recognizing the late application there. However, I guess it begs the question of whether or not there's a double standard in this province.

Again, the math is quite straightforward. In North Vancouver there were nine homes, $6 million and, as far as I understand, no application process. The money was paid in full for that situation. In Quesnel we have 750 homes involved in this slide. The city of Quesnel is asking for funding for three years for $12 million for 750 households — three years and $12 million. Would the Minister of Community Services please explain this disparity and, if she would, rectify it?

Hon. I. Chong: Again I thank the member for bringing this issue up because, in fact, it is very challenging for these homeowners in west Quesnel. I can say that the west Quesnel homeowners were encouraged through their municipality to put forward this application, and because this is the process they've chosen — to request funding in this manner — this is the application that we are currently reviewing. If the member has any additional information that he would like to supply, I would be very happy and pleased to receive it so that we can work through this in a very quick way.

I would like to ask the Minister of Economic Development why he has left it until five minutes to midnight to try to facilitate the purchase of the specialty cellulose mill in Port Alice.

Hon. C. Hansen: This is a file that the ministry has been actively working on now for many months — in fact, many years — in terms of the challenges pertaining to the future of the Port Alice pulp mill. Over the last number of weeks there has been considerable effort put into trying to find ways that the province could assist the proponent. That has been a bit of a shifting sand for us.

We want to make it clear that the province is prepared to assist with the cost of necessary remediation of pre-existing contamination, but the bottom line is that we don't think it's responsible for the province to say to any business operator in the province that they would not have to accept the full responsibility for any environmental problems that they may trigger in the future.

At the end of the day it is not a decision for government to make. It is a decision for the company that's looking at the possibility of restarting the mill to make. We are trying to be supportive in every way we can, but at the end of the day it is a decision that has to be made by a private sector operator.

C. Trevena: I beg to differ. I think that it is incumbent on the government to take a role in this. The village has been left for a year. There is a potential buyer in the village today, but he's now giving a drop-dead date of Friday. That is two days after a year in which this village has been left hanging, waiting for something to move, waiting for some intervention by the government — not a subsidy but an intervention — to help facilitate this deal.

First the government refused to commit on fibre supply. Now we are stuck on an environmental issue. I would like to ask the Minister of Economic Development how people can believe that this government is good for business or good for industry if it so flagrantly ignores a major contributor to the Island and to B.C.'s economy.

Hon. C. Hansen: As the member knows, because of the conversations that she and I have had on this file, I think what we are primarily concerned about is not the business interest. We are primarily concerned about the environmental interest of this particular part of northern Vancouver Island. I do not believe it would be responsible for government to allow for any operator of any company to not take full responsibility for any environmental problems that they might trigger in the future.

H. Lali: This Liberal Premier and this Liberal government promised British Columbians a golden decade of milk and honey. Prosperity for all, they promised — the Liberals did.

Hon. Speaker, let me tell you how the people of Kamloops are celebrating their prosperity under the so-called golden decade. Kamloops food bank saw a record number of people using its services last week; 272 hampers of food were given out in one day. In one year almost 9,000 children received their food from the Kamloops food bank. This is an absolutely shameful indictment of the golden decade.

My question is to the Minister of Employment and Income Assistance. How can this Liberal government justify its social and economic policies when there is a 16-percent increase in food bank usage across British Columbia and a 42-percent increase among the usage by children?

Hon. C. Richmond: First of all, let me remind the member that the unemployment rate in Kamloops is the lowest it has been in decades. People in the construction trades in Kamloops, in home building and in industrial building, are finding it difficult to find workers. We are assisting them in any way we can to put people who feel they've been left behind to work in Kamloops, and our employment programs are working.

H. Lali: Clearly, the minister is not answering the question. It's obvious that the Premier's golden decade has quickly turned into a picnic for his wealthy friends on Howe Street. Clearly, the Premier's social and economic policies are benefiting the top 2 percent of income earners in this province — who, by the way, heavily financed the Premier's re-election campaign. Meanwhile the number of homeless increases, and food bank lineups also increase.

My question again is to the minister: how can this Liberal minister sleep at night in good conscience while his social and economic policies devastate the lives of the less fortunate in society? How can this Liberal minister abandon hungry children in Kamloops — which is his home, by the way — and leave it to the goodwill and generosity of the Kamloops residents to feed the hungry, when it's the responsibility of this government to make sure they look after all rungs of society?

Hon. C. Richmond: For that member to say we are ignoring the plight of children and the less fortunate is just absolutely untrue. We have assisted literally hundreds of people in our town back into the workforce. They have productive jobs, and we are adding more to those rolls every day.

One of the most difficult problems we had as government was to change the direction of…

Hon. C. Richmond: …employment assistance. The ministry doesn't consider itself successful when it adds people to the welfare rolls and they get to a figure of 400,000, as they did under the past administration.

N. Macdonald: To the Minister of Environment: when will Golden receive the conservation officer it was promised before the election?

Hon. B. Penner: As I explained to the member in a meeting earlier this week, we are committed to increas-

ing the number of conservation officers and in fact this summer had hoped to have an extra 15 conservation officers out protecting our resources in the province. Unfortunately, in part due to the increasingly hot job market in western Canada, including British Columbia, it's harder and harder to attract qualified people.

We were able to hire 13 qualified conservation officers. I could tell the House that as the Minister of Environment, I am not prepared to put unqualified personnel into the role of conservation officer in this province. It's a very important job. We place a high priority on protecting our environment, and we are out looking for skilled and qualified people to meet those jobs next year.

N. Macdonald: There were 13 qualified people. He chose to put them somewhere else other than Golden. We have had wardens and conservation officers for 100 years in Golden, until this government got rid of the two that we had and left our community with none. We've been promised by two of your government's ministers that a conservation officer would come — so far, nothing. When — what date — will the minister keep his government's commitment and put a conservation officer back in Golden?

Hon. B. Penner: As I explained to the member a couple of days ago in my office, we will be doing the recruitment process this year. We hope that will help us get the word out across western Canada that we're looking for conservation officers and people with the particular skill set we need.

Being a conservation officer is not an easy job. It can be dangerous; it can be risky. You're dealing with people who are armed. You're out in remote locations. You're dealing with wildlife. We have to have qualified people fit the bill. It's my job as Minister of Environment to make sure that the people we do hire are qualified. I take the advice of the conservation officer service that after interviews were conducted this year, we were only able to come up with 13 people who were able to fit the bill. It's unfortunate we weren't able to get the full 15, but we're working hard to make sure that next year we can do that.

C. Wyse: Mr. Speaker, after an ambulance paramedic pays for their own training with fees and other expenses approaching $10,000, these individuals face the following pay schedule: remote classification, $2 per hour on standby with pager; rural classification, $10 per hour on call. These classifications move to full hourly pay when called.

Urban and metropolitan classifications receive full hourly wage per shift. Under this system, qualified paramedics move from remote rural areas a.s.a.p.

My question: how does the Minister of Health intend to retain properly trained ambulance attendants in remote and rural B.C. under the existing classification system for ambulance service?

Like so many parts of the health care system and so many occupations in British Columbia, it is always a challenge to ensure that we have the human resources that are needed to provide an effective ambulance service.

I would say this, though. The reason why we will be able to attract and retain people in rural areas such as where I come from, Sicamous in the Shuswap, is because it's the best place in British Columbia to live. That's a good start on why they will want to be there. I suspect you would like to say the same of your constituency as well.

Further, the other point I would want the member to acknowledge, if he would, is that, in fact, we have seen a very positive agreement negotiated between the paramedics and the Ministry of Health, the province of British Columbia. That collective agreement and all of the very progressive changes contained in it are a great step forward, and I'm sure the member celebrates it along with me.

Hon. C. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, I move that this House at its next sitting resolve itself for this session into a committee to consider the supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

Hon. C. Taylor presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: Estimates of Sums Required for the Service of the Province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2006, and a supplement to the estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2006, recommending the same to the Legislative Assembly.

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

Hon. C. Taylor: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. Premier of British Columbia, that the Speaker do now leave the chair for the House to go into Committee of Supply.

Hon. C. Taylor: Hon. Speaker, this budget is the first of five this government will table in its second mandate. It reinforces the direction and the determina-

tion that, over the last four years, helped to turn our province around. It sets a course for a brighter future, one that is possible because of the work British Columbians have done to return this province to a leadership position in Canada, in North America and indeed the world.

We faced some difficult choices in the past four years, and we will continue to face choices. But today we do so from a position of strength. Our economic growth is strong, people are optimistic again, and now that we have our fiscal house in order, we have an opportunity to share more of the benefits with more British Columbians.

The February budget and the public accounts that followed showed how far we've come. They underlined our commitment to sound fiscal management, with a record-setting surplus, a record-setting debt reduction, and targeted investments in programs and people to help maintain our positive momentum. This budget update reaffirms the commitments made in February and goes beyond them to move us ever closer to achieving the government's five great goals.

Today I will concentrate on the changes in this budget update from the February 15 document. Today we are announcing renewed and focused support for our seniors, a new and significant commitment to first nations, as well as new measures to help keep our economy competitive.

Now, we do not pretend and we're not going to suggest that we can do everything we want to do immediately. We cannot. Today's budget update is step one. It's a first step forward in our new mandate. With a balanced budget, with a strong economy, as we've said so many times, we have more and more attractive options and real opportunities to work together to build a future that reflects the priorities of all British Columbians.

We begin our mandate, and we begin this update, by reaching out to British Columbia's senior citizens. Like all governments across North America, one of the biggest challenges we face today is how to meet the challenges — but also seize the opportunities — presented by our aging population. The great majority of seniors in our province enjoy a very good quality of life, and we're working now to ensure that we can meet the changing needs of a much larger senior population in the future. By 2031 nearly one in four British Columbians will be 65 or older. One in 15 will be 80 or older. But these are just the statistics. Let's never forget who we're talking about. We're talking about our parents, our grandparents — the people who built our province, nurtured their families and never lost sight about how great British Columbia could be.

We have a responsibility. Now, thanks to our strengthening economy, we have the opportunity to build on the social supports that many of our low-income seniors depend on.

First, we are reinstating the seniors' supplement, starting next month. This monthly payment supports the lowest-income seniors in British Columbia by topping up their federal guaranteed income supplement benefits. With the renewed seniors' supplement, seniors will receive approximately $50 more each month — $600 more each year. The change will benefit almost 40,000 seniors, including some of the lowest-income people in the province. The benefit to seniors across the province will be $50 million over three years in this budget update.

Second, just as our robust economy has allowed us to bring back the seniors' supplement, it's also making it possible to double our annual investment in the SAFER program. SAFER, which stands for Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters, provides assistance to seniors who spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent. It is currently available to single people paying up to $520 a month in rent and couples paying up to $575. The amazing thing about this program is that those levels haven't changed since 1990. We all know what has happened to rents in the past 15 years. So effective October 1, we're raising the rental ceiling in all categories by $90 around the province, and we are raising the ceiling by $180 for singles and couples who live in high-rent areas.

As well as having listened to seniors from around the province and heard about some of the problems with SAFER's benefits, we also know that there's another issue. So we are extending SAFER to benefit seniors who own manufactured homes, recognizing that many of them pay significant monthly pad rentals.

There are approximately 12,000 B.C. seniors currently benefiting from SAFER. With these changes, many of them will in fact increase their monthly benefits, and we will open and expand this program by the addition of manufactured homes. That will bring, in both cases, 7,200 new seniors into the SAFER program. Over three years these changes will provide $42 million in rent relief for low- and modest-income seniors.

Third, in addition to enhancing rent and income supplement programs for our seniors, we are allocating 150 million new health care dollars in the next two years towards our goal of building the best system of support for seniors in Canada.

Hon. Speaker, we are on track to deliver, as you know, on the Premier's commitment to add 5,000 new residential assisted-living and supportive housing beds by 2008, and 2,700 beds will be completed by December 2006 — next year. We will reach our goal of 5,000 by the end of 2008. In fact, we've already broken ground for hundreds of new units in places such as Burns Lake, Abbotsford, Lake Country, Powell River and Saltspring Island, and those are just in the last two months alone.

These beds are being built in partnership with community groups, health authorities, non-profit societies, private sector organizations and other levels of government, all supported by countless dedicated volunteers. But new beds alone will not meet the needs of all of our senior citizens. Thousands are in facilities that need to be modernized. Many have unique needs related to disabilities or to illnesses such as dementia. Furthermore, our bed commitment is not being made

in isolation. It is being made and met in the context of a broader, longer-term renewal of our total health care system.

These new dollars — $75 million this year and $75 million next year — will help ensure that as new units come on stream, we have the resources and the added flexibility we need to support a smooth transition and to allow more of our seniors to age in place where appropriate. Of this new funding, $40 million will be invested directly in services provided by partners such as Kiwanis Club, Salvation Army and SUCCESS. The balance will be used by health authorities to strengthen and modernize a full range of services to help ensure that our seniors get the care they need.

Beyond these significant financial initiatives, our seniors need to be listened to on policy issues that affect their lives and, by extension, all of our lives. To that end, the new Premier's council on aging and seniors issues will hold meetings throughout this fall with B.C.'s seniors and with researchers, policy-makers, service providers — anyone who works with older people. The council is headed by Dr. Patricia Baird, who is one of North America's leading authorities on health and public policy.

This council will examine in detail a range of issues related to our aging population, from mandatory retirement to transportation, recreation, community infrastructure. The council's work will help assure seniors in our province that they have the supports and services they need to continue enjoying full, rewarding lives in the communities to which they've contributed so much.

We are investing a total of $242 million over three years in these new initiatives, and taken together as a package, they are significant steps forward for British Columbia's senior citizens.

With this budget update we're also moving forward to deliver on the government's commitment to build a new relationship with first nations. Many share in the renewed sense of hope and opportunity that we're seeing in this province, but others still struggle to overcome a legacy of dislocation and discrimination, of life in the margins of everyday society. That's why it is so important to build this new relationship, reflecting a vision of economic prosperity for all first nations across British Columbia.

We have made progress towards that vision in the past several years. Together we have signed five agreements-in-principle, foundations for treaties, along with more than 300 smaller-scale agreements in areas such as forestry, oil and gas, parkland, agriculture, aquaculture and economic development. Similarly, we've moved ahead with a number of key initiatives in areas including education and child and family services. These developments are underpinned by our interest, our dedication to collaborating government to government with first nations leaders to continue to strengthen and improve the quality of life in their communities.

Our vision for a new relationship is based on openness, transparency and collaboration. By addressing the systemic problems of the past, we will reduce uncertainty, litigation and conflict, and we will work to increase the capacity of first nations communities to be effective partners in consultations concerning the use of land and resources.

Too often available funding from all levels of government is focused on short-term priorities and needs. It results in a reliance on third-party expertise, so we need to invest in first nations communities to advance training and skills development and to create lasting growth, prosperity and true self-reliance. This is the key to improve social and economic well-being for our first nations communities. Our government is committed to this direction and to bringing about real change, and in fact, this new relationship has the potential to reshape our social and economic landscape completely. It will create a more inclusive and prosperous future for all British Columbians.

Today we take another step forward towards that future by setting aside $100 million to establish a first nations new relationship fund. Through this fund we will support first nations as they build their own direct capacity to participate in this new relationship. We will work with first nations leaders and others to finalize official terms of reference in the coming months, and we will bring more details to the Legislature in the spring.

Like all of our communities, each first nation is unique with unique needs, strengths and priorities. We will respect that fundamental truth, as we engage in a dialogue and work to identify issues and to find solutions. We will continue to work towards treaties, but we recognize that this road is long. It will have many turns, but a strong, new relationship based on respect will help ensure we navigate that road together with a shared sense of values and direction to the ultimate benefit of all British Columbians.

Hon. Speaker, in this province we've had great success, as we talked about before, in turning our economy and our fiscal position around. In 2001 we faced a structural deficit of $4 billion. Today, with this budget update, we are now forecasting surpluses of $1.3 billion this year, $600 million the following year and $400 million in 2007-2008. All of our projections are protected by significant forecast allowances.

Overall our fiscal position is stronger than in February due mainly to strong economic growth which we expect will continue to top 3 percent a year throughout the fiscal plan, driven by strength in retail sales, construction starts, investment, job growth and high commodity prices.

Our economy is doing very well, but we cannot take all of these positive economic drivers for granted. Yes, we have a surplus, but we cannot assume that everything will continue to go up indefinitely. That way lies the risk and the danger of returning to budget deficits, which we will not do.

We will not endanger the health of our province with careless spending. Instead, we will continue making thoughtful investments that reflect and will help sustain the strength of our economy. Since day one this government has worked to encourage growth with a series of measures to keep British Columbia competitive, from income tax cuts across the board to targeted investments in key economic sectors.

The February budget built on those initiatives with nearly half a billion dollars over three years in income tax and MSP reductions for the province's lowest-income earners. B.C. now has the lowest personal income tax rates in all of Canada for the bottom two tax brackets, and most people earning less than $16,000 a year pay no provincial income tax at all.

The February budget also allowed more business income to qualify for the lower 4½ percent small business tax rate, recognizing that small business drives our economy and, further, that high taxes damage our province by driving people and businesses away. With that in mind, today we are taking tax relief one step further. We are lowering the general corporate income tax rate from 13.5 percent to 12 percent. So in this budget update we are taking it down 1½ percent, but I will remind you that is 4½ points lower than when we formed government in 2001.

This will keep B.C.'s rate among the lowest in the country. It benefits businesses in all economic sectors in all regions of the country, as a really large number of them are smaller operations as well. We are encouraging them to come here, stay here, grow here and — most importantly — to create jobs for British Columbians.

We're also taking steps today to make B.C. an even more attractive centre for research and development. Our biotechnology sector is one of the largest in North America and the fastest-growing in the country. It's a major generator of not just jobs and revenues but real, groundbreaking, life-altering innovations.

We are at the forefront of genome research, a science that could radically affect how we treat diseases. Companies here are working on advances with the potential to do such amazing things as regrow spinal cord cells after injuries.

So we've done a good job of attracting and nurturing these companies with our competitive taxes, world-class universities and unparalleled quality of life. Today we're moving forward to encourage more of them to keep their intellectual property here, especially as they move from research and development into the commercial market.

Effective January 1, 2006, we are expanding the international financial activity program. It refunds the corporate income tax that B.C. companies pay on eligible earnings from international financial activities. Starting next year it will also allow B.C. companies to get partial refunds of corporate income tax paid on earnings from international commercialization of life science patents.

Life science patents are typically developed in sectors such as biomedicine, forestry, mining and agriculture, all of which are vital to our economy and society. Combined, these tax changes will save businesses almost $400 million over three years, supporting our goal once again to create more jobs per capita than anywhere else in Canada.

We have seen remarkable job growth in B.C. — more than 230,000 jobs since December 2001 — and last year we also led the country in economic growth. With continued careful fiscal management, we have more revenues and therefore more choices about the kind of province we all want for our future. It is great to have choices, but it is also a challenge, because as every single person in this House knows, we can never do all of the things we want to all at the same time. We have to set priorities, we have to make trade-offs, and in everything we do, we have to seek balance.

For example, as a fast-growing province, we have to continually invest in infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, highways, transit. These are an essential part of delivering public services, and even with a healthy surplus, we often have to borrow to finance their construction. The challenge is to do that and to do it at a pace that meets people's needs in the communities throughout B.C. without burdening future generations — our kids — with a debt load that we cannot afford.

Likewise, there is a long list of public sector contracts that are up for renewal in 2006. Public sector workers are the people we count on to deliver services that British Columbians use every single day. They've also played a key role in getting our fiscal house in order. We respect and appreciate the work they do on our behalf, and we want to make sure that they're compensated appropriately. But we also have a duty to the public to ensure that wages are affordable, that they are sustainable and that we still have room left in our budget for all of those other priorities that people have told us are critical, such as addressing hospital wait times; supporting children's initiatives; upgrading roads, schools, hospitals; adding and expanding needed public programs; keeping taxes competitive; managing our debt. These are all important priorities, we've been told by British Columbians.

But none of these important needs, not even wages, can be looked at in isolation. A spending decision in one area affects what is available in other areas. So we are seeking balance in every part of government, consistent with our budget plan. That is why we continually seek advice from British Columbians in forums such as the Premier's council on aging and seniors issues, the First Citizens Forum, and our prebudget consultations.

This government works for the people of British Columbia. It is their ideas, their priorities, their recommendations that will guide us in developing our next budget, 2006, and that will be another step towards the government's great goals for a golden decade. The people of this province have made incredible progress in the last four years.

Today we're able to build on that progress and invest some of the dividends of sound fiscal management

and strong economic growth in: more support for seniors — this package of assistance will dramatically improve the quality of life for tens of thousands of our senior citizens; important new support for our first nations communities to participate more fully in our economy and society; and tax measures aimed at keeping B.C. competitive, drawing new businesses and new jobs to our province.

On a personal note, I want to thank the hard-working, talented people in the Finance Ministry. We are so fortunate — all of us — as British Columbians to have people of such integrity and commitment working in the public service.

Frankly, this budget update is a good example of why I got into government. I welcome this opportunity to take part directly in strengthening British Columbia, changing it for the better and making a truly positive difference in people's lives. We can't have everything at once, of course. We must make choices. We must make the right choices. When I say "we," I mean all of British Columbia.

This budget update is step one. It's the first of five budgets the government will present in this mandate. In four years the full story of our priorities as a government will be told. I am confident in our citizens' strengths, talents, vision, imagination and determination.

In just four years the people of British Columbia turned this province around. I can't wait to see what we can accomplish together in the next four years.

J. Kwan: I'm very pleased to stand here today as the official opposition's Finance critic and put forward a first response to the minister's budget update. We on this side of the House have come a long way in four years.

First, let me congratulate the minister and all the members opposite, as well as my new colleagues on this side, on winning their elections. It is very exciting to have so much company. It is very exciting to engage, in opposition, in a dialogue with the government so that we can work towards building a better British Columbia for all British Columbians.

Four months ago the voters of British Columbia sent the Premier and his government a strong message. They gave the government a second mandate that made some very clear demands. They wanted a different approach from government. They wanted their government to move away from this one-sided and confrontational style to one that respects due process and supports the priorities of middle-income families — priorities that leave no one behind.

With this budget the new Minister of Finance had the first opportunity to reach out to British Columbians and show how her government will respond to the electorate's message. There were some new commitments and some new promises but also a lot of self-congratulatory praise. There's not much news in this budget when you hold it up to the one that was delivered in February.

I'm not sure that the government actually heard the message from the election. British Columbians will not forget the last four years and all the promises made and broken. It is going to take a lot more than this budget and a few new promises to make up for the short-sighted policies of the last four years.

After listening to the minister's speech, I'm not convinced that the government is ready to take responsibility for the damage it caused to so many of our social and environmental systems — health care, child protection, education and the relationship with working people, just to name a few.

There have been cuts, reductions of services, strange reclassifications, confusion and broken promises. The government wants to move B.C. forward, but to do that, they need to look back and take ownership of the damage that they caused and begin to make repairs.

The minister said she repaired some old shoes for today's budget, which she's wearing today. I hope that she's as committed to repairing the damage her government has caused since 2001. That's what British Columbians expect. British Columbians expect that commitments that were made — and we in the opposition are here to ensure that government makes those commitments — do not become broken promises once again, as they were, starting in 2001.

There are now 33 opposition MLAs ready to dig into the budget books and ensure that the government's commitments are honoured and the public's voice is heard. We hold this budget up to a level of scrutiny that was never possible before.

In February the government introduced a budget but refused to debate the details of that budget. Instead, they closed the books and shut down the Legislature. But that was then, and this is now.

In February there were only three opposition MLAs. We did the very best we could, but I'll admit debate could have been better. Our caucus was small. We did not have official opposition status, and there were many times when entire ministries would pass without scrutiny. Now there are 33 opposition MLAs, and every single one of us is going to pore over those books and take every minister to task through their spending, line by line. Every ministry will be debated, every minister will face questions, and every move of this government will be scrutinized.

That scrutiny begins today. From everything the minister says, British Columbians have never seen better days, but this is far from the whole story. If the province is doing so well, why are so many people and communities struggling to make ends meet? The government talks about a record surplus, but seniors are still waiting for long-term care beds. They are waiting for a promise that this government made in 2001, and it has yet to materialize.

The minister just promised new measures to help seniors — promises she has made that say that now, because everything is better…. But you know what? This Minister of Finance and this government have to remember how badly seniors were treated in the last four years.

I will remind this House that it was this same Premier that actually eliminated the seniors supplement four years ago. I will remind this House that while the SAFER program is always important and is a component to the entire housing continuum in terms of housing options for British Columbians, it does not replace long-term care beds. Nor does it replace housing programs for many people that are in need across British Columbia.

In the throne speech there was talk about homelessness and the need to address homelessness. Yet in this budget there's very little that addresses the issue of homelessness.

The government says regional economies are growing, but the government does not have a long-term strategy to cope with the effects of the pine beetle epidemic. To date, the government has not said how it will answer key questions. What happens when the annual allowable cut goes back down, Mr. Speaker? What will the government do to support economic diversification in Quesnel, in Prince George, in Williams Lake? The answers in today's budget are not sufficient.

It is great that the federal government finally came through with some dollars, but the province's commitment is lacking. B.C.'s funding for pine beetle response next year is budgeted today at $7 million.

The government champions its commitments to education, but there is no commitment to making education more affordable. Too many parents are paying basic school fees in the K-to-12 system. That issue was raised today in question period, to which we heard no answers from this minister and this government. Too many British Columbians have lost access to higher education because they cannot afford tuition. The government has refused to honour its commitment to legislate a tuition cap.

The minister's budget boosts unprecedented health care funding, but it does not address the growing concerns of overcrowded emergency rooms in places like Surrey, Victoria and Kamloops. This budget is too thin on health care. Another winter is just months away, and our ERs will once again face the winter surge of patients that crippled so many of them last year. This government needs to act now on overcrowded emergency rooms and bed shortages, not next year. What is the government waiting for? People and patients don't wait. They need the beds now.

We also see some new funding for some environmental and conservation programs. But let me just say this: that funding does not even begin to give back or make up for all the cuts and closures over the last four years. That's why Golden still doesn't have the conservation officers that they need.

There was focus on addressing challenges in the aboriginal community. Let me just say this: I am glad to see that finally here after four years. But I should also say that that should have been here four years ago. Instead of making positive steps in the healing process with the aboriginal community, this government and this Premier chose to divide communities. They chose to bring forward a divisive, confrontational referendum process that pitted communities against communities. That was not necessary.

Having said that, I am glad it is the new election cycle. We have new faces around the table, a new Minister of Finance. I'm glad that the government has learned a lesson that building communities is always, always better than dividing them. And it begins. Let us use that in the measurement of the steps this government will take in the years ahead, in the next four years.

I'd like to put this government on notice. One-time funding for the aboriginal community with respect to the New Relationship fund is not good enough. Ongoing progress must be made. Sincere efforts must be made. Actions must follow words.

With that, Mr. Speaker, in the coming weeks the opposition will study the books presented to the House today, and finally, a budget that was first delivered seven months ago will get a full and open debate in this Legislature. I look forward to that debate. I look forward to all of the help with my 32 colleagues around this table to engage in a constructive debate, to engage in a process that will matter and that will make democracy whole once again in this Legislature.

I'll have more to say around this budget tomorrow. With that, I move adjournment of the debate.

Hon. C. Taylor presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: bills entitled Revenue Statutes Amendment Act, 2005; Budget Measures Implementation Act (No. 2), 2005.

Hon. C. Taylor: These two bills implement some of the measures that were announced in the September budget update. Bill 2, Revenue Statutes Amendment Act, 2005, implements two measures to enhance the competitiveness of the province as a choice location for business to invest and create jobs. The bill amends the Income Tax Act to reduce the general corporate income tax rate to 12 percent from 13.5 percent. It also amends the International Financial Activity Act to provide a partial corporate income tax refund for the commercialization of certain patent-based intellectual property in British Columbia.

Bill 3, Budget Measures Implementation Act (No. 2), 2005, amends the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act to extend the term of the term of the Accounting Policy Advisory Committee for three years. In addition, the Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters Act is amended to add manufactured homesites to the definition of residence.

The Budget Measures Implementation Act (No. 2), 2005, also includes transitional provisions that clarify

how requirements under the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act and the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act apply in relation to the 2005-2006 fiscal year.

I move first reading of Bill 2, Revenue Statutes Amendment Act, 2005; and Bill 3, Budget Measures Implementation Act (No. 2), 2005.

Hon. C. Taylor: I move that the said bills be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bills 2 and 3 introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. C. Taylor: I have the pleasure to rise to table the September update budget and fiscal plan, which fulfils the requirements of section 7 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act.

I also rise to table the budget consultation paper, as required by section 2 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act.

I table, on behalf of the ministers responsible, the government's 2005-2006, 2007-2008 overall strategic plan and service plans, required under the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act.

I have two packages that I will give to the Clerk. The first package contains service plans for the Office of the Premier, 19 ministries and three related organizations. The second package contains service plans for 27 Crown agencies. The second package also includes a list of organizations that have been exempted from section 13, service plans, of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act and for which service plans are not being filed.

Two government organizations have been added to the exemption list for this budget update. Land and Water British Columbia Inc. and British Columbia Buildings Corporation are both being wound up. Their functions will be delivered through ministries and reported in future service plans and annual reports of those ministries.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until ten o'clock tomorrow morning.

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