2009 Legislative Session: Fifth Session, 38th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Monday, March 2, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 39, Number 2

[ Page 14091 ]

MONDAY, MARCH 2, 2009

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Mr. Speaker: I want to remind members today that I understand there are a number of guests, so if we could keep the introductions fairly short.

Hon. S. Bond: Sure. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Is that because you saw me get on my feet? There's a message in that.

Today in the gallery we are joined by the 20 outstanding winners of the second annual Premier's Awards for Teaching Excellence and members of the selection committee for the award. As you would know, Mr. Speaker, the award recognizes the best teachers from across British Columbia for their dedication to student achievement and learning.

Earlier today I was really pleased to be joined by members from both sides of the House as we celebrated the accomplishments of these teachers, who tonight will receive the second annual award at Government House. Please join me in welcoming members of the selection committee and our 20 outstanding teachers.

N. Macdonald: I'd like to introduce Ian Foss from Golden, B.C. He's with the Golden and District Search and Rescue. As members will know, this is an incredible group of volunteers that has dedicated thousands of volunteer hours. Members will remember the miraculous rescue of three-year-old Kate Williams from a crashed plane some time back. That was Golden Search and Rescue.

Ian has also done a wonderful job of representing search and rescue in the media during what has been a difficult week. He's joined by Rozalyn Milne, and I ask the House to please join me in making them both feel welcome here.

Hon. M. Coell: I have four guests in the chamber this afternoon: Diane and Gordon Campbell and Bev Kissinger from Community Living Victoria, and Stacy Kuiack. Would you please make them all welcome.

S. Herbert: I rise today to introduce some constituents of mine and some constituents of the member for Surrey-Whalley. We had some trouble getting them into this House because of what I believe to be some antiquated rules here. But they are here, minus tiaras and sashes. Small steps towards a fuller appreciation of our province's great diversity.

I'd like to introduce to the House Mr. and Miss Gay Vancouver XXIX — Brent Wildefyre and Jackie A Go-Go, also known as Mark Gueffroy and Kurtis Reeves.

We are also joined by the Emperor and Empress 5 of Surrey. That would be Wolfgang Bang! and Elektra Quecha — be careful; she'll electrocute ya — also known as Rob Neyts and Sterling Hargitt. We're also joined by the managing editor of Xtra! West, Robin Perelle.

Finally, I would like to introduce…. Somewhere circulating in the House today is the cornerstone of the Canadian court system with 40-plus years of community service embracing diversity. That would be the current reigning Empress of Canada, ted northe, not to be confused with Queen Elizabeth.

All the individuals I've had the pleasure of introducing are integral to their community for promoting diversity and understanding. Mr. and Miss Gay Vancouver XXIX represent the Rhinestone Phoenix Charity Foundation, celebrating 30 years of service. They are elected to serve Vancouver and the North Shore, raise funds for Covenant House and the Metro Vancouver Dream Centre to help end homelessness. Almost there, Mr. Speaker.

The Empress and Emperor 5 of Surrey represent the Imperial and Sovereign Court of Surrey, which has been working to promote community understanding and diversity in the Fraser Valley for over ten years and has been raising funds for the food bank for those living with HIV and AIDS.

While they represent many of us here today, I and my colleague from Surrey-Whalley are their representatives. I would ask the House to make them welcome and thank them for their service to their communities on behalf of B.C.

Hon. W. Oppal: I want to introduce Karen Blake, who teaches physical education, science, health and careers at David Thompson high school in my riding. She's an awesome teacher, who has spent so much time with kids in the neighbourhood and at the school. Ironically, she has a former student who's also an honouree here this afternoon. I'd like to ask the House to make them welcome.

C. Trevena: I'd like to recognize some of the teachers who are up in the gallery. We do have, from Gold River, Rosamund Latvala, who has been working with aboriginal education at Gold River Secondary and Ray Watkins Elementary.

[1340]

But as she says, she couldn't do it without the very involved and long and dedicated contribution of Nan Violet Johnson, who is here as her guest. Nan Violet is an elder with Mowachaht/Muchalaht and is very much the heart and soul of the aboriginal education program that Rosamund is here to receive the award for. So I hope the House will make them both very welcome.

Hon. J. McIntyre: I would like for the House to also acknowledge one of the very special teachers here today, who has won an award. Not only is she a fabulous
[ Page 14092 ]
teacher, doing her work experience and grad transitions, but she's from Rockridge Secondary, where both my children attended, and I actually knew her.

I'd like the House to welcome Susan Atwood. She's accompanied by Linda Harrison, a youth worker. I just wanted to give my very special personal as well as professional acknowledgment of the great work they do at Rockridge and in West Van.

R. Hawes: In the gallery are two of my constituency assistants, Janis Butcher and Sharon Kihn. Joining them is Christopher Butcher, Janis's son. He lives in the Victoria area, has never been here to question period and is looking forward to watching the quiet and decorum and cooperative attitude that I'm sure will be in evidence here in a few minutes. Could we make them welcome.

R. Sultan: I have two introductions. It's very appropriate that on the day the Premier is making awards for teaching excellence in British Columbia, we should have represented in the precinct and in the galleries 140 students from an institution which is among the best in our superb public school system in this province, Handsworth Secondary School in my riding. They are accompanied by their teacher Mr. Glenn MacKenzie and chaperones. Will the House please make them welcome.

Secondly, also in the House today are members of the Insurance Bureau of Canada, including Jim Robinson, George Bozanin, Ken Keenan, Phil Wynne, Tam Narine, Elizabeth MacDonald, Lindsay Olson, Miranda Lee and Serge Corbeil. Would the House please make them welcome.

R. Thorpe: On behalf of the Speaker and myself, I am very pleased to introduce to the House, visiting the Legislature today from Penticton and Victoria, Jacinta Ferrari, Cal Meiklejohn, Duncan Meiklejohn, Caitlin Meiklejohn and Jasper Meiklejohn. Both Caitlin and Jasper are young aspiring authors from Penticton. Would the House please make them welcome here today.

Hon. G. Hogg: Last Friday after a sleepless night, the wonderful administrative coordinator from our office made her way to the hospital rather than to the Legislature and gave birth to a 7-pound-6-ounce daughter named Kaelyn. Would the House give their best wishes to Kaelyn and to her mother, Julie Smart.

Hon. I. Chong: I wanted, as well, to take this opportunity to recognize an exceptional teacher in my community, Roger Conrod. Roger teaches at Lambrick Park Secondary here in my riding of Oak Bay–Gordon Head, and he teaches carpentry and career prep.

What has been noticeable about his program is that he has engaged the community. He has engaged the private sector, where he has found opportunities for equipment donations, and he has parents and local business owners involved in this program. He has done an exceptional job. A number of his students have gone on to operate successful businesses.

I know that because he works so hard in his advanced woodworking class, he wholly supports our Wood is Good policy. I would hope the House will please welcome Roger Conrod.

[1345]

Hon. G. Abbott: I have three guests in the gallery today from the Health Services world. They are Suzanne Taylor, who is the executive director of the drug use optimization branch of the pharmaceutical services division of the ministry. Hilary Watson is a student working on a pharmacy degree from the University of Washington, and Pam Scott is executive coordinator, assistant deputy minister's office, pharmaceutical services division. I'd like to ask the House to please make them all welcome.

D. Hayer: At this time I'd also like to introduce two teachers, Mr. Marc Pelech from Sullivan Heights Secondary School, as well as Paul-Jean "P.J." Lavoie, along with his wife Nancy Campbell. Paul teaches at Johnston Heights Secondary School. These are two exceptional teachers who will be presented with the Premier's Award for Teaching Excellence later on today. Would the House please make them very welcome.

Hon. K. Krueger: Mr. Speaker, mindful of your admonition to be brief, I didn't want to miss the opportunity to introduce Sherry Stade, a recipient of the Premier's Award for Teaching Excellence from Kamloops. She taught all my children as they were going through school and continues to distinguish herself these many years later. She's here with her husband Brian Stade. I ask the House to make them welcome.

Hon. T. Christensen: I want to join with the House and invite them to join me in welcoming Sharon Mackenzie, who is here, as well, to receive the Premier's Award for Teaching Excellence. I have had the pleasure of actually attending Sharon's classroom.

What makes that unique is that it was at Coldstream Meadows seniors facility in Vernon, where Sharon takes her class for a three-month period — I believe it is — and where the students in grade 6 get to interact with the seniors. It is an excellent example of community engagement in education, something that Sharon takes to heart on a number of fronts. I would ask the House to please join me in welcoming her. I'm thrilled she's here.

Mr. Speaker: I'm definitely glad we were brief.
[ Page 14093 ]

Point of Privilege
(Speaker's Ruling)

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, on February 24 the member for Alberni-Qualicum rose in this place on what he described as a matter of privilege, alleging that the Minister of Agriculture and Lands misled the House during question period on February 19 and 23, 2009. On Thursday, February 26, the Government House Leader responded to the member's submission, and I've carefully considered both the member's submission and the Government House Leader's reply. I have also carefully reviewed the authorities quoted to the House and the authorities on the law of privilege.

Before dealing with the substantive issue, there are one or two technical matters which merit comment. In a decision of this House on July 21, 1993, and quoted with approval on July 15, 1996, one of the essential elements required when raising a matter of privilege is that a copy of the motion that the member intends to move, should the Chair find a prima facie case has been established, must be tabled. No such proposed motion was tabled by the member for Alberni-Qualicum.

The Government House Leader, in his presentation, also noted that the matter may not have been raised at the earliest opportunity, and I have considered this submission as well. However, the substantive portion of the submission from the member for Alberni-Qualicum is what the Chair has focused upon in this matter.

The essence of this allegation is that the member must establish that the minister deliberately misled the House, a considerable burden which the member has failed to establish. While there is currently a clear difference of opinion between the member and the minister as to the number of trees cut, the number of logs removed, the groups who were consulted and the end result of the logging operation, I am satisfied that this controversy clearly fits the category of a dispute as to facts, which in itself does not qualify as a matter of privilege.

Let me remind all hon. members that an accusation of deliberately misleading the House is a serious accusation and must rest on a solid foundation. I find that the necessary elements have not been established to sustain a charge of deliberately misleading the House, and I so rule.

Statements
(Standing Order 25b)

SUCCESS SERVICES FOR IMMIGRANTS

R. Lee: Last Friday night I joined other members of this House at a fundraising gala for SUCCESS. I had the opportunity to be part of the rather joyous and exciting night, and I know everyone had a good time. I want to thank the many organizers and volunteers who make SUCCESS a success every day.

[1350]

I particularly want to recognize Betty Funston, Joann Wong Bittle, Dr. Raymond Kwan, Tung Chan and Peter Kwok for their tireless work. I also would like to recognize members of the fundraising gala committee: Ricky Wu, Johnny Fong, Michele Kwok, Patrick Lau, Sandra Lau, Karen Woo and Elsa Yap.

There were great artists there to entertain guests, including Chet Lam, the two-time best folk artist of the year at the Chinese Music Media Awards; Ha Yu, who won the best actor at the TVB awards; Annabelle Louie; one of the leading singing coaches in Vancouver; Raymond Sham, whose "Song in the Wind" won an award at the First Canadian Songwriter Quest.

Since 1973 SUCCESS has promoted the well-being of Canadians and immigrants and encouraged their integration into the community. They do this through three organizations: SUCCESS, SUCCESS Multi-Level Care Society and SUCCESS Foundation.

Burnaby has strong ties to SUCCESS, and my constituents benefit greatly from their services. They have taken a lead role in developing a strong sense of community.

Announced last December, SUCCESS was selected to manage and operate Hillside Gardens and add 100 new units of subsidized housing for low-income or new arrivals. I know they will make a positive impact at Hillside Gardens by helping residents link into the community and receive the supports they need to succeed.

Will the House please join me in celebrating the success of SUCCESS.

WOMEN'S MEMORIAL MARCH and
status of aboriginal women

S. Fraser: On February 14 Victoria joined other major cities in honouring murdered women and indigenous people from across the province. I attended the rally organized by the students from the University of Victoria and Camosun College.

The purpose of the rally, which ended here at the Legislature, was to create awareness, grieve for the loss of the women, show support for the families, and remember the over 500 missing and murdered indigenous women from Vancouver Island and all over Canada.

Hundreds gathered for the event, and as I marched, I realized I was becoming angry. I recalled how, as a fledgling MLA in this House and a new Aboriginal Affairs critic in 2005, I had risen in this House to bring attention to the same issue. I referred to the Amnesty International report of 2004 entitled Stolen Sisters, and I spoke of the missing and murdered women along Highway 16, the highway of tears.

Since then, I and many of my colleagues have met with families and friends of the missing and murdered women,
[ Page 14094 ]
and to a person, they feel the frustration of abandonment and frustration and outrage at the failures of the system to provide the resources necessary for justice.

The Amnesty report identified that social and economic marginalization of indigenous women — along with government policies that have torn apart families and communities, as well as the failures of policy and the justice system — as contributing to the entire problem. Combine that with the worst combination of racism and sexism, and there is an expectation that societal indifference to the welfare and safety of indigenous women will allow the perpetrators, the predators, to escape justice.

Here we are four years later. I stand here raising the same issues again, and nothing has changed.

So I will paraphrase from my closing statement of four years ago. I suggest that if the missing and murdered women were from an affluent region of B.C. and involving non-aboriginal women, we would not need to march to raise attention.

SETTLEMENT WORKERS
IN SCHOOLS PROGRAM

J. Yap: This past Saturday, February 28, I attended a very unique event aimed at helping newly arrived immigrant families. The event was presented by Settlement Workers in Schools, or SWIS, and was held in my riding at Hugh-Boyd Secondary School in partnership with the Richmond board of education.

Let's Connect: School, Community and You was the theme, and the concept is very simple yet significant. Typically, new immigrants arrive in Canada with young families. After all, it is the desire for a better life for their children that drives many to leave their homelands. Schools are a natural point of entry for new immigrants and can provide a perfect venue to learn about and access services in their new environment.

[1355]

This was a day of workshops to help parents learn about a variety of services available to them. More than 20 information booths were on hand. Whether it was health care, social programs, nutrition, child care services, sports activities, volunteer opportunities or English-language training, there was something for every new immigrant family trying to figure out how to better settle into life in British Columbia and, in particular, Richmond.

About 600 people, both parents and children, attended this event. Let's Connect was supported by the Richmond board of education, and for this I commend board chair Linda McPhail and her fellow school trustees.

I'd also like to thank district administrator Tony Corrigan, who was the driving force in bringing the SWIS program to Richmond and in organizing this day, which was a great success.

I ask all members of this House to join me in congratulating Tony Corrigan and the SWIS team in Richmond for their dedication and commitment to helping new immigrants become better adjusted, informed and settled in our community.

FESTIVAL DU BOIS

D. Thorne: Bonjour, mes amis. Today I address the House with the friendly French greeting you can hear on the streets of Maillardville, particularly at this time of year when Festival du Bois is just days away.

I am particularly proud this year as B.C.'s first and largest French Canadian settlement celebrates its 100th anniversary. Maillardville's rich history began when brave pioneers from Quebec settled on the shores of the Fraser River, bringing their music and their culture with them.

The largest francophone community west of Manitoba is the result, and the French language can still be heard in my constituency, which includes the community of Maillardville on the south slope of Coquitlam.

This coming weekend marks the 20th year for the Festival du Bois, a folk music festival that spans cultures, generations and language. It attracts thousands of visitors who share in the joie de vivre with music of all kinds, dance, cultural workshops and a children's tent.

Along with the lineup of amazing musicians representing many cultures and favourite performers from past years, I'm especially looking forward to hearing the 60 young voices in the chorale des pionniers on Sunday at 3 p.m. I'm doing my best, Mr. Speaker, with corrections from my colleague here, who obviously paid more attention in school than I did.

These children, in grades 2 to 6, attend the Ecole des Pionniers du Maillardville. This is your invitation to join me at Mackin Park in Coquitlam on March 7 and 8. The fun is contagious, and you'll soon be tapping your toes to fiddle music as you dig into tourtière, poutine and maple syrup. Merci.

PAUL-JEAN LAVOIE AND MARC PELECH

D. Hayer: I rise today to speak of the foundation of our society — education. I wish to highlight two teachers from my home community of Surrey, who have dedicated their lives to our youth. Paul-Jean "P.J." Lavoie and Marc Pelech are incredibly dedicated to education and to our kids, and Surrey is very fortunate to have them.

As a result of their tremendous talent, passion and innovation, I am pleased to report that they are both among the recipients of the Premier's Award for Teaching Excellence who have been honoured today here in Victoria. Paul-Jean "P.J." Lavoie is a teacher at Johnston Heights Secondary School, where he teaches student leadership and works to promote community participation and healthy relationships within the school.

Along with sporting activities such as the Terry Fox Run and breast cancer awareness, Paul arranges two
[ Page 14095 ]
major drama productions and a dinner theatre event each year. He works to ensure that teachers in the school have the resources they need to develop healthy relationships with students through his Relationship Always Matters.

Marc Pelech teaches visual and media arts at Sullivan Heights Secondary School, where he creates a culture of student achievements and community engagement through student participation in civic arts projects. His students worked with the B.C. Dairy Foundation on a Drink More Milk campaign and are working with the city manager on local beautification and a culture celebration project.

[1400]

Under his guidance, his students have also created a sustainable on-line resource for art teachers, parents and students interested in participating in applied arts. Both these teachers are being awarded today because of their talent and passion for teaching. But most importantly, they have made a difference in hundreds of lives. They have fostered the most precious resource for our future, that being our children and youth.

SAGE BIRCHWATER

C. Wyse: Today I would like to introduce a man who was born in Victoria, lived in Toronto and settled in the Chilcotin. Sage Birchwater is a well-known and much-loved resident of the Cariboo-Chilcotin. Sage arrived in B.C. in March 1973 from Toronto with only a packsack on his back and a plan to head to Bella Coola. Sage never made it past the Chilcotin plateau.

In his farewell message to the readers of the Williams Lake Tribune, Sage said that he caught the bug and never left. His friend Diana French called it hearing the drummer. Whatever it's called, Sage joined the many others who call the Chilcotin their home.

While the Chilcotin was supposed to be a short stop on his trip, Sage stayed to make this wonderful area his home. During this time he learned much about the people and places on the Chilcotin plateau and shared this knowledge with the rest of us through his writing. He is the author of Chiwid; Williams Lake: Gateway to the Cariboo Chilcotin; as well as contributing to Ulkatcho Food and Medicine Plants.

Sage is also a journalist and has worked for the Tribune for almost eight years, covering hard news and human interest stories. He is respected for his ability to tell the truth, share the fascinating and reveal the humorous side of life.

Above all, Sage is a storyteller. Whether he's writing about current events, history or the people and places of the Cariboo-Chilcotin, Sage brings his readers into the story, capturing their attention and imagination with his easy writing style.

Sage has won several newspaper awards for his stories and photographs. He has also worked as a trapper, environmentalist, educator and oral history researcher. I ask the House to join me in wishing Sage Birchwater well as he retires to take on new challenges.

Oral Questions

Use of government staff for
B.C. LIBERAL PARTY FUNDRAISING

L. Krog: Documents obtained by the official opposition show that in 2003 the then Finance Minister was using his government office and staff to coordinate an exclusive fundraiser for the B.C. Liberal Party at a Vancouver Canucks game.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. Is using a minister's office for raising funds for the B.C. Liberal Party a standard operating procedure in this government?

Hon. W. Oppal: I assume that the document that the member speaks of is a document obtained as a result of a court order, an order made by Madam Justice Bennett of the Supreme Court of British Columbia. In those circumstances, it would be improper for me to answer the question, as it is improper for that member to ask the question.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

L. Krog: Well, the minister is always one to criticize my law school education. Let me tell the minister. There is nothing at law that prevents this government from answering this important public question here in this House today.

These documents show that on March 5, 2003, well-known Liberal bagman Lyall Knott worked hand in glove with the minister's office to coordinate this fundraiser. The Ministry of Finance is still sitting on a five-page list of donors who watched the game from a luxury box donated by John McCaw, owner of the Vancouver Canucks. They refused to release it, citing privacy considerations.

[1405]

Again, to the minister: is it acceptable for a government employee to organize a partisan political party fundraiser through a ministry office? Is it or is it not a violation of every acceptable practice for ministers' offices and the minister's employees? And shouldn't the government know who the government's hand is out to? Shouldn't the public know who the government is seeking electoral favours from in the course of government business?

Hon. W. Oppal: The member well knows that these matters are matters that came before the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and it is improper for anyone here to make reference to those matters.
[ Page 14096 ]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: The documents that were apparently released were released pursuant to the order of Madam Justice Bennett, and I'm not going to comment on those.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a further supplemental.

L. Krog: Well, for the benefit and information of the Attorney General, the documents are available through FOI, if he cares to look himself. So they're public documents.

It's very clear that the government's employee code of conduct absolutely prohibits this kind of partisan activity. The evidence is clear. The former Minister of Finance was using his office to help raise funds for the Liberal Party.

How widespread is this practice? What steps will the Deputy Premier take to lift the lid off these B.C. Liberal Party activities in this Legislature?

Hon. W. Oppal: It's the same question, and I'll answer it the same way.

J. Horgan: I have in my hand what is a public document released by the government of British Columbia. I have it in my possession. I'm happy to give it to the minister on the other side.

It's from Lyall Knott, fundraiser for the B.C. Liberal Party, to an administrative staff person in the Minister of Finance's office. It says the following: "I am enclosing the names and contact information for the people who either attended the Canucks game on February 23 or sent cheques but were unable to attend. Please note one list is marked contributors and the other list is marked attendees so Minister Collins can tailor his response accordingly."

My question to the minister: is it acceptable behaviour to force public servants to do political work on the public dime?

Hon. W. Oppal: The document submitted may or may not be relevant to the proceedings. The fact is that they are inextricably tied to the Supreme Court proceedings, so I'm not going to make comment.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

Orca Bay donation
to B.C. Liberal Party

J. Horgan: Let's see if we can try and get around this ethical blind spot that the Attorney General has discovered.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: I was ten years old, Minister. Wake up. It's 2009.

I have in my hand….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat for a second.

Let's listen to the question and listen to the answer, please.

Continue, Member.

J. Horgan: I have in my hand a document from Elections B.C., an organization that the minister may be familiar with. It discloses that the B.C. Liberal Party, on the 23rd of February, 2003, received a $3,000 donation in kind from Orca Bay, the parent group for the Vancouver Canucks. That donation was a luxury box so that the member for Vancouver-Fairview at that time could take money out of business pockets to seek gain for the Liberal Party. It's clear. It's transparent.

My question is to the minister. Just after this hockey game, Orca Bay signed an agreement with the B.C. Lottery Corporation that improved the bottom line for that private company. Can the minister confirm that this sort of ethical behaviour is standard practice for the B.C. Liberal Party?

Hon. W. Oppal: We will respect the principle of independence of the judiciary. The fact that the member opposite said….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. W. Oppal: "We'll get around it this way," he said. Well, we're not going to get around ethical conditions and ethical issues this way.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, everybody gets a turn to ask a question and, in turn, hear an answer. So we're going to just wait.

[1410]

COST OF PORT MANN BRIDGE project

M. Karagianis: On Friday the Transportation Minister announced a colossal failure, the collapse of his privatization scheme for the Port Mann bridge. The minister failed to pull off the deal even after offering a $1.1 billion bailout to the project's financier. His obsession with pursuing a private financing scheme means the bridge is greatly delayed and the costs have doubled.
[ Page 14097 ]

Will the minister reveal to the taxpayers of British Columbia how much money he's wasted so far on this dogmatic pursuit of a failed privatization scheme?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, actually the member's wrong — not one day of delay. What I can confirm, in fact, is that under this government we are building a $2.46 billion Port Mann bridge. What I can confirm is that we will be building a ten-lane bridge with dedicated bus lanes. We will be moving forward with a project that will employ 8,000 British Columbians. And we will be doing it in spite of the fact that the NDP have opposed it every step of the way.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just take your seat, Member.

The member has a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: Well, you know, in 2006 this project was budgeted to be $1.5 billion. Today the project is $3.3 billion and counting. So we were supposed to see pilings rising out of the river in 2008. Has that happened? No, it has not. The project….

Interjection.

M. Karagianis: Oh, one piling — one piling. The minister cannot be….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, just take your seat. I can't hear you.

Members, let's listen to the question.

Continue, Member.

M. Karagianis: Well, the minister cannot be serious about that. But listen. The reality is that the project is late, it's massively over budget, and the financing scheme has collapsed. This isn't just a failure, but it's an embarrassment for the minister…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. Karagianis: …and it's also a colossal waste of taxpayers' money. My question to the minister is simply: will he reveal to British Columbians the cost of this embarrassing failure? How much are we paying because he ignored the warnings, blindly pursued a privatization scheme, wasted time on his failed financing deal and pushed the costs through the roof?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, I can see that the NDP's understanding of basic finance hasn't improved since the fast ferries. The fact of the matter is that when the project was announced in 2005 at $1.7 billion, it was made clear that that was in 2005 dollars. There's a concept called time value of money, and I'm happy to walk the members through that.

The fact of the matter is that the project has not doubled in cost, as they're always out there yammering on about. That's simply not true. The project cost is $2.46 billion. There is a larger bridge that is being built as a result of the competitive bid process. It is on schedule, it is going to get built, and, let me tell you, for the people that are stuck 14 hours a day in rush hour traffic, they appreciate the new Port Mann bridge we are building here in British Columbia.

[1415]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: It's going to be a long question period. You might as well take your seat.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

PORT MANN BRIDGE TOLL CONTRACT

B. Ralston: The minister mentioned the competitive bidding process. It's striking that on Friday afternoon the minister also announced that he had awarded a new and untendered contract to Macquarie, the failed bidder, to provide advice on financing and tolling. Yet Macquarie investment bank had failed to produce the financing for the Port Mann crossing. Does the Minister of Finance support this award to a failed bidder?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member could have pulled me aside and asked me that question so I could have actually straightened out his misperception, because we didn't say that we had awarded an untendered contract. We said that Macquarie was available, when we decide to pay them, to provide advice in an area in which they actually have tremendous expertise.

Some Hon. Members: More, more.

Hon. K. Falcon: I'll give you more.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.
[ Page 14098 ]

Hon. K. Falcon: I know, for the members opposite, that it would be rather striking to consider utilizing the services of a company that is world-renowned for their expertise in electronic tolling. I know that for the members of the opposition, that is a challenging fact. But the fact of the matter is that this is a great project with a great builder. I'll remind the members opposite that it's currently involved in building two major products in British Columbia: the Sea to Sky Highway and the Pitt River bridge, both of them ahead of schedule and on budget.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member has a supplemental.

B. Ralston: Well, the minister's position is contradicted by the ministry press release, but that's, I suppose, small potatoes for this minister.

Section 4 of the Transportation Act speaks of the competitive bidding process. That's the way costs to taxpayers are saved. Mr. Justice Brenner of the B.C. Supreme Court said in a case he decided: "When governments, for reasons of patronage or otherwise, apply criteria unknown to the bidders, great injustice follows."

Will the Minister of Finance investigate the secret standards that led the Minister of Transportation to award a consolation prize to the failed bidder Macquarie?

Hon. K. Falcon: Again, the member opposite completely fails to understand what's happened.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: No, I don't think you do, actually, Member. You see, what we have said is that on an as-needed basis, we are able to utilize the services of Macquarie Group. On an as-needed basis, should we need them, we can utilize them to provide some advice and expertise that they have that is unique in the fact that they provide tolling advisory services around the world, and we will have the ability to take advantage of that.

But really, I think the issue here that is important is that I'm still trying to figure out the position of the NDP on this very important project. Now, maybe we have an opportunity, because in 2007 the Leader of the Opposition said: "Not this. Wrong bridge; wrong time." I'd like to know if that's still the position of the opposition.

I'll tell you what our position is. We're moving forward with the Port Mann bridge, 400 people are currently working on it, and we're getting it built.

RELEASE OF INTERIM REPORT
ON FRANK PAUL INQUIRY

M. Farnworth: Can the Attorney General confirm that he has the Frank Paul…? The results of the Frank Paul inquiry have been sitting on his desk for the last 19 days. Can he tell this House when he intends to release it?

Hon. W. Oppal: I do have the Frank Paul interim report. It's 445 pages in length. We have to abide by the law before we release such a report. The Inquiry Act sets forth…. I recommend the Inquiry Act for reading…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1420]

Hon. W. Oppal: …for the members. We usually follow the law on this side of the House.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Attorney. Attorney, just sit down.

Members.

Attorney, continue.

Hon. W. Oppal: The report will be released.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

M. Farnworth: It's been sitting on the minister's desk for 19 days. The minister said it was 445 pages. That's a little over 20 pages a day, I think. I would have thought the Attorney General would have been quite capable of reading 20 pages a day.

Let me ask this question to the Attorney General. Will he commit to this House that it's released before the writ is dropped?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Just wait, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: The members opposite can make fun of this and make light of it, but this is a serious report. It dealt with the death of a man who was in police custody. That report needs to be taken seriously, and we are….

Interjections.

Hon. W. Oppal: It may provoke a lot of laughter over there, but I can tell you the report is not funny. It will be released. We have to go through all the….

Interjections.
[ Page 14099 ]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. W. Oppal: There are other ministries involved. There are privacy considerations to canvass. The law needs to be adhered to. We will release the report, and I can assure the member that it will be released before the writ is dropped.

COMMUNITY LIVING B.C.
PUBLIC RELATIONS CONTRACT

J. McGinn: My question is to the Minister of Housing and Social Development.

People with developmental disabilities need help, not another public relations campaign from this government. On February 6 this government posted a request for spin doctors to help Community Living B.C. with its image. Front-line services, not public relations, should be the priority. Minister, will you cancel this wasteful and unnecessary contract and invest in community support?

Mr. Speaker: Just to remind members to go through the Chair, please.

Hon. R. Coleman: The member opposite might want to look at the budget and find out there's been a huge increase in funding for Community Living B.C. this year to deal with wait-lists and to deal with people on the front line.

I might just read a little quote into the record here that might actually crystallize it for the members opposite. "It's not often that I give kudos to the government, but at this particular time, I think we need to. They've shown true leadership by listening to their community" — you don't like hearing quotes, do you? — "and responding to our needs." That is Rory Summers of the B.C. Association for Community Living.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

J. McGinn: The most effective and efficient way to build public trust is to actually deliver the services that British Columbians expect from their government. People with developmental disabilities should not be left waiting while the government's on another public relations exercise.

I ask the minister again. Will you cancel this unnecessary and wasteful contract and invest instead in front-line services for people with developmental disabilities?

[1425]

Hon. R. Coleman: This year the government is providing $52.4 million more to community living services in British Columbia. The budget increase is going to help us to address the rising demand for CLBC services dealing with the change from IQ 70 and the number of clients that are presently wait-listed with CLBC.

I think it's always best to not have us tell us what's important or what's right. Let me read another quote. "The B.C. Association for Community Living recognizes the current economic climate and is pleased…"

Interjections.

Hon. R. Coleman: You don't like hearing this — do you? You just don't like hearing this.

"…that the government understands the social and economic value of working towards its 'great goal' of building the best system of supports for persons with disabilities and special needs." That's exactly what we're doing.

CHILD CARE SPACES IN WHISTLER

C. Trevena: The Teddy Bear Daycare in Whistler is closing at the end of May, and the operators have told parents in a letter that it's because "the day care space will not be available during the 2010 Olympic period."

Last spring when the issue of child care in Whistler was raised in this House, the minister of state advised parents to go to another centre, which is about 20 kilometres away. I'd like to advise the minister that that centre is closing, and the centre in Whistler is closing, and there is nothing available for parents in Whistler or the surrounding areas.

I'd like to ask if the minister of state can give some advice to working parents in Whistler on what they should do about their child care.

Hon. L. Reid: I thank the member opposite for her question. This government continues to oversee the largest child care budget ever — an enormous sum of money. We continue to work with the individuals in Whistler, and I, in fact, have visited there many times in terms of addressing the recruitment issues, the retention issues, the real estate issues.

We'll continue to work with them, because our challenge is to continue to provide day care services across British Columbia, and they continue to be in regular contact with our offices.

Mr. Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

C. Trevena: To the minister of state. I'm very intrigued that she's carrying on talking to the various communities in Whistler, because since she started talking we've lost 46 spaces in the community, and we don't actually have any space for parents who are looking for child care.

The operators of the Teddy Bear Daycare are a major company. They're Whistler Blackcomb, which is part of
[ Page 14100 ]
the Intrawest group, and that company recognizes that child care is important for the community and for a successful business.

In the letter to parents which was informing them of the closure, it actually says: "We realize that quality child care is essential to the success of the community." Whistler Blackcomb recognizes it. B.C. Chamber of Commerce recognizes it. The board of trade recognizes it. But seriously, I think the minister is paying lip service to it.

I'd like to ask the minister: if the Olympics is supposed to attract people to British Columbia, what message is being given to families? The fact that these child care spaces are closing as we approach the Olympics — is this the minister's legacy for the Olympics, for the working families in Whistler?

Hon. L. Reid: Absolutely, this government understands the importance of building child care space, which is why we've built 6,000 new child care spaces across British Columbia. We have invested $34 million in capital construction, and we continue to provide subsidies to 90,000 licensed child care spaces. That is double what it was when we came to government.

MEAT INSPECTION REGULATIONS

C. Wyse: On Thursday of last week I raised some questions with regard to the meat industry regulations and how they were affecting the industry itself.

[1430]

The Minister of Healthy Living and Sport responded to those questions regarding those inadequacies. The minister missed the point.

When the government introduced the new meat industry regulations, many meat-processing plants were shut down. Production costs for meat producers have increased substantially, while hundreds of meat producers around the province have been forced out of business.

My question to the minister is: how many processing plants were in operation before the regulations were implemented, how many have since closed down, and how many are now in production?

Hon. M. Polak: First of all, I want to remind the member and all members opposite that this is a public health issue. The safety of the food….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. Polak: For those who do not think that the meat inspection regulations are a matter of public health, I might remind them of a small disease known as BSE and the devastating impact that it has had on populations and on the meat industry.

Not only are the meat inspection regulations important to protect public health, Mr. Speaker, but can you imagine the devastating impact on the meat industry in British Columbia from one case of BSE?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, please take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. M. Polak: One case of BSE — that's all it would take to absolutely devastate the meat industry in British Columbia. That's all it would take.

I am absolutely appalled to think that at a time when we're trying to work with meat processors to strengthen the industry, to increase production capacity and processing capacity, those members would want to reject the safety of the public and the well-being of the meat industry in order to just score political points.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

C. Wyse: The issue that is in front of the House is a government that doesn't wish to respond to the suggestions that have been brought forward by the producers as well as the meat-slaughtering industry.

There is no question that there have been increased costs that have been passed on to the producer. There have been increased costs that have been caused by transportation, niche marketing, and the issues go on and on. The government across the way has passed this issue from Agriculture to Health to Healthy Living and Sport.

Where does someone from Cranbrook, where does somebody from the Kootenays, where does someone from around the province approach to get answers? My question: will any minister commit to working with the meat producers and the meat-slaughtering industry to fix these regressive meat inspection regulations?

Hon. M. Polak: The member is once again just dead wrong. This is a file that has been taken with great seriousness by those involved in public health, who are the same people who have been working with developing this since 2004 when it was implemented.

We're proud to work with the Cattlemen's Association and the B.C. Food Processors Association. I'd be interested to know: if the member is so concerned about the costs that have been present in the transition for the meat industry, where were the members opposite when it was time to vote on meat transition assistance program funding — $9 million?

Guess what, Mr. Speaker. They voted against it — $9 million to help transition this industry. We will continue
[ Page 14101 ]
to work with this industry so that we have safe meat products and a vibrant meat-processing industry in British Columbia.

[End of question period.]

L. Krog: Hon. Speaker, I seek leave to table two petitions.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

[1435]

Petitions

L. Krog: I have two petitions. They both relate to the same dangerous stretch of the Island Highway just south of Nanaimo. The first consists of 118 signatures calling on the government to improve the intersection of Spruston and the Island Highway. And the second, collected by Ken Dixon, a community-minded citizen, consists of over 1,300 signatures calling on the government to install cement dividers and proper lighting, and to remove the southwest bluffs and install photo radar cameras in order to protect the people who travel on the Island Highway.

Point of Privilege
(Reservation of Right)

R. Hawes: I rise to reserve my right to raise a matter of privilege.

B. Simpson: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

B. Simpson: I have a petition signed by 1,527 residents of Williams Lake, 100 Mile House and the surrounding area who are experiencing unsafe driving conditions due to lack of proper road maintenance as a result of deteriorating roads.

D. Routley: I seek to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

D. Routley: This petition is signed by many of my constituents. They're concerned about the length of time British Columbians must wait for weight-loss surgery, otherwise known as bariatric surgery, and the lack of choice that is available to them.

M. Farnworth: I ask leave to make an introduction.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

M. Farnworth: Mindful of your comments earlier, I'd like to let the House know that a teacher from Archbishop Carney Secondary School is up in the gallery watching question period. So would the House please make Mr. Chris Seppelt most welcome.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: I call Committee of Supply — for the information of members, continued discussion on the supplementary estimates, beginning with Tourism and, I think, moving eventually to Transportation.

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES:
MINISTRY OF TOURISM,
CULTURE AND THE ARTS

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply; K. Whittred in the chair.

The committee met at 2:40 p.m.

On Vote 42(S): ministry operations, $15,100,000 (continued).

S. Herbert: We got some good discussion going on last day. I appreciate the minister sharing what he did.

I've got a little summary of a report, Building from Strength — Report and Recommendations from Arts and Culture: Building B.C.'s Creative Agenda. It's a summit that happened in 2006 with the former Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts, the member for Richmond Centre. It's got something in here which I thought I'd read out, because I think it's important to get on the record and to make very clear why I'm so interested in this file and why the NDP is so interested in this file and what the government is currently planning on doing.

The executive summary states, basically:

"A consistent thread throughout the day was the need to build on current strengths to affirm and develop the importance of the cultural sector to the province's economic prosperity and social health. The strength of the role played by the cultural sector in the province's economy was particularly stressed at that summit.

"As the minister pointed out" — the minister at that time — "the most recent Statistics Canada data indicated that British Columbia was the third-largest producer of culture output in Canada, accounting for $5 billion, 4 percent of provincial gross domestic product."

It goes on to quote from the minister, where she states:

"But the cultural sector represents and contributes more than just money and jobs to our economy…. It's the very stuff that defines us as a society."
[ Page 14102 ]

Then it says:

"The meeting was unanimous in its belief that more resources, both public and private, are necessary to allow the province's cultural sector to flourish."

Just to highlight, it says that more resources are necessary.

It also says:

"What was needed is a comprehensive, multi-year investment plan" — and underline multi-year investment plan — "that takes into account the relationship of arts and cultural activity to recreation, community development, education and the diverse cultures of the province."

The delegates at that forum and in this report strongly supported sustained core operational funding, which would be required to ensure long-term growth and development of the sector. I know the minister certainly has made mention of that in the past as well.

A question we finished off with the other day that I wanted to follow up on was the discussion of how many jobs this supplementary estimate of $7 million for arts and culture would be infusing into the community, as it has year after year because of the sustained funding.

Hon. B. Bennett: I find myself in pretty much complete agreement with the member in terms of the backgrounder that prefaces his question, specifically in terms of the importance of arts and culture to our individual communities and to us as a people.

I'm certainly proud of everything that we have done on this side of the House to support arts and culture. I won't go into the litany just from this current fiscal year, but it's quite substantive.

Just one example is the BC150 fund that was created — $150 million. It was created specifically to be ongoing and to help with sustainable funding for arts and culture.

In terms of the specific question, we do have our staff working on the logistics of calculating how many jobs will come out of the $15.1 million. When we have that, I'll include it in a letter and give it to the member.

S. Herbert: Well, I did just a little back-of-a-napkin numbers, based on the average income of an artist in Canada, which is about $23,000. It works out to be quite a good-sized number of jobs in our province. I'll be looking forward to seeing those figures.

[1445]

I guess the reason I think it's so important that we get the numbers of jobs — the thousands of jobs that the arts and culture sector creates in the province…. I've got a couple of figures, ranging from 80,000 to 118,000 that the cultural sector has in this province. I am concerned, of course, with the cuts coming up that the minister has outlined in his service plan to the B.C. Arts Council budget — the approximately 50 percent cuts in support.

I think it's important we get these numbers on the table here so we can see what kind of devastation will be coming to communities that rely on arts and culture support for jobs and for community livability, because certainly slashing the budget by about 50 percent in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 will have that effect.

I would ask the minister if it will also be possible to share with me what other kind of money is leveraged into the arts and culture sector by the investment of this government. Maybe there's a quick answer there, or maybe you'll need a few days to get that back to me.

Hon. B. Bennett: Starting with the $7 million that's going to the B.C. Arts Council. That is the first thing that comes to mind, if the member is interested in a list. I don't have an exhaustive list in front of me, but I can certainly provide the member some examples. I'd be glad to do that.

In addition to that $7 million that we're discussing here today, there is $650,000 that's going to support the Juno Awards in Vancouver. That's provincial. There's another $600,000 that's going to support B.C. artists participating in B.C. Scene in Ottawa this spring. There's $300,000 that's going to the Canadian Country Music Awards in Vancouver in September. There is $575,000 going towards the Cultural Olympiad. That, of course, is the cultural component of the 2010 games.

There is between $18 million and $20 million — we calculate that for 2007-08, it was exactly $19.8 million — that goes to arts and culture in this province from the community gaming grants program. That's B.C. Lotteries.

There was also the arts legacy fund that we created, the $20 million endowment in addition to the BC150 $150 million endowment. There's been $15 million go into arts and culture through 2010 Legacies Now. Frankly, I could stand here and list lots of examples of provincial money going into arts and culture.

Of course, before I sit down, I should mention $50 million going into the Vancouver Art Gallery. So there have been lots and lots of examples of this government supporting arts and culture in this province.

S. Herbert: I agree that there have been many examples of the provincial government supporting arts and culture in this province for many years. That's why I'm so concerned that the budget for the arts and culture department is planned on being slashed by 50 percent. All of these things the minister likes to talk about will be thoroughly threatened by his service plan which he proposes.

I guess he missed the question and gave me a list. It's nice to know the list, because I think it speaks to the vitality that the arts and culture industry brings to the sector.

But what I'm asking is…. This $7 million leverages other funding. That's funding from the Canada Council for the Arts. That's funding from municipalities. That's funding from the private sector. I'm wondering if there's any estimation on the leverage. The reason I think it's important is that when the province cuts 50 percent support to the arts and culture sector, as they're planning on
[ Page 14103 ]
doing, you're also losing money for the province from the Canada Council for the Arts.

We look to Quebec. There's incredible leverage of funding. The province kicks in this much, and the federal government comes and kicks in this much. But here in this province it looks like we're going backwards. By not kicking in the same amount with the 50 percent cut in funding that this minister proposes in 2010-2011, 2011-2012, we're basically suggesting to other groups that the B.C. government doesn't support the arts in that way, so why should they.

[1450]

I was hoping I could get a figure from the minister about what kind of other investment the B.C. government's investment brings into the province — so from the Canada Council for the Arts, from private sector, from foundations, from local governments — because that's all important in our understanding of how to support the arts and culture sector.

Hon. B. Bennett: The member included a number of questions, really, in his statement. With regard to federal funding, it's certainly my opinion that British Columbia generally receives as much largesse from the federal government as any other province in the country. In fact, I think we probably have one of the most, if not the most, constructive relationships with the federal government of any province or territory in the country.

Unlike the way it used to be, when the province of British Columbia was always bickering with the federal government and calling the federal government names in Vancouver and Victoria newspapers, we have developed, on the other hand, a very good and very constructive and productive relationship with the federal government.

So I do think that we get our share there in terms of infrastructure dollars. Some of those infrastructure dollars, of course, in this upcoming round of infrastructure funding, are going to be related to arts and culture and heritage, based on what the federal government has said about their budget. We will ensure that we get our share.

In fact, I've had meetings just recently, within the last two weeks, with a number of arts and culture groups in this province where I have volunteered my staff to assist them to ensure that they're able to provide the right kind of application for federal-provincial infrastructure funding, arts-and-culture type of infrastructure funding. So I think we're on solid ground there.

In terms of the $7 million that the member referred to — and, of course, that's the amount that we're actually discussing here in the supplementary budget — some of that money is leveraged after it comes out of the B.C. Arts Council. It's up to the individual applicant organization or individual as to whether the funds are leveraged or not. So some is, and some is not. There may not be the opportunity to leverage it, but for whatever reason, some is and some isn't.

The B.C. renaissance fund was all leveraged money, as the member is probably aware. So that's, I think, a very good example of how you can leverage. Put money into the arts and culture communities across the province and require leveraging on that money. That's what we did in that case.

The examples that I read out just a few minutes ago…. For example, the $50 million going into the art gallery — that's leveraged money. The art gallery will clearly cost a lot more than $50 million, but we've put $50 million in to get things started. There will be private money coming in there, and there may be other public money. I think that's true of the arts and culture community generally. They find resources wherever they can, and I have a lot of respect for how well they do that.

I agree with the member that we have to hold our end up, and that's why we're here discussing this supplementary budget. That's why we have made sure that in this next fiscal year the B.C. Arts Council will, in fact, have the same amount of money that it had last year — even a little bump-up of about $800,000.

So I think all of the opportunities that existed for arts and culture groups and individuals in this past fiscal year will exist in the next fiscal year. In the meantime, over the next 13 months, I hope a couple of things will happen. I hope that the economy improves and that the interest rates will be somewhat higher for the BC150 fund. I mean, a bump of a couple of interest percentages or points would bump the number up from, say, $3 million to $5 million or $6 million.

Of course, if the economy improves, as it will, I am hopeful — even cautiously optimistic — that in out-years we'll be able to put something back into the budget, just as we're doing this year.

[1455]

Can I promise that right now, given the circumstances that the province finds itself in? No, I can't. What I can promise stakeholders in the arts and culture community is that I will do everything I possibly can to make sure that those out-years, the 2010-11 and the 2011-12, will be at least as good as this year. And this year, as I have said, is just as good as last year. So that's my commitment.

S. Herbert: Well, I think that's a longer answer for what I think is a short question, which is: how much money is leveraged?

As an artist, when I worked in the arts, I can tell you that quite often there would be foundations, there would be the Canada Council, and they'd want to know that you had provincial support before they committed to give you federal support. So with the proposed 50 percent cut to arts and culture funding by this minister, we're looking at a lot less money coming in from across Canada, and that's going to hurt our economy.

We are going to see a loss of jobs with this proposal. But we're also going to see a net effect, a wider effect, of
[ Page 14104 ]
a loss of jobs, because we see that the leveraged funding increases the opportunity for more jobs because of the federal funding. I'll just put that on the record. Hopefully, the minister can come back and take a look at the leveraging effect and get that in the letter to me. I understand it doesn't seem like he has the figures today, but it would be very helpful to have an estimate for the future.

I found it interesting what the minister spoke about, about the out-years of 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 when he plans on cutting the budget by 50 percent. He says he's going to do his best to put something back, just as we did this year.

Now, I would remind the minister that the legislation his Finance Minister brought in actually precludes any possibility of there being supplementary funding like this. It would actually be against the law, and it would have to go into paying down the debt.

This supplementary funding is a last time. This is really one time only because of the legislation that his Minister of Finance has brought in. So for him to suggest that is a bit rich and, I think, a little bit…. Hopefully, it's not disingenuous. Maybe he's got another pot of money somewhere else that he thinks he can dip into. But if so, I would have hoped to see it in the service plan.

I remember, going back to last time when we were discussing this topic, that the minister struck out at my suggestion that President Obama had been supporting the arts and investing in the arts. He said nobody's projecting three years out. Obama's not projecting three years out in terms of support. So I find it a little interesting that in his Minister of Finance's documents, he does project three years out.

I seem to remember something about rural homeowners and how that would come into place in 2011. Well, that sounds to me like his Finance Minister was projecting three years out. So it's a little bit odd for me to see this service plan, which shows 50 percent cuts coming in 2010-2011, 2011-2012 — and of course, the core cut, which is this next year, 2009-10. That is only being topped up by the supplementary funding right before an election and before they outlaw this practice of supplementary funding.

It's a bit questionable, and I'd be interested in the minister's response to that. But so far whenever I ask a question, I don't get a straight answer. What I get is a discussion of what the member has done in the past and what has happened in the past. I'm interested in what's coming up for the future, because arts organizations right now are putting together their budgets, they're putting together their fundraising plans, and they're putting together their programs for the seasons in the future.

I've spoken to a number of large and small arts organizations, who basically are telling me: "Is the government asking me" — asking them — "to program with less programming?" Are they asking them to plan for less staff?

I guess my question is, first off, because I haven't heard the minister confirm it…. I would like to ask the minister: could he confirm for me that his service plan for his ministry shows that he plans on cutting the budget for arts and culture by 50 percent in 2010-2011 and 2011-12?

[1500]

Hon. B. Bennett: I truly hope that the member is not going around Vancouver telling people that there is no possible way for the government to increase budgets for arts and culture and heritage — or anything else, for that matter, but in particular for arts and culture — in the out-years of a three-year budget cycle, which is what I think I just heard him say. I think I just heard him say that you can't do that.

For the benefit of stakeholders…. I've kind of given up on trying to explain this to the member, but if there are any stakeholders listening, it's important for them to know that even though you have a three-year budget cycle, you do have individual annual cycles within that. Each year, whether you do supplementary budgets or not — the member is correct; there won't be any supplementary budgets in the future — you still have that opportunity in the annual budget cycle to change what you have forecast two years prior.

We will have an opportunity over the next 13 months to take a close read of what's happening in the economy and to increase the arts and culture budget, if we're able to do that, for 2010-11. Then we would probably take the same approach for 2011-12, depending on how the economy is going.

Just to summarize, government is not prevented from increasing an annual ministry budget on an annual basis. That has nothing to do with supplementary budgets.

With regard to the member's question about those two out-years, I think the member has stated himself — and I have stated myself on a number of occasions, on this past Thursday and then so far here this afternoon — that 2010-11 and 2011-12 do contain the core reductions that that member has referred to. The actual amount is $7 million less to the B.C. Arts Council in '10-11 and '11-12. Those are the two years that I'm committed to trying to find resources for as we go forward.

S. Herbert: I don't know if the minister was listening to somebody else, but I've never said that the government cannot increase the budget for arts and culture. In fact, I've been saying over and over that the government needs to give its head a shake, wake up and realize that this is a good investment.

The B.C. Arts Council's own study, as put out by the minister, shows that for every dollar the government has invested, they get $1.36 back in return. The Conference Board of Canada shows that it's much higher, more like $1.86. It's an investment, as the minister seems to agree but at the same time seems to argue. "Well, it's too bad.
[ Page 14105 ]
It's tough times. We should cut the budget by up to 50 percent." Oh, but he'll try and get the money back.

Well, the government could have kept the funding there. That's a real possibility — could have kept core funding there. That's a real possibility. It's something the minister could have fought harder for. He could have said: "We're going to go back to the table and put this money back." He can still do that. The budget hasn't passed yet.

If he's really committed to finding that money, I'm wondering if he's going to go and ask his Finance Minister to put that money back.

Hon. B. Bennett: The member, I'm sure, is aware that a goodly portion of the $7 million that we're discussing today is the result of lower interest rates earned by the BC150 fund and the other legacy fund. If interest rates were where I think most people, not just in British Columbia but in the rest of the world…. If they were where the experts thought they were going to be, we wouldn't be talking about $7 million. We might be talking about $3 million. That's a good part of what we're talking about.

The discussion went way wider and broader than we intended it to, I guess, on Thursday, and it appears like it's going to go way broader than it should be going today.

[1505]

I've answered any question that the member has put forward with regard to the supplementary budget of $15.1 million. I'm happy to answer any specific questions that the member has about that $15.1 million. Otherwise, I just don't see that we're making any progress here.

S. Herbert: I've got to say I'm disappointed in the minister's response. This is the minister who is supposed to be standing up for Tourism, Culture and the Arts, but who's brought in a service plan which shows 50 percent cuts coming in 2010, 2011 and 2012. That's not growing our future. That's smashing it to the ground, and I'm ashamed of what's going on in this House.

The minister could say that he's going to go to the Finance Minister to debate, could say that he's going to do that for the arts and culture industry, but there's no response. The minister wants a specific question; I will give him a specific question.

The Chair: Member. Member.

Point of Order

Hon. T. Christensen: Point of order, Madam Chair. I understand that the supplementary estimates are before the House. A budget was introduced a couple of weeks ago. I understand that if we're able to get through the supplementary estimates and vote on those, there will be some future opportunity to debate the budget. Perhaps the Chair could direct the member to keep his comments to the supplementary estimates so that we can get those completed.

C. Evans: Hon. Chair, I just wanted to congratulate you on this debate, which I hear as precisely on the subject of supplementary estimates and how they will develop and grow and as allowing people on the outside to see exactly what the supplementary estimates are about. I heard the questions about: would there be future…? So I think you're running a great debate, and you don't really have to worry how these two gentlemen are running it.

The Chair: Thank you, Members. The Chair has allowed, I think, considerable latitude during the entire supplemental estimate debate.

However, I do take the comments of the Minister of Children and Family Development. I believe that the recent comments are, in fact, straying away from the debate on the supplemental estimates.

So Member, if you would keep your remarks relevant to the supplementary estimates. Continue, Member.

Debate Continued

S. Herbert: Arts groups are asked repeatedly to think ahead and plan for the future. Is the minister advising them — based on his service plan and this one-time-only supplementary funding before the massive cuts come in 2010, 2011 and 2012 — that they should be planning on cutting staff and programming that they provide to this community?

Hon. B. Bennett: No, actually, it's not me that's going around the province spreading doom and gloom within the arts and culture budget with the obvious intention of earning political points. It's not me that's doing that. It's that member over there that's travelling around the province here for the last two weeks spreading fear and gloom and doom amongst the arts and culture community, and he's doing it purposely, strictly to gain political points in his own riding, where he has a lot of voters who are in the arts and culture community. He's trying to do it for his political masters, the NDP party.

Member, if you want to hear the truth, that's the truth. Now, you've mentioned tourism. I've heard your radio clips, and you mentioned tourism again. You haven't asked one….

The Chair: Minister. Minister, through the Chair.

Hon. B. Bennett: Hon. Chair, the member has mentioned tourism a number of times both through the media and here. Not one question on tourism. Does the NDP care about tourism? No. They don't care about tourism.
[ Page 14106 ]

We've more than doubled the budget for tourism. What did the member's leader say in 2005 when we said that we want to give them more hotel room tax? The member's leader said: "No, we don't want to give Tourism B.C. more hotel room tax." So the member shouldn't lecture me about funding tourism or about funding arts and culture, because this government's record stands up against the record of the NDP government from the 1990s very, very well.

S. Herbert: I think it's interesting that the minister would suggest that it's me running around the province spreading doom and gloom. Last time I checked, it's his ministry's service plan which is spreading the doom and gloom, because this minister has watched over while the arts and culture budget has been gutted by this government. It's not me spreading the doom and gloom. It's this document signed by the minister that's spreading the doom and gloom. Anybody can look it up themselves.

[1510]

The journalists phone. They want to know about it because this minister claims that everything is fine. Last time I checked, the numbers in here are not fine, acceptable or going to do anything except devastate our arts and culture industry.

So for the minister, I remember. I looked through the Hansard last time. He said: "Stop sending e-mails. Don't tell people about this." I'm telling people about it because it's wrong, and it shouldn't happen in this House.

I ask again to the minister: how many jobs…? Arts groups are just like business groups. They plan more than one year in advance, and because the minister's only got supplementary, one-time-only funding before massive cuts come in his own plan, I'm asking him what they should do to plan for the future. Should they be planning on a budget increase? I don't think so, based on his numbers. What should they be planning for? Budget cuts? Should that be what they're planning for, Mr. Minister?

Hon. B. Bennett: The member continues to insist that he hasn't said what he has said within the arts and culture community. I read into the record last week — I won't bother doing that again; I think I read it in twice — what he said about the $15.1 million, which is the supplementary budget, which is the topic of our discussion here in the House this afternoon. The member has said that the facts don't bear out that this $15.1 million is going to help the arts and culture community. That's just wrong, and he shouldn't be saying it.

I can say, for the member's benefit, that in 2007-08 this government…. In addition to the funding that went through the B.C. Arts Council, in addition to $50 million into the art gallery and in addition to the BC150 legacy fund of $150 million, we put $19.8 million — this is just in 2007-08 — into the arts and culture community through B.C. Lotteries. That will continue into the future.

We also, just a few days ago, announced another $6.2 million that went into the arts and culture community through the B.C. Arts Council, and 90 different communities received that money. We put $350,000 into grants to 20 different arts organizations in November, just a few months ago. That was made possible by the province's $150 million BC150 cultural fund.

In September we put $100,000 into the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra. That included their Asia tour. It was actually $250,000 in total, I think. In September of this past fall $600,000 went to 600 B.C. artists who are participating in B.C. Scene. Also in September 270 artists and organizations received $7.1 million in that round of B.C. Arts Council grants.

For the member to suggest that we are abandoning arts and culture in this province, given the investment that we have made, given what we are doing with this supplementary budget and given my commitment and the government's commitment to try and improve the budgets, going forward, for those out-years….

They are 13 months away. The axe doesn't fall, Member. The axe doesn't fall tomorrow. We've got 13 months to try and improve the situation. I've made a commitment to try to do that, and I will follow through on that commitment.

S. Herbert: Well, where I come from, the ultimate commitment is doing what you say you're going to be doing, and this is the service plan that shows what the minister is going to be doing. The budget of this government shows what they are going to be doing. So I think it's a bit rich for him to say: "That is our commitment. I will pledge for 13 months that I will look around and try and find the money."

If he could do that, it would be in here. I hope that there's something that we can do, because on my side, I'm saying: "Restore the funding." I'm saying: "Talk to your Finance Minister right now, and restore the funding." You don't need to wait 13 months to do it. You could go talk to him right now. You could tell him you're going to resign if the funding is not returned because you care that much about the sector.

[1515]

The Chair: Member, we've already, I think, spoken of the appropriateness of that line of questioning. So if you would move on, please.

S. Herbert: I'm wondering if the minister could explain to me what good things happen in communities across B.C. because of this $7 million. I don't need the list. We've heard I don't know how many times now about what they did in the past.
[ Page 14107 ]

Can you tell me what this $7 million will do for your community?

Hon. B. Bennett: I'm going to make a point that I have made already. I'm going to make it again, not so much for the benefit of the member, who I suspect already knows this, but for the benefit of anyone in the arts and culture community.

When you project out three years with a budget, you have the year that is right in front of you, and obviously, you have to get that right. If you have the capacity for a supplementary budget like we do this year, you can make some change just before you go into that fiscal year. However, with the two out-years, you have opportunity through the annual budget cycle to change those budgets.

For the member to suggest that they are frozen in stone and that they are not going to change is wrong. It's worse than wrong; it's actually disingenuous. It's a deliberate attempt, I think, in my opinion, to frighten people.

The member has used the word "rich" to describe my commitment, and that's fair enough. This is the venue where we say these kinds of things. I do want to remind the member of what he said. This is what he said. This is a quote from his newsletter, February 20. "The Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts has suggested that the provincial government is providing an additional $15.1 million for arts, culture and heritage. This statement is not backed up by the facts."

That's what the member said. I'm not making this stuff up. This is what the member said. The member is deliberately going around this province trying to frighten people, and I just don't see how that can be constructive.

The member asked me, you know, how the $7 million was going to help in communities, but he doesn't want me to give any examples. That's an interesting way to put the question. I can stand here all afternoon and read out how the last $6.8 million that was awarded a few days ago — I think it was Wednesday or Thursday of last week — will be distributed. I know that….

I think the member just inquired as to how the money is going to be spent in my riding. I believe that was his question. Some of the money…. I know there was a grant that went to the Canadian Museum of Rail Travel, which is one of the top railway museums in North America. The curator, Garry Anderson, is a person of heroic proportions. He deserves enormous credit for what he's been able to create in the city of Cranbrook.

There is also money going to the Fernie Arts Council. I'm doing this from memory. There is a second grant going to Cranbrook to the Symphony of the Kootenays. There are grants, frankly, going to a lot of the small towns — many, many small towns — and big towns all across the province. That $7 million that the B.C. Arts Council will distribute will also go across the province.

How they will spend it…. As I stated very clearly last week on a number of different answers that I gave, that money is spent by the B.C. Arts Council the way that they think is best for the arts and culture community in this province. They adjudicate all of the applications, and they pay out on the basis of a rational, fair adjudication. We don't tell them how to spend the $7 million.

S. Herbert: It's just interesting that the minister is trying to pick a fight with me when I'm trying to talk about the future that's coming for arts and culture in this province under his leadership. It's his own service plan now.

Have I ever said: "It's never possible to increase the budget"? No. In fact, in the question and the statement right before, I told him that. I told him he should do it now, and he should commit to doing that. He should talk to his Finance Minister, but he won't do that for some reason that I can't understand.

[1520]

The Finance Minister won't invest in the arts and culture industry. I can't understand that either, especially when every study that I've read and the studies that the minister has referenced in the past support that view — that it's an investment for the future. It's an investment in jobs. It's an economic stimulus.

Earlier he said: "Why don't you ask me about tourism?" Because this is actually about arts and culture, Minister. This is about heritage, Minister. That's what this supplementary debate is about. If you want to talk about tourism, we can have a town hall or something like that, but that's not what this is about today. I'm talking about arts and culture.

He suggested that it was wrong for me to suggest that this was not additional funding for arts and culture. Well, if the minister looked at his own budget, he would understand that the core funding for B.C. Arts Council has been slashed in this upcoming fiscal year, and they're replacing that funding. That's not additional funding, in my book, when you replace something you took away.

The minister has rightly pointed out that there's a small bump-up. So I'll give him that. There's been a small bump-up this one time only, before the axe drops next time around because of what the minister suggests is the right way to go forward in his service plan.

Now, under here in his service plan, it talks all about the great things we're going to do for arts, culture and tourism. It talks about how we're going to be building so that companies are sustainable. I don't get how one-time-only supplementary funding before the axe drops under his service plan is going to help him do that. It doesn't make any sense to me or anyone in the arts and culture industry.

I appreciate the minister speaking about his constituency and what difference the arts and culture make in his constituency. I think it's about $83,000 which goes
[ Page 14108 ]
directly to some of those local groups, and I'm glad about it. Why I mention it is because I want the minister to recognize that under his plan, that funding will be severely restricted — about 50 percent under 2010, 2011, 2012 — because of the cuts that he's bringing into this ministry, unless something else happens, which he could be doing right now. He could be changing that forecast right now, but he chose to sign off on this document. That's his commitment for the future.

I'd like to ask the minister how this one-time funding and then massive cuts in 2010, 2011 and 2012, as outlined in his service plan, make arts and culture organizations sustainable over the long term?

Hon. B. Bennett: Clearly, to use the member's own words…. He said: "I don't get it." I don't think he does get it. I don't think that he gets what it's like to be responsible for the taxpayers' money, to go into a fiscal year projecting a huge surplus and to find, a few months before the end of the year, that not only are you not going to have your huge surplus, but you're going to be challenged to even balance the budget.

The decline in revenue to the province has no precedent. There is no precedent for what we've just gone through and are still going through in North America with the economy. When in late fall we realized what was happening — it was like a train speeding up going down a hill; it just seemed to get worse every day that went by — all of the ministers in this government took it upon themselves to see what they could do to help out, to make sure that we did balance this year's budget but also to make sure that we were able to fund the core services that we provide in this province.

We've increased the health care budget in this province every single year that I've been here as an MLA — eight years in a row. You know, I always hear mumbling when I or any other member on this side of the House mentions that we've increased the health care budget. Frankly, you've got members of the opposition, including the leader, running around the province right now. She was in Kelowna today or yesterday saying that we're cutting health care. I mean, it just seems like they believe that if you repeat a fabrication often enough, people will believe it.

[1525]

We went through an exercise that's very difficult, I can tell you. It's like the experience that you go through, husband and wife and family, when all of a sudden, one of the husband or wife loses their job. You have to basically sit down at the kitchen table and decide what you are going to be able to continue to do until you find that second job again.

We went through that exercise this fall and also in January, and we found $1.9 billion within our ministries. In my case we found some savings in tourism administration and in travel — my minister's office, for example, and senior staff travel — and in some statutory type of advertising. We didn't reduce anything having to do with marketing tourism in the province, but we found some money in those other categories, and it wasn't enough.

It wasn't enough to allow government to support the essential services that the taxpayers of British Columbia expect from their provincial government such as health care and education, both K-to-12 and advanced education. This is certainly no time to be reducing our investment in training, going into a difficult economic time like this. This difficult economic time will be a time when workers will want to go back and finish up their apprenticeship or go further with their training. Care and services for children, care and services for disabled adults — all of those things are extremely important to the people of British Columbia.

That is not to minimize the importance of the environmental aspects of our life in B.C., or the arts and culture aspects of our life here in British Columbia or any other aspect of our life here in British Columbia that the provincial government is involved in. It's not to minimize the importance of those things at all. It's just that when you're elected to govern, you're elected to make difficult choices. So we have made some difficult choices.

Now, we were fortunate in the arts and culture community that even though we had to make that difficult choice, we were able to find $15.1 million that we could use to provide a sustaining three-year budget for heritage — something they haven't had for a long, long time — and the $7 million that we're giving to the B.C. Arts Council to keep them whole throughout 2009-2010.

Given the economic climate that we're in — to be able to go through that exercise that I just described and collaborate with my colleagues in cabinet and in caucus and make those difficult decisions — I think, frankly, that this is a much more positive scenario than what it could have been.

Going forward — again, to repeat myself, for the benefit of any arts and culture stakeholders that are out there…. Certainly, they have my 100 percent commitment that I will see what I can do about that $7 million going forward in 2010-11 and 2011-12.

S. Herbert: Well, I appreciate the statement from the hon. minister, but it really leads me to believe, from what he's said, that he doesn't see supporting the arts as a core investment. He doesn't see investing in arts and culture as wise economically, even though he says it is. Based on his actions, he's shown that he does not appreciate that, especially now in a time of economic trouble.

The arts and culture industry is one of the best investments you can make at this time for building the economy, for a creative economy, for the future of this province.

Basically, the minister refused to answer my question about how one-time-only funding, before massive cuts, makes arts and culture organizations sustainable over
[ Page 14109 ]
the long term. Even though that's his stated goal in this document, they don't jibe, because I guess he understands that it can't. There's no way that what he plans to do to the arts and culture industry is going to make it sustainable over the long term. Otherwise, he would commit right now to fighting to put it right back, right now. But he won't do that. It will be sometime in the future: "Maybe we'll try."

I think we've got to look at his own government's facts and the Conference Board of Canada's facts. Investing in arts and culture is one of the best things you can do in a recession, if not the best, because of the economic spinoffs for local economies.

He spoke earlier about the wonderful benefits that arts and culture play for local communities. Right on. Right on. That's what we need to hear, but it needs to be backed up by facts. It needs to be backed up by numbers, and by that I mean dollars — not cuts, not the axe knocking at the door.

I guess the minister is suggesting that arts and culture organizations need to be preparing for layoffs in the future. They need to be preparing for fewer programs. I'm already hearing from arts and culture organizations, who are telling me that they are planning for that.

[1530]

If the minister was going to actually come through for them, he would have come through. But he's justified it by saying that he's protecting the core. Well, that's old-style economic thinking. That's not understanding the benefit the creative economy is playing right now in this province — one of the number one job creators; one of the real leaders in leveraging funding from across the country; and one of the leaders in making sure that people have work and that communities are healthy, communities have enjoyment, communities get to know themselves.

That's what the arts are about to me. I wish it were the same for this government, but it's not.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

This has been an absolute failure of this government — failure to act for the future and putting us back, oh, probably about 20 years. I heard a local arts organization put out a song recently, "Total Eclipse of the Arts," which talked about how we're putting us back into the 1980s in terms of supporting arts and culture. That's what it does here.

I'm disappointed that the minister wouldn't answer that question. I'm disappointed that he wouldn't come forward and say that he commits that he will resign if he cannot get that funding increased, because really, as Arts and Culture Minister, he says he's committed, but maybe not to threaten his own seat. That's disappointing to me.

I've got a whole bunch more questions, but I haven't gotten, really, any answers from him, except for: "Oh, it's just fine. Everybody should be happy. But the cuts to arts and culture are necessary."

It's an investment, Minister. It's an investment for the future.

I finish off debate at this point.

Hon. B. Bennett: Well, a couple things. Unlike the member, I don't question his sincerity with regard to the importance of arts and culture and his personal commitment to arts and culture. I believe that the member really does care about arts and culture. It's disappointing to me that he seems to have to characterize his position as personal against me and to question my commitment to arts and culture.

I am committed to doing everything I possibly can over the next two years and a bit to make sure that we have the level of funding for arts and culture that we've had in this province over the last few years. The member doesn't know me well, but my commitment is a good commitment.

I would remind the member on the way out the door from these estimates that he, in fact, did vote for a balanced budget. So for him to come into this House and say, "We should just spend. We should just get the money, borrow it, get it someplace" — off the money tree, perhaps — "spend it and go into deficit this year" is an irresponsible suggestion, because he, in fact, as with his colleagues, did vote for a balanced budget.

As I alluded to a few minutes ago, it's a difficult process. Members on the other side who have been in government will be able to understand what it's like to go through that process and have to make difficult decisions.

Having said that, let me just close by saying that it is an honour to represent or be the minister for the arts and culture community. I love music, I love art, I love dance, and I love theatre — probably just as much as my critic does. So perhaps after today we can work together instead of being at odds in this political theatre. We can work together and see what we can do to accomplish the goal that I know that he and I share.

Vote 42(S): ministry operations, $15,100,000 — approved.

The Chair: Members will stand recessed for five minutes.

The committee recessed from 3:35 p.m. to 3:42 p.m.

[S. Hammell in the chair.]

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES:
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION
AND INFRASTRUCTURE

On Vote 43(S): ministry operations, $20,000,000.

M. Karagianis: In looking at this $20 million supplemental that's being asked for here, it says very specifically:
[ Page 14110 ]
"…to invest in significant road maintenance and rehabilitation projects." Clearly, this is a pre-election fund to go and throw money around and perhaps try and win some favour back in rural B.C.

I would like to ask: what are the priorities for maintenance in this fund?

Hon. K. Falcon: Just to correct the member's characterization, this actually follows up from the Premier's October statement, where he announced a series of economic measures in his ten-point plan to help rejuvenate the economy and inject some confidence into the economy of British Columbia.

We committed at that time up to $20 million for local transportation projects — projects that would utilize local hires, local equipment, often referred to as day labour — particularly and primarily across the rural parts of the province. Those are the areas that are being impacted, we think, most definitely as a result of the economic downturn.

The investments will go primarily to the kinds of things that are jobs that are important work to get done but work that also can be moved ahead with quickly. That would be things like brushing, pavement patching. It would include gravelling on the side road network, improvements to bridges. It would also include crushing material that will be used in the future to address our infrastructure needs.

The idea is that we want to essentially get people working over the next few months immediately. It also acts as a bridge as we work to negotiate with the federal government for additional infrastructure investments that we can make throughout the province that will provide even more projects above and beyond those which are already underway through our ministry.

[1545]

M. Karagianis: So the priority is, then, for maintenance. Is this all being done through existing maintenance contracts?

Hon. K. Falcon: It is being done through our local district offices and the maintenance contractors. This is all additional work that can be utilized for the benefit of the public at large.

M. Karagianis: How would this work be outside of the normal maintenance expectations of any of the contractors right now? You made mention of things like patching. Are these not part of the normal budgetary process — the normal workload and work expectation of these contractors? What is extraordinary about this that we're looking for extra money?

Hon. K. Falcon: The criteria that we put in place were that it would involve new work and new jobs, that it would involve local equipment and local hires, to make sure that folks who wouldn't normally have the opportunity are given the opportunity to provide the work.

It is all work that is identified as additional work. If you will, it would be the kinds of things we would love to get done that might not be part of the normal maintenance contract but that we would be able to add on to get things done. We identify that in cooperation with the individual maintenance contractors and through our district offices, in terms of identifying what kind of work that would be.

M. Karagianis: How has the minister determined the priorities of these jobs? In other words, are you looking at where there's been, say, more frost heave, more damage? We've certainly heard from communities across northern British Columbia about the problems of potholes and the ongoing concerns around maintenance of some of the northern routes.

How have the maintenance priorities been determined? Are they going to start in the north? Are they going to start in any given place, and what is the time line for these projects?

Hon. K. Falcon: What we have done is, working through our district offices and working through the maintenance contractors, identified a range of the kind of work that could get done immediately. The criterion we want to use is that it be work that will be underway and completed by the end of March. We want to ensure that these dollars are put to work as quickly as possible. We're trying to accelerate a number of jobs and opportunities.

The emphasis and the breakdown is gravelling, pavement patching, brushing on side roads, improvements to bridges and dollars being spent on crushing material that will be used in the future to improve our road and highway infrastructure. So those are the categories.

What we wanted to do was make sure that those dollars got out into communities right across the province, but we wanted to make sure they got into communities over the immediate period of time so that they acted as a bridge while we are in the course of moving forward other potential projects in cooperation with the federal government and the economic stimulus program that the federal government has been talking about.

[1550]

M. Karagianis: So there are sort of two parts of this. The funds are being earmarked for both road maintenance and rehabilitation. Can the minister explain what the difference between the rehabilitation will be, as well as maintenance? Maintenance would be fairly obvious — potholes, patching, gravelling, regravelling, that kind of thing. But certainly, some of these…. The list that the minister has just given us of paving and things could
[ Page 14111 ]
very likely be new roads. Will the rehabilitation be classified as any kind of new corridors anywhere?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is correct in her characterization. If I understood the member's question correctly, I think she's correct, in that it would not involve new bridges or new roads. It would be improvements to existing bridges and roads where there is a road and bridge element to the improvements, or it would be, as the member correctly pointed out, gravelling or brushing along the highway or crushing material that will be used.

It will differ depending on the different parts of the province in what the needs are that have been identified by the local contractors and through the district offices. The goal, as I say, was to make sure that it was work that could begin virtually immediately and that it's work that will involve local workers and local hired equipment so that we could get that activity happening as soon as possible.

M. Karagianis: At this point I do need to ask. The minister is very careful to say that this won't involve any new roads or bridges, and I can understand that. Those are significant projects. But in the case of things like resource roads….

Interjections.

The Chair: Member.

M. Karagianis: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

The minister has been very clear that this is not about new bridges or roads. But in the case of rehabilitation of roads, what exactly is the scope of that? What could that involve? It seems to me that this is blacktop politics at work just before an election. How far is the rehabilitation going to go on some of these roads throughout the province?

Hon. K. Falcon: Again, I remind the member that back in October the Premier and government, under their ten-point economic plan, identified that one of the steps we would be taking was to accelerate $20 million worth of the kind of maintenance work that could put local people and local equipment to work immediately in communities across the province.

I wouldn't characterize it the way the member talked about. We are facing a global international downdraft here that is epic in its proportions. It requires immediate action by government.

The goal of this government was to make sure that we could do important maintenance work that should and could and would be desirable to have done anyhow but do it by utilizing local labour and local workers immediately — not to spend 12 months talking about how we might be able to do work or talking about how we might be able to put people to work on additional projects above and beyond our already massive transportation and capital investment program across government but how we could do that in the short term, immediately.

[1555]

The blacktop issues that the member opposite mentions have to do with patching — some small pavement jobs. Granted, they may not be large in the scheme of things, but they'll be very important work for the individuals and the equipment operators that are utilizing that work. It will involve gravelling and brushing work that will be certainly important to local communities and the side road network. They will be important safety issues, particularly on the issue of brushing and gravelling and pavement patching.

These are important economic activities that will employ British Columbians immediately; put them to work immediately; allow them to utilize their equipment, which may be idled as a result of the slowdown in the private sector economy; and, as I say, act as that important bridge as we continue to move forward other major transportation initiatives right across the province.

M. Karagianis: I know that in the budget one of the things that the government has talked about was new roads for oil exploration and mining. Will any of these dollars go into those kinds of initiatives?

Hon. K. Falcon: The short answer is no. This wouldn't be for the roads that the member mentions, in terms of rural resource roads specific to the Peace country, where the oil and gas activity is taking place.

We already, in my ministry…. I'm going by memory, but this year alone we are investing close to $100 million in rural resource roads to encourage and continue to stimulate the extraordinary economic activity that's taking place in the Peace country, the northeast part of the province. These are much more modest in nature in terms of the kind of work that is involved but, as I say, very important for those local equipment operators and those local workers that are finding themselves idled as a result of some of the slowdown that's taken place in the private sector activity.

The $20 million itself, though, because it's over a relatively short period, does have a magnified impact. It will be significant, because we're trying to move those dollars out rapidly and put people to work immediately.

The magnification of that investment — because it's not over 12 months; it's over a very short period of weeks — does allow people to get to work almost immediately and does it in such a way that it acts as an important bridge to get us to the point where the other projects that we have moving forward will be able to complement the investment that's being made through the $20 million economic stimulus.
[ Page 14112 ]

M. Karagianis: I have no doubt that it will have significant impact. It is blacktop politics, and we are 60 days from an election. I'm sure $20 million in small communities will certainly have its effect.

I asked earlier about the priorities for these projects. Is there going to be any focus on communities like those that have been so hard hit by the forestry downturn? Is there going to be a focus on those communities first and foremost to make sure that if, in fact, there are some new jobs created, those communities that are really devastated by the current situation in forestry are going to be the first to benefit from the significant dollars that the minister is going to start spending?

[1600]

Hon. K. Falcon: The member keeps referring to blacktop politics. I should remind the member that in our budget over the next few years our combined investment from the province and our partners in transportation investment projects is $3.3 billion. It is continuing what has been the largest transportation investment program in the history of the province of British Columbia. That has been going on year after year after year.

I can assure the member that $20 million by itself does not, in my view, even begin to touch on the scope and scale of work that is underway.

What is unique about these dollars…. The reason why the Premier committed to this $20 million as part of the ten-point economic plan he laid out in October was to recognize that, as the private sector activity is dropping off dramatically in some parts of the province — in virtually all parts of the province, but certainly in some parts of the province more than others — the Premier wanted to make sure that we had dollars that were moving out immediately to assist those that are impacted in communities, in every community right across this province, that they would have the ability to undertake work — small projects, granted, but important projects for many of those contractors.

As I say, it will be in every part of the province, and there will be projects involving all aspects of the kind of maintenance that the public would like to see anyhow, in terms of gravelling and pavement patching and improvements to brushing and highways.

It is something that certainly has been well received in virtually every community right across the province, and I'm proud of the fact that the Premier was recognizing back in October the scale of the economic forces that were buffeting British Columbia from around the world. Though not of our making, it required an immediate response, and that's exactly what this $20 million is achieving.

N. Macdonald: For the minister's benefit, I'm going to be talking mainly about local issues. The first thing is that I just want to talk a little bit about maintenance issues. We have, of course, ongoing maintenance issues, and these are partially inevitable, just given the nature of the area that we live in.

Before I ask specific questions, I just want to pass along just how receptive the communication has been with local highways staff. That's always been the case, and that's something that I think that the minister needs to hear — that as issues come up, both with the contractor and also with the staff that represents him there, there's good communication, and that the challenges are… We'll work them out, and we would expect no less from the Ministry of Transportation.

I do want to talk about a couple of things that the minister will be familiar with. The Trans-Canada Highway — there are signs up that seem to indicate that four-laning will be coming relatively soon. Now, I think most people realize, given the time right now, that there's possibly federal money coming. What I would say…. I think something that the minister has touched on, which is very accurate, is that the forest industry has gone through an unprecedented downturn.

What the minister will know is that, with the Park Bridge project and actually its predecessor, you had a very high percentage of local workers. The contractors, in particular, have a workforce that easily moves into some of the work that's done on these highway projects. As the minister would be familiar with, up to 70 percent of the workers on the Park Bridge were actually from Golden, the Golden area, which is very, very significant.

While, obviously, it fits well outside the $20 million, part of what the minister has said is that this is going to be preparation work for larger projects. I realize that there are particular projects that need to be done along the Trans-Canada. I'd be interested in hearing about the Donald Bridge. I think the minister has likely, certainly, seen the pictures from Donald Bridge, and that very clearly would be a priority, regardless of what was going on.

What we have talked about in the past, what I think is important, is that idea of moving through with perhaps a ten-year plan — which is something that has been talked about by mayors; you've heard it very many times — of moving that four-laning across from the border all the way through to Kamloops and perhaps to Cache Creek.

Can the minister give me some idea of where we are with that as a project? I know that we've often talked about waiting. I mean, it's decades. We've always talked about getting federal money.

[1605]

It seems clear that, beyond the investments that have been made by the federal government, there's also an opportunity to just move that project along. So can you give me — it would be interesting to refer specifically to that Donald Bridge; as well, there are also the remaining phases of the Kicking Horse project — some sense there, because as the minister will know, the most expensive
[ Page 14113 ]
part is the one that we haven't started yet, which is likely to be the tunnel.

I've given you a whole bunch of things to talk about, but I'd be very interested to hear about it. Like I say, that 70 percent local at this time right now, and likely over the next number of years, is going to be critically important.

Hon. K. Falcon: I thank the member for the question. The member is quite right. I remember the former mayor of Golden once saying to me that the Kicking Horse Canyon improvements were essentially employing his entire community. Though I suspect that was a bit of hyperbole, I think he wasn't far off the mark, and the member reflects that when he correctly points out that there is a huge component of local work and workers that go into these projects.

As the member knows, we are continuing on with those improvements. The member is correct to point out that local mayors have called for…. What they would like to see is a ten-year sort of commitment between the federal and provincial governments to improve the Trans-Canada from the Alberta border to Kamloops. The federal government is unable or unwilling to enter into that kind of a ten-year commitment. They haven't done it anywhere across Canada, and they tell me they're not going to start in British Columbia.

There is a way we can achieve the same thing, as far as I'm concerned, without having something that says we'll do this over ten years, and that is to make significant investments in the Trans-Canada. I can promise and assure the member that I have been, as recently as last week, talking to the federal government.

I had a very good meeting with Minister John Baird, the federal Minister of Transport and Infrastructure in Ottawa. I indicated again to Minister Baird and to Minister Stockwell Day, who is the key minister for British Columbia in terms of dealing with the province, that the Trans-Canada Highway remains a critical corridor for the province.

The signs that the member refers to that start to refer to improvements being made on the Trans-Canada are to reflect the fact that we are making a significant commitment as a province, and we are optimistically expecting the federal government to join with us on a number of improvements along the Trans-Canada corridor to fulfil exactly what the member correctly wants to see, as do we, which is a continued, significant investment in the Trans-Canada to improve safety and improve four-laning right from Kamloops to the Alberta border.

The $65 million right now is continuing on the improvements that have been made to the Kicking Horse Canyon. They're underway, as the member knows. We want to do more. The member references Donald Bridge. Donald Bridge is certainly on my radar screen in terms of projects that I would like to see us moving forward with. The one thing that we have to be careful of as a province is that we don't want to get started on projects that we know could be cost-shared with the federal government, because any dollars we spend are sunk dollars. We wouldn't be able to get cost-sharing on them.

We have encouraged the federal government to have a sense of urgency about the fact that we need to get these projects underway and employ British Columbians as soon as we can, and I received a very positive message from the federal government. I believe that we are close to receiving some sign-offs on a number and range of projects that would provide significant benefit to the province and the travelling public, especially on the Trans-Canada.

N. Macdonald: I thank you for that, and of course, the urgency…. I'm sure that the minister has passed this along. It has to do with also trying to maintain a very skilled group of contractors that we will need when, inevitably, there's an upturn in the industry. We need these people to remain in the area, and we need them to remain engaged, and this is a very constructive way of doing it.

The Donald Bridge in particular…. I know the minister will be aware that there's a lot of discussion and concern, not only about longstanding alignment issues and things like that but also deterioration issues on the bridge. People talk about it, and I'm sure the minister has information on that.

[1610]

The Trans-Canada would be one issue. As I've mentioned also, there are maintenance issues that from time to time come up. It seems to work to have that flow up through local ministry staff, and we do that.

The other issue I'd like to talk about is Highway 95, as it passes through Golden. This is something that may be more long term and perhaps doesn't directly relate to the 20 million, but I think the minister would be interested anyway. For a long time the community has been looking at a new bridge. I wouldn't be surprised if it goes back 20, 30 years. Certainly, there's an opportunity with a realignment of 95. The minister is always pretty good about actually knowing these sites, so I'll presume that you do. The bridge that goes through the community could also be realigned.

I just want to get some sense as to where that would be within the plans for the government in terms of making that upgrade.

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is correct. That is an issue, with respect to that bridge in town on Highway 95. I've had a number of discussions with at least the former mayor. I haven't had a chance to meet the new mayor yet, but I have no doubt that will still be an issue. We have been in discussions with them to try and figure out a way that we could sensibly deal with that issue.

I usually hasten to point out to them that we have focused our attention really heavily on the Trans-Canada,
[ Page 14114 ]
for obvious reasons. Some of the improvements that the member talked about or improvements that we would like to see done are higher up on our radar screen in terms of urgency. But we have been in continuous discussions, I think I would say, with respect to Highway 95 and the local bridge there.

I forget the name of the bridge, but it's a wooden one, as I recall.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Falcon: No. It's that small one right in Golden — right?

It's still on our radar screen, but we haven't got to an answer yet in terms of the best way of dealing with it. I guess that is the simple answer.

N. Macdonald: The next question I have is one that you're familiar with as well. It would be from the improvements to Highways 95 and 93 that come from Radium through to pretty well Fairmont. In those areas, especially during the summer or on weekends, there's incredibly heavy traffic. I think if you took an overall traffic count over the course of the year, it might not seem as high as it is — but incredibly high.

There have been improvements made in terms of turnout lanes and so on. There has also been talk about a circle, I think, that we're going to put in at the junction with Invermere. There remain turnout areas that your staff would be familiar with just near the Tenaha or the Akisqnuk turnoff and places like that.

Just some sense of how this $20 million or other funds — how you plan to proceed on those projects.

Hon. K. Falcon: The member's right. This is an area that we have spent some time and some dollars on recently to try and make some improvements. I think it's one of those areas where there will be continuous improvement being made.

[1615]

We know it is important for the tourism sector, and I would agree with the member in his description of the fact that there are peak times of the year where you do have heavy traffic in that area. We are going to be continuing to invest dollars in making continuous improvements. I know discussions are underway and some planning has been done on the next stages of improvements.

I don't have the details at my fingertips, but I can confirm to the member that it would not involve the $20 million that we're talking about today. That would be separate ministry capital dollars that are being looked at.

N. Macdonald: The minister is being very tolerant with the questions, and I appreciate that. I just want to say one thing, and then just ask one final question.

The improvements to the 95A through Kimberley are very much appreciated. That was a road that really needed improvements. Of course — and it's true with Golden as well — often, few people realize that these are provincial roads. So I suspect you get very little credit for it. It's certainly an important road through Kimberley and a surprisingly long section of highway through Kimberley. So that's welcome.

I think the minister will know that tied into that, the city is making improvements to the sidewalks and to intersections. So that's a very positive project.

The last question I would have is the road up to Panorama, which has had some improvements but continues to be a road that…. You know, at one point it must have been to capacity. It's a challenging road to upgrade, but it very clearly needs upgrades. Just a question about what plans are in place for improvements to the road up to Panorama Resort. And then that's it.

Hon. K. Falcon: First of all, I thank the member for the comments on Kimberley. The mayor and councillors have visited me on a number of occasions, and this was their top priority; there's no question. So we're thrilled with the work that we were able to jointly do there. The curb and gutter and the sidewalks, in particular, I think, add an element that's important to them from a tourism point of view and a beautification point of view. So I appreciate the member saying that.

In terms of Panorama, the member's right. Panorama Mountain is an important economic generator. We spent some dollars — significant dollars, as I recall; I just can't recall if it was last year or the year before — on some improvements to the road up to Panorama.

We plan on doing more in the future. We do recognize it's a really important tourist generator and tourism generator. So our intention is to continue to make investments and improvements to the road.

C. Trevena: To the minister, I thank him for his generosity in answers to my colleagues. I hope he will show the same generosity for North Island constituents.

Interjection.

C. Trevena: No, I have to argue with the minister. During the estimates process the minister is very helpful for constituents' issues, and I thank the minister for that.

I did want to know, as we are going towards an election, on the $20 million, whether there has been a specific assignation of that $20 million to various areas. If so, we have two specific roads in the north Island that I would like to ask the minister about. I wondered whether there will be money going to Highway 28, which I have raised with him in the past, and also certain stretches of Highway 19 north of Campbell River.
[ Page 14115 ]

I could break those down, as the road is breaking down, for the minister.

[1620]

Hon. K. Falcon: The improvements that the member is talking about with respect to Highway 28 to Gold River and Highway 19 on the north Island are improvements that we do have in our rehab budget. I don't have all those details with us, because it's not part of the $20 million that we're talking about today. But I do know that that is on our radar screen for rehab work that we are doing. I'm just not sure when the dollars flow.

I can tell the member that I do know that with respect to the $20 million, it does include improvements to Head Bay Road between Gold River and Tahsis. So there will be some work being done there that I think will be important for the communities.

C. Trevena: I thank the minister for that. The Head Bay Road has gradually been improved over the last few years. Every time there is a bit more chip seal on that, people are very pleased to see it. Unfortunately, the minister has no responsibility for the Zeballos road, because people in Zeballos would like a similar treatment.

Is Head Bay Road the only stretch of highway in the north Island, north of the Oyster River, that will be getting some of this $20 million?

Hon. K. Falcon: The Head Bay Road project was identified early on as a high-priority project. We are still in the midst of dealing with the district offices, maintenance contractors — identifying the kind of projects that would be good projects. That was one that came up early and quickly as one that could benefit from a substantive gravelling program. So that's what's being looked at.

In terms of Zeballos, that is a Forest Service road. With respect to the Forest Service roads, as the member knows, the Premier also made a commitment of a $20 million investment to improve Forest Service roads across the province. That's obviously not the $20 million we're talking about here. That's a different $20 million. I suspect that there will be some opportunities for roads like Zeballos.

I honestly don't know at this point whether that's one of the roads, but it is one that has been brought to my attention in the past and one that would certainly be on the radar screen of the Forests Ministry as they look at making improvements.

C. Trevena: Like my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke, I have to say that every time I go to Port Alice, the only thing people are talking about is the improvement to the road there. I'm hoping that in the rehabilitation to the Gold River road, when it comes to work that's coming up soon, we get the same response. It is in the same condition that Port Alice at Highway 30 was.

The north Island's share of the $20 million is basically for gravelling for the Head Bay Road. I wondered if there's been any consideration for a small — I would perceive it to be small — investment, that of highway cameras. We're getting a lot of concerns. We've been in touch with your ministry about the highway camera north of Campbell River — there is none — and looking at something around Hoomak Lake to give people an idea of the road conditions there.

[1625]

Hon. K. Falcon: I thank the member for the question. With respect to the cameras that the member refers to that are utilized through the Drive B.C. website…. This is easily the most popular website in government. I don't think there is any question about that. It is widely utilized. It's so popular that we keep adding cameras every year.

Basically, we work with communities. They bring forward requests for additional cameras. We try to incorporate…. Of course, the ask is huge, because they're very popular. We keep trying to add new cameras every year, to keep knocking off those community requests, so that we have the broadest possible coverage.

I think the member will know…. I haven't got the number on the top of my head, but I know that just in this past year we've added dozens of new cameras across the province. I'll try and check and find out where we're at in terms of the locations the member mentioned.

C. Trevena: That's kind of the minister. As I say, north of Campbell River there is a stretch where you get into the mountains, and people like to know before they set off so that they don't get caught in bad weather there. That would be great.

My final question to the minister is…. I think it's really one to cite a little bit of disappointment. There is the $20 million in road maintenance and rehabilitation, and under the Premier's ten-point plan, point 9 or 10 was the reduction in the ferry fees for two months.

I wondered if the minister would be considering putting any of this money, or any of the subsequent contingencies money that the minister could get hold of, to reintroduce lower fares. Or would he be looking at stopping the fare increase which is due in April? If some of the contingency money could be used for that, I think that would really ease people's perceptions and comfort levels financially as they go forward into the summer.

Hon. K. Falcon: No, we won't be using any of the $20 million stimulus that we're talking about in the supplemental estimates here for ferry fares.

I think the issue with ferry fares…. There are a couple of issues. One is that B.C. Ferries has now removed all the fuel surcharges that were put on to reflect the international situation with fuel prices. Secondly, we were able to convince the federal government to take the tax
[ Page 14116 ]
that was going to be imposed on ferries for bringing the MV Sonia onto our network and having that replace the sunken Queen of the North.

We got a commitment out of them to rebate that to the province. We made a commitment that 100 percent of that would go towards reducing fuel costs on the minor routes. It works out to about a 5 percent further fuel reduction on the minor routes.

The $20 million that we committed to the 33 percent rate buy-down over the holiday period was really to, again, make sure that we provided an opportunity during a critical holiday period to allow families to connect over the holidays and to act essentially as a seat sale. We bought a seat sale, effectively, through the contract we have with B.C. Ferries to try and allow families to reconnect over the holiday period.

For the most part, I think it was successful, except that we had some of the worst snowstorms we have ever had. That really impacted the ability of people to travel, particularly during that period leading up to Christmas. So I think that probably impacted the total volume.

I guess the short answer is, Member, that of this $20 million, none of it will be going to any further rate buy-downs for the ferries.

[1630]

C. Trevena: One last question/comment. As I say, I noticed in the supplementary estimates that there is another $125 million. I don't know what access the minister has. If the minister is looking at economic stimulus…. Obviously, the construction crews are working on it and getting the shovel-ready projects and getting the shovels in the ground. That all is an economic stimulus.

Likewise, I would urge the minister to consider that if there was a freeze on fare increases, it would be an economic stimulus right across the islands, both for people living and working there and for the people who are dependent on tourism coming in. This fare increase is going in just at the beginning of the early parts of the tourism season.

Hon. K. Falcon: The increases that the member is talking about are the annualized increases that are capped but are allowed to the ferry system. You're correct about that, Member.

I think it would be important to recognize that they will be done in an environment — especially on the minor routes, for example — where there has been a 5 percent reduction, which is currently in place. So it will obviously cancel out that reduction, if you will, but it will moderate dramatically the increase that would be imposed.

You know, again, the province is dealing with a very difficult financial situation. I think the budget that the Finance Minister introduced was prudent, and it was responsible. But we are not going to be taking on any further obligations to deal with the whole range of issues, I can imagine, that people would like to have government try and deal with on their behalf.

M. Sather: I wanted to ask the minister about an issue in Pitt Meadows that I know he's aware of, which is the top concern for the city there. That's the redevelopment of the interchange at Harris Road and Lougheed Highway. I just wanted to ask if any money would be coming from this $20 million to help them with that or if the minister can comment if there's anything else on the horizon with regard to that.

Hon. K. Falcon: I am aware of the project. That is a project that is being driven, as the member knows, by a proposed development. It really is something that we've been working on, with the municipality and the developer, to understand what the requirements of the developer are and what that would do in terms of the intersection traffic.

In fact, this has been a discussion we've been having for quite some time with the municipality. I don't believe there's been any change in those discussions up to this point, except trying to figure out what the scale of the project is that the municipality is planning and what the impacts are likely to be on the intersection and then how we would apportion the costs — what contribution the developer would make, etc., to the project.

What I can tell the member with confidence, though, is that none of the dollars we're talking about here in the $20 million supplementary estimate request will have anything to do with that project. These are all much smaller maintenance-type jobs that will provide short-term work for local labour and local equipment.

M. Sather: Well, of course, this is about movement of traffic west on the Lougheed Highway, with the choke point being at Harris and Lougheed. We are getting the two new bridges, and we want to be sure that everything will flow as well as possible when those are done.

This may be too large as well, but I wanted to ask the minister. The other piece that is needed there is that when you come off the Abernethy Connector from the northeast onto Lougheed Highway and you're heading west, there needs to be…. I think the plan is to have another lane there, between the junction of the Lougheed Highway and the Abernethy Connector and Harris Road going west.

[1635]

I just wanted to ask the minister if any of this money might come out of that or if there's any other news on that.

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is correct. It wouldn't be part of the $20 million that we're talking about, but it is on our radar screen in the out-years. We've been working with the municipality on that. They've got some
[ Page 14117 ]
ideas they want to do with their local road network that could complement that kind of investment. So it is something that's on our radar screen, but it would be more in the out-years — probably in the next few years as opposed to immediately.

M. Sather: Thanks to the minister. I have a smaller project to ask about.

But just one question on the other roadway that's proposed for that area. It's been named the North Lougheed connector, which would run from the Abernethy Connector past Harris and Lougheed going west or going both ways. That goes through agricultural land, so it's contentious. Has the ministry had any discussions with the city of Pitt Meadows about that road? If so, what were they?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is referring to a local road, as the member knows, and we have been working with the municipality in terms of some high-level planning they're doing on that proposed route. Our only interest is what impacts it actually has on the Lougheed Highway, so that's really been the level of our discussions. I don't have a lot of information on that road, because it is an initiative of the municipality.

M. Sather: The other thing I wanted to ask about is…. The traffic lights at Lougheed and 203rd Street have been changed by the ministry. I talked to a fellow from the ministry there a couple weeks ago, and there have been some problems with the synchronizing and that. I wonder if any of this money might go towards fixing or changing the lighting at that intersection at 203rd and Lougheed.

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm not aware of the synchronization issue that the member talks about, but that's something that our ministry, just as a matter of course, can look into. If the member can flip me an e-mail just identifying what that issue is, I'm happy to look into it. It wouldn't require the utilization of the $20 million that we're talking about in the supplementary estimate.

M. Sather: Lastly, can the minister tell me: are there any projects in Maple Ridge and/or Pitt Meadows that would get some funding out of this $20 million? How much of the $20 million would go to Maple Ridge, and how much would go to Pitt Meadows?

Hon. K. Falcon: We're just in the midst of identifying those priorities and working through our district offices and maintenance contractors to identify the kind of projects. I can assure the member there will be projects in the area. I just don't know what those will be at this point, because they're in the midst of trying to identify those.

[1640]

The former member, the one for North Island, was talking to me, and I was able to identify one that was…. I know that one because it was identified early on as a priority for the area that they've been talking about for some time, but I don't have that same information in the member's area. But as I say, the moment we've identified those with the maintenance contractors or with the district offices, we'll be moving those out very, very quickly.

K. Conroy: I've asked in estimates over the years about Highway 3, and I'm going to do it again. Mayors over the years from all those communities along Highway 3 have also asked the minister, as have the MLAs on both sides of this House, I'm sure. I know definitely the ones on this side have asked if there's going to be any upgrading work, maintenance — anything — on Highway 3. I'm wondering if there's any money, in this money that's allotted, for Highway 3. If so, what part of Highway 3 is going to be at least maintained?

Hon. K. Falcon: As the member knows, over the years we have invested millions of dollars in improving Highway 3 — replacing bridges, doing improvements, repavement, widenings, passing lanes. It is not the easiest corridor, of course, because it is — as is so much of the highway system in British Columbia — some very challenging geography. But it has been identified by the province as an area where we have more work to do. It has been identified to the federal government as a great opportunity for doing some cost-sharing on some significant project work we could do there.

I think the short answer, Member, is that we have invested millions. We will be investing millions more to come on Highway 3 to make sure we continue our commitment to that important corridor.

In terms of the $20 million that we're talking about today, some of those dollars will almost certainly be identified and spent on Highway 3. Just off the top of my head, I know there could be some brushing work that could be done to improve sightlines, perhaps some patching or those kinds of issues that could be undertaken there. But as I say, we're in the midst of working with the local contractors and district offices to identify what exactly those priorities would be.

I think the short answer I could tell you with some confidence is that there will be some work done on that. It hasn't been identified quite yet as to what it would be.

K. Conroy: Well, I'm hoping that by the end of this month potentially, or when the House finishes sitting or soon, we'll actually get a list of the parts of the highway that are going to be fixed up.

Just so the minister is aware, one part of the highway that desperately needs work is when you come down from Rock Creek or from…. I just want to make sure
[ Page 14118 ]
the minister is aware that one part of the highway that is particularly bad is the intersection of 33 and 3. You cannot miss the potholes. They're so large, as you're coming down from Kelowna to turn to go to either Castlegar or Osoyoos, that it's a real hazard. People are commenting on it continually.

[K. Whittred in the chair.]

Again, the road from Christina Lake to Castlegar is a pothole mess. It needs work, and it seems to be needing work year after year. Hopefully, there will be some money there for that.

I want to ask the minister again — I've asked it every year — about Highway 33. I've talked to the people that are working for the ministry in Kelowna. I know there was some work done lower down, closer to Kelowna. The actual section of the road that is in my constituency — there isn't anything done with it. It's still a very, very difficult highway, and it needs work.

[1645]

So I'm hoping that some day in the near future…. The minister keeps assuring me that there is going to be something done with the road from Joe Rich to Big White. For the past four years there has been nothing done with that road. It's a real hazard. I'm just hoping, again, that perhaps the minister can see it clear to make sure there is some money in the future that's going to deal with that portion of the road.

Hon. K. Falcon: With respect to Highways 3 and 33, there is a reasonable chance that would be a project that would probably be a good candidate for dollars. The member is correct to point that out. If it doesn't come out of the $20 million stimulus — from my discussions with staff, that hasn't yet been identified — it certainly will be part of our rehab program for next year. Either way, it will get done.

In terms of the improvements on Highway 33 closer to Big White that the member is talking about, typically what we've done with the improvements that we've been making to Highway 33 is tried to focus on the areas where we have the highest traffic volumes, which also results in higher accident rates. We're trying to deal with those sections first.

We have been in discussions with the city of Kelowna and our staff about improvements along that Highway 33 corridor. We are, though, as I want to emphasize, focusing attention, too, on improvements to Highway 3 — not just what we've done, but what we're planning on doing on Highway 3. There will be a more significant commitment to that very important corridor.

K. Conroy: Just for the minister's education, there's incredible traffic volume between Big White and Kelowna every morning and every afternoon. It's bumper-to-bumper traffic. I know people in the Lower Mainland are used to rush-hour traffic, but it feels like that when you're on that highway. It does have a high traffic volume.

One of the other highways in my constituency that gets asked about a lot is the road from Rossland to the Paterson border. It hasn't had much work done to it. It is indeed in need of some work. I just wondered if there was any hope of that being looked at.

[1650]

Hon. K. Falcon: The good news is on the first part of the member's question. The Big White, the Kelowna piece, is exactly the piece where she correctly points out the traffic issues in the morning and afternoons. That's exactly the piece I was referring to that we are planning significant improvements.

In terms of Rossland to the border, this is an area that does have very heavy truck traffic. It does require, and we have invested, significant dollars over the past years to rehabilitate that road, which takes a real pummelling from the truck traffic. We intend to continue our commitment to maintaining that road, in recognizing that it does take a heavy truck traffic load, and we will continue to rehab and maintain that road to the best of our abilities.

Again, that is not the $20 million that we're talking about today for the stimulus projects across the province. That will not be what we will be investing on that Rossland piece. That will be dollars that we will be investing, as we have been in the past, to maintain that road to an adequate standard.

K. Conroy: I thank the minister for that. I also want to, just at this time, acknowledge the ministry staff that work in the Kootenays. They do a phenomenal job, and they're excellent in working with our office and dealing with our concerns. We're really very, very happy, and I feel fortunate we have the relationship we do with the ministry staff. They're great in the Kootenays.

They also heard our concerns about the web cameras in our area. We're kind of lacking web cameras in our area. I want to thank the ministry. We did get two, although one of the highest summits in B.C. — not the highest summit, which is Nelson-Creston's summit — is the Blueberry-Paulson. It's the only summit in the province that doesn't have a web camera. I know those web cameras are utilized a lot.

I understand it's an issue of power, but there are solar-powered web cameras at the tops of other summits. I think that it would be utilized a lot if we could get a solar-operated web camera up there. I doubt that's part of this $20 million stimulus package, but I think it would be a wonderful opportunity to use that money to put something like that up there, because it's definitely wanted.

Hon. K. Falcon: We do recognize that the camera program is a valued service that the Ministry of
[ Page 14119 ]
Transportation provides the public. As I mentioned earlier to an earlier member, we continue to add cameras every year. The popularity of the program is such that people want cameras everywhere, and that's understandable, so we're adding new cameras every year.

I've made note of the fact that that's an area where the member would like to see another one. We do our best to accommodate. As I say, we're trying to work through a number of requests from across the province, and we will continue to be adding traffic cameras throughout the province. I thank the member for bringing that to my attention.

N. Simons: Thank you to the minister for being available, and to his staff of course. First, I'd like to say that I reflect the comments of my colleagues that the staff in Powell River–Sunshine Coast are extremely responsive and helpful. I'd like to thank Don Legault, Sharon Goddard, Brian Atkins and Tyler Lambert for the work they do.

There are a few questions around Highway 101. I guess I could divide them into two sections, Langdale to Earls Cove and Saltery Bay to Lund. I'm wondering if it's possible to ascertain whether or not any of this, in the $20 million we're speaking about, will be allocated to those roads, which obviously, the minister knows, have serious issues with respect to their maintenance and traffic volume.

[1655]

Hon. K. Falcon: I thank the member for his comments. I agree with him that Don Legault, our staff member there, is exceptional to deal with and does an outstanding job on behalf of the Sunshine Coast.

The last time I was there, which would have been over…. I think it was in early December when I was there. Don and I toured through, met with the local mayors and talked about the projects that I think the member is referring to.

The $20 million in stimulus that we're talking about today would likely not apply to the projects that you're referring to. I think the ones you're referring to are the conveyor belt to Elevator Road, and then I think there was another one through Gibsons that we've been working on with the community of Gibsons. Those are larger capital projects that we're actually looking at now, especially the Elevator to conveyor belt, on how we could phase that project and get that work started.

Don was doing some work on that last time I checked. I'm not exactly sure where we are on it, but I committed to try and move that project forward to the mayors. We're trying to sort of break it down into manageable pieces.

The $20 million stimulus. We will definitely be spending dollars on the Sunshine Coast. Again, there will be, for sure, projects on Highway 101. I don't know what they are at this point, but I know they will probably have to do with things like patching, probably brushing to clear sightlines to make sure that the safety issues are dealt with. As I say, there will be a number of them. I just don't know what they are because we're in the midst of identifying those right now.

N. Simons: I'm just wondering if some of the funding for the brushing and for the maintenance…. How does that impact on the existing contract with the contractor? Just so I know, where does it fit in? Is it above and beyond? That might help clarify things.

Hon. K. Falcon: First of all, we want to make sure that it's above and beyond the work that's already been undertaken by the maintenance contractor. It has to be new work, and it has got to involve new labour being involved, local equipment being used, our local workers that are being used. The idea is that the stimulus is exactly that. It will be a stimulus that hires local people from the Sunshine Coast–Powell River area to actually undertake that work.

The goal is, as I say, to get that work underway as quickly as possible. That's what the consultations are all about between the district offices and our maintenance contractors — to identify what the work will be and then get people out and get them hired immediately to go to work. So it is all new work, and it's all above and beyond what would be done normally by the maintenance contractor.

N. Simons: Just to make sure I'm clear. It's brushing that wouldn't necessarily be done. It's repair to the subsurface or the surface of the highways that wouldn't otherwise be done. I think there's a section just south of Lund that is sort of in an ongoing state of almost being completed. I'm hoping that perhaps that's part of the discussions with the district office. Have those decisions been made by this point, or are they still in the process of being made?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'll check with Don with respect to that. They may have made that decision by now. Some decisions have been made. Some are in the midst of being made. I'll follow that up and try and find out.

N. Simons: I think that pretty much wraps up. I'm still going to probably ask you for some clarification on how contractors can allocate. They did have huge expenditures due to the snowfall that you rightfully refer to as a snowstorm unlike others that we've seen. I'm just wondering if perhaps the stimulus package is partly to address some of the budgetary pressures that have resulted from that. They're already hiring local people, and they use local equipment, so I'm wondering if that can be explained at some future date.

[1700]
[ Page 14120 ]

Hon. K. Falcon: I actually think that's a very good question. It's a legitimate question in the sense that we, you, the public would want to make sure that the dollars aren't going towards just looking after some costs that the maintenance contractor may want to include in the so-called stimulus.

So we're very clear. That's why our district offices are involved. We have to see the work. It's got to be new work. It's got to be work that would not be done by the maintenance contractor as part of their normal work routines. We have to sign off on every single one of those to make sure that it's all new. It's got to meet the definition of true stimulus.

C. Evans: If this goes well, I only have two questions. It has to do with the $20 million which is being discussed here today in terms of estimates, a short-term rise to the Ministry of Transportation.

The minister will remember that I came in here almost a year ago and made a little six-minute statement suggesting that we change the timing of the Kootenay Lake ferry to hourly. The now Minister of Tourism responded, saying that was such a good idea and so inexpensive that if it had happened in Cranbrook, they would have already done it a year before.

Then I asked the question of the minister in question period, and the minister said, "We are in discussions to see whether or not there are any cost implications of changing the ferry," which I remind you, hon. Chair, would reduce the carbon use, the fuel use, save money on fuel and make all the people on both sides of the lake very cheerful. It wasn't even known, when we discussed it here before, if it would cost any money.

My first question to the minister is: did the ministry determine whether putting the Kootenay Lake ferry on an hourly basis would cost any money?

Hon. K. Falcon: Member, the short answer is that I don't know. And I don't know because what recollection I have of that issue…. I do remember that from a year ago. I thought that we had actually brought in some changes to address the issue of the length of time that the ferry operates. I just don't remember the details, but if the member is saying there were no changes, that would surprise me a little bit because I thought that we had moved down that road to making changes.

I can find out for the member. I'm here to discuss, obviously, the $20 million supplementary estimates. I wasn't anticipating a question on the inland ferry crossings.

C. Evans: That leads to the second question. I did not suggest that the minister had not made changes. I assumed that change was happening, and I appreciate the changes that the minister did make.

However, we did not put the ferry on an hourly basis and reduce the speed, which was the intent, to reduce the fuel use and to make it so that everybody would know when the ferry left. Instead of ten minutes to two and five after three, it would just go at two and three.

Since it was intended to save fuel, I think it's not an estimates question, strictly speaking, unless it costs money. I think it's a free question, and if the minister had said, "Well, we determined that running it on the hour would cost us another $100,000 and saving the fuel would cost us some money in staffing," then I was going to ask whether or not that might not come out of the $20 million.

But since the minister has said that he will get back to me, I will sit down with this caveat: I don't work here very much longer. This is a really good idea. There are a lot of citizens who care more about when the ferry runs and how fast it goes than they care about my future.

To the minister: when you bring forward your real budget for the next fiscal year and your real projects, will you please respond to whoever is the MLA for Nelson-Creston? What is the cost, if there is any cost, of running the ferry on the hourly basis and slowing it down? And if there isn't cost, just do it to make all the people happy.

Hon. K. Falcon: I will attempt to get that answer for the member. I do recall, though — because it's coming back to me a little bit — that I think we extended the hours. Is that not correct, Member? And as I recall, there was quite positive support from the community.

[1705]

I guess the issue you're asking is: "That was great, and if we could even do more and look at an hourly service…." And I don't have the answer to that.

I will get the answer for the member. I'll try and get it to you before the member is no longer a member so that at least for the member's benefit, you can know whether that makes sense or not as a suggestion. I think it's reasonable to ask. I just don't have the answer right now.

C. Evans: We're having a bit of a dialogue. The idea, to refresh your memory, was to slow down the ferry a little bit in order to use less fuel — I think $100,000 a year less diesel — and less carbon, and then run it on the hour. It is my impression that the ministry might actually save money. I appreciate that the minister is going to look into it, but it isn't just running on the hour; it's slowing down the ferry.

Hon. K. Falcon: We'll look into that, and obviously the calculation would be the slowing down and what that would mean in terms of labour costs and whether that would outweigh the savings on the fuel side. It wouldn't be a hard calculation to make, I wouldn't think, so we'll try and find that out for you.

C. Wyse: In the past I've had discussions with the minister with regards to maintenance projects, road
[ Page 14121 ]
upgrades across the Cariboo, and specifically with Cariboo South. The amount of print information that I'm able to find on this fund and its use has been relatively narrow, so I'm going to mention some items that we've had discussions on either through correspondence or through questions in estimates in the past. I'm going to name some of them.

From the Loon Lake area, Highway 20. Loon Lake would be off of 97, Minister, in fairness. Highway 20, of course, is Williams Lake out to Bella Coola. Highway 24 — specifically in the Bridge Lake–Interlakes area. Then, likewise, we have concerns that have come in with regards to maintenance and road upgrades from the 150 Mile area, the Horsefly area and the Likely area.

It would be my understanding that correspondence has taken place either directly with here in Victoria or through the local highways people. Is it those types of projects that will be reviewed for consideration for the allocation of the supplementary funds?

Hon. K. Falcon: All of those corridors that the member talks about would be candidates for sure for improvements as part of the $20 million stimulus. The key thing to get across here, Member, is that what we're trying not to do is recognize that this is a difference in terms of the sense of urgency that the Premier was trying to get across in a statement back in October when he laid out his ten-point plan.

The idea was to make sure that we put people to work as immediately as we could, particularly in the south Cariboo where local equipment and local workers could be hired to get involved in doing some work now, not sort of six month from now. We didn't want to bureaucratize the whole process by saying: "Well, now, here's a list of eligible projects, and here's the bureaucratic approval process that we're going to go through."

[1710]

The idea was to get people working now. That would act as a bridge towards larger projects that will also employ a bunch of those folks on the Cariboo connector, for example. Right now, this year, we'll have about $100 million of work underway in the Cariboo connector.

We have a number of projects that we are working on with the federal government. We would like to see us joint-share further improvements on the Cariboo connector. The Premier has identified that as a key priority corridor for the province of British Columbia. So there will be, I think it's safe to say, enough work — which is either underway or being contemplated — to keep the folks in the Cariboo very busy this year.

We hope to do that because that acts as an important stimulus. The $20 million that we're talking about as part of the supplemental estimate is going to be more of the kind of work like the gravelling on side roads or the brushing or pavement patching, etc., that could be done on any one of those corridors. That will, again, employ that local labour and hired equipment to get them working right now.

C. Wyse: I appreciate the answer from the minister, and I think I understand the distinction that the minister is making. All of my questions were off of the so-called Cariboo connector, and they're all off on roads away from that area.

I also recognize what I think the minister's point was. When you have big projects like he's referring to, they're very large sums of money that are spent, and the actual employment figure on manpower is relatively small. If I was understanding the minister correctly, these $20 million are more with the intention of trying to improve upon the number of man-hours of employment rather than necessarily increasing the number of kilometres of pavement that may be laid down.

I see the minister is nodding in agreement. So he seems to be quite in agreement with me, then, that my understanding of what he was talking about on the highway connector has a very different effect upon what this program is about. I appreciate the communication in this fashion.

Then, having established that, my question follows out of the large number of local contractor potentials. The person who's got a backhoe, a grader or a dumptruck, who is presently unemployed…. Pardon me. That's an overstatement on my part. Would be looking for work to do — that would be, I think, more accurate to describe it.

What assurances is the minister able to give me that it's this type of work that will go to those types of individuals? And given that answer, how do they go about getting in on acquiring those types of contracts, or whatever they're called?

Hon. K. Falcon: The good news, Member, just putting aside this $20 million we're talking about for the moment, is that we have $50 million this year alone in our rural side-road program.

We have made clear…. The ministry staff is working to break down those contracts into small enough pieces so that a lot of the small contractors the member is referring to will have the ability to access those contracts readily. We're also utilizing day labour wherever we can so that we have the ability to hire a lot of that equipment and a lot of those operators on a day-labour basis to work on many of these projects. So that is a significant amount of work that we've already been pushing out the door.

We've tried to tender these projects early, even in the winter. Even though they're not going to be able to start work, we want the contracting community to know that this work is out there, that they can bid on it and have some certainty of work as soon as the conditions allow. So we will continue with that. There will be a heavy emphasis on smaller contracts, day labour.

[1715]
[ Page 14122 ]

With respect to the $20 million of additional supplemental estimates that we're talking about today, those are geared exactly to those very small operators, the local equipment folks that may have one piece of equipment — an excavator, a grader or whatever it may be. We want to make sure that they get to work. That's what our staff is busily doing with the maintenance contractors: to identify projects on the side road network that will be good, eligible candidates for these kinds of contractors and for these kinds of dollars.

C. Wyse: My ignorance, when you talk about maintenance contractors…. Sometimes I think of the people that have the maintenance contract that is in existence for areas versus someone who's interested in getting a contract to do maintenance. The minister has used some terminology that has left me somewhat confused here.

Later, when it is the minister's turn to respond, I would ask that he would clarify that, to ensure that this work is going to go out to the independent contractors who are able to get this type of work. While he's explaining that, I would also ask so that when I share this information with the people that are through my office looking for this type of work: what process that they make application for…? Would it be the normal way that they would get this type of work and this type of contract?

Hon. K. Falcon: No, that's actually a good question to ask. I had canvassed this a little bit earlier, but the member might not have heard that, so that's all right.

What happens is that we utilize the maintenance contractors, because they will be able to help us identify a lot of the work that could be undertaken. So we will count on them and our district staff to identify the works that will allow us to get these workers and their equipment hired.

The maintenance contractors have a list of the day-labour lists, which list all the equipment and manpower that are available for these projects. So they have the ability, once we've identified the list of projects, to immediately go to that list and start phoning up those day-labour folks, who are the small contractors that the member and I are referring to.

Really, at the end of the day, that is our goal, in a nutshell. Our goal is to get this $20 million, in a very short period of time, out the door and on to contractors so that they can do important maintenance work. Although individual jobs may be small jobs in the scheme of a $3.5 billion budget, it is very important and significant work for that hired equipment and the individuals that we're going to be asking to carry it out.

Our key is to identify those projects as quickly as we can and get those workers working as quickly as we can.

C. Wyse: To the minister: thank you for repeating yourself. I was not here. I'm most appreciative of that fact.

Recent discussions with the council of 100 Mile…. They have a bridge on a secondary road that is inside the boundaries of the village of 100 Mile. They're responsible for the maintenance, the rehabilitation and what have you for this particular bridge. The cost of doing such is huge, and my question is: would bridge rehabilitation work also be considered for this type of fund that is here?

Hon. K. Falcon: It is amazing to me that there is anything left in 100 Mile House that we haven't paved or fixed up. Apparently there is now a local bridge that I was unaware of.

[1720]

I think the member will know, of course, that 100 Mile House is a unique area, because every time I go there, we're virtually carried on their backs through the streets, celebrating the investments that we've done jointly through the community.

As the member knows, through the pine beetle impact funding, we made grants to the community of 100 Mile House — significant. The amounts I haven't got off the top of my head, but it was millions of dollars that went into improving their local roads.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Falcon: Yeah. No, there were a number of different grant amounts. So it was a significant amount of dollars that I know were well received.

I think if there was an issue with the local bridge, what I would suggest…. Because these dollars, of course, are not for…. We can't invest in local improvements, like local bridges or local roads unless they're under the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation.

But if it is a local bridge, my recommendation to the mayor and council there — who, by the way, are generally very good at seizing on these opportunities — would be to apply under the communities component of what's called the Building Canada fund. There is a joint federal-provincial contribution that gets made to projects right across the province, where the funding contributions are a third, a third, a third between the municipalities, the province and the federal government. That sounds like it would be a very good candidate for that program.

J. Horgan: I thank the minister for his time today. I've been listening intently to his responses to questions from this side of the House in terms of identifying projects and trying to get this $20 million out into the streets, as it were, of British Columbia. Certainly, I want to see that happen as quickly as possible, particularly if a significant chunk of that sum is going to be making its way into my communities in southern Vancouver Island.

I just want to throw a couple of projects out for the minister to reflect on and perhaps give me a sense of
[ Page 14123 ]
whether or not they would fit in this supplementary estimate. I'll start with Highway 14 west of Sooke and, in fact, Highway 14 east of Sooke. The minister will know, and I know his staff are well aware, that depending on weather events through the fall and winter months, Highway 14 can be a challenge for the residents along that ribbon of provincial highway.

Does the minister contemplate…? I know that there would be local equipment and opportunities around Lost Creek, certainly in and around Port Renfrew and stretches on both sides of Sooke. Does the ministry have a plan to look at identifiable projects in that region?

Hon. K. Falcon: Yes, the member will know that there were some significant washout issues on the highway that I think the maintenance contractor dealt with really quite well. I think the community, as I understand it, was pretty pleased with the response and the repair work that was done.

That doesn't mean there's not more to do. These dollars are more minor in scope, though, in terms of the kinds of things that would be looked at. This is going to be that kind of brushing, gravelling, patching, pavement patching — the smaller-type improvements that are being contemplated here.

[1725]

We have got a program, as you know, of bridge replacement at Sombrio. I think some of that work is underway, if my memory serves me correctly, and I'm in touch with the mayor there on a fairly regular basis about what more we could do. I think we've got a very good relationship, and we continue to invest in Highway 14.

J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that. There is work being done on the far west portions of Highway 14. This is a non-partisan comment. Certainly, the anecdotes you hear out of Port Renfrew are that every four years there's an influx of survey work in anticipation of some roadwork after that. This has been going on for 30 years, so I think that we can spread around the actors in that play. But it does cause concern, certainly in the winter months, and the minister knows that.

I'll confirm that he's correct that certainly Port Renfrew residents were quite pleased with the speed with which the washout — the road disappearing, in fact — was handled by the maintenance crews. But I'm thinking that, consistent with what the minister is proposing for this money, shoulder improvements would be consistent with this envelope.

There are numerous opportunities along Highway 14 that do get passed by when we're looking at the larger problems that emerge, whether it be on bridges around Sombrio or Lost Creek. There are some big-ticket or long stretches of shoulder work that could be done around Highway 14. I'm wondering if that is part of the equation, keeping in mind that the district of Sooke — the mayor that the minister refers to — is just one very, very small portion of that long stretch of road.

Hon. K. Falcon: Yes, shoulder improvements are exactly the kind of thing that would qualify under this. It has the beauty of being additional work that we could undertake relatively easily which will utilize local equipment and labour.

As I say, the district offices and maintenance contractors are identifying right now what would be good candidates for that. I would agree with the member that shoulder improvements along that route would be good prospective projects.

J. Horgan: I have a very, very good relationship with district staff. They're very attentive to my requests for assistance with information. They're very quick to get to trouble spots at various times during the year. So I have no complaints whatsoever with the capacity on the ground.

I'm wondering if the minister could advise me how members like me can participate or insert themselves in the process of identifying those projects. I know I've got a couple I'd like to rattle off here now. Renfrew Road in the Shawnigan district is one that's historically a challenge for residents at the north end of Shawnigan Lake. And at the south end of Shawnigan Lake is the Sooke Lake Road, which is the only access way north of the Malahat into the CRD water district lands.

The community is growing along Sooke Lake Road in the Shawnigan district. They've contacted me. I'm meeting with ministry officials and residents, I believe next week, to talk about the challenges they have with that road.

Mountain Road in the Glenora area is another one that I know the minister's staff will be getting e-mails and correspondence on from my constituents who are concerned about the state of that road and what they perceive to be a lack of maintenance and rehabilitation dollars.

Again, I think all members could list off a handful of community projects that are small enough to fit the criteria that the minister is talking about, but perhaps in some cases so small that they might not get on that list.

As the minister consults with staff, I'll just talk a little bit more about the Sooke Lake Road question. It is an alternative route to the Malahat to get through from Shawnigan Lake through the water district into either Sooke or Langford. A growing population there is concerned that the road is not up to a standard that one would come to expect from a provincial highway, and as I understand it, Sooke Lake Road would fit that criteria.

[1730]

Now that the minister has had time to think about that, could he comment on how I could access, on behalf of my constituents, district staff to make sure that these projects are high up on the list and that some of that $20 million will roll into Malahat?
[ Page 14124 ]

Hon. K. Falcon: The member will know that many of these issues and requests are often longstanding. It won't be news to our local district offices or even the maintenance contractors. They are obviously keenly aware of what the requests have been through different communities over time. Obviously, where they can try and combine the requests to utilizing some of these dollars to — in part at least — deal with some of those requests, they will certainly do so.

The key, of course, is to move as quickly as possible. I'm really leaving virtually all of that judgment in the hands of the district offices and the maintenance contractors who, together, have a far better understanding of all the different local needs than I could ever pretend to or try and grasp, especially given that I'm responsible for projects right across the province.

I can tell the member that if they are issues that have been sent in, in the past or longstanding issues, they will be very much on the radar screen, with the proviso that they would obviously have to be projects that are small enough to be dealt with quickly with local equipment, local hires, etc. If the member is talking about larger road improvements, that is a different discussion we could have on whether that is part of our rehab plans or capital upgrade plans that we may have going forward.

J. Horgan: I thank the minister for that, and I wouldn't have expected that he would be participating in decision-making on projects at the district level. So I'm comforted to hear that he is of the same view as me on that.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

There is one other criterion that I would like to throw out, and it's specifically around Mill Bay Road in my constituency. There is significant concern around safety. It's a potentially larger issue than could be addressed by this fund, when you consider how widely you have to stretch this $20 million envelope, but safety on Mill Bay Road is something that's been raised with me by constituents. Improvements could be made as easily as relocating signage, brush work around some of the more treacherous turns.

Negotiations are underway with the Malahat First Nation, for example, to move the ferry…. I'm endeavouring to have a discussion with the head of B.C. Ferries about putting signage in place to divert traffic away from Mill Bay Road and make a more direct line to the Trans-Canada Highway so that there are fewer cars on the road. That, of course, will improve the safety, and it will reduce the need for rehabilitation and maintenance.

Is safety one of the criteria? I assume it is, but I may have missed it if the minister raised it before now. Could he comment on whether or not safety is a criterion in finding ways to get this money off the back of the truck and into communities?

Hon. K. Falcon: The short answer is that safety is always an issue in the ministry. Virtually all the kinds of improvements we're talking about — the gravelling, the patching, the brushing, clearing, sightline clearings, etc. — are driven around safety issues.

I don't know whether Mill Bay Road made it on that candidate list. I just don't actually know. But as I said to the member, I think the key thing I can assure members right across the province is that these are dollars that will be spread throughout the province. We have made it clear that we expect the local district offices, in coordination with the maintenance contractors, to identify those projects and get people hired and to work immediately.

S. Fraser: I understand that the amount we're working with here, the $20 million, is spread over the entire province. So there are a number of issues, like the alternative access route through to Port Alberni. We've talked about that before. That's a larger project that I'm assuming doesn't fit into these criteria.

[1735]

The Bamfield road. We've come some way since we first began discussions four years ago. The last time we spoke, you did acknowledge the need for improvements on the road — that you would be working, I think, with the Minister of Forests to address that. Is this package of funding potentially…? Is any of it being allotted towards addressing the dire safety needs on the Bamfield road?

Hon. K. Falcon: The short answer is that it wouldn't be a candidate for this $20 million because it is a Forest Service road. We don't have the ability in the Ministry of Transportation to be investing in that. As I may have referred to earlier, there is another $20 million that the Ministry of Forests is responsible for, and that is to be invested in exactly those kinds of roads.

I know the Ministry of Forests, probably utilizing much the same approach that we are utilizing for this $20 million, will have a long list of requests that have been made over the years to improve different Forest Service roads. It wouldn't surprise me at all if that was one of them, but I just don't have that information at my fingertips.

S. Fraser: I thank the minister for that. That's good. I'll try to be as squeaky a wheel as I can with the Minister of Forests on that. I know there's competition, and $20 million gets spread pretty thin when it's the whole province. Needs are great all over, but it's certainly very important on the Bamfield road.

I'll move right on. I mentioned the issue around alternative access across the Island — Highway 4 not being part of this. Is there anything anticipated? Highway 4 going from, say, Qualicum Beach to Port Alberni over what they call the Hump and/or Port Alberni and beyond to the west coast — Ucluelet, Tofino and the Nuu-chah-nulth communities there.
[ Page 14125 ]

Hon. K. Falcon: Really, I guess the short answer is yes. They would be candidates for sure — prime candidates probably. That is something that the maintenance contractors and the district office will be looking at in terms of what projects along that corridor could be undertaken that would meet the needs of communities, would address probably historical requests or that would improve safety.

Again, keep in mind that we are talking about smaller projects, but smaller projects that are huge projects for the local equipment and the individuals that are being hired. Especially given that we are doing it over a very short period of time, it really magnifies the spend, as opposed to if you were spending this $20 million over 12 months.

The member is quite right that would be dollars that in the scheme of things might not appear that large. When you're doing it over a shorter period of time, over a 60-day period, then that will magnify that investment and the opportunities.

I think the short answer is yes. They have probably identified already or are in the process of identifying what those projects would be.

S. Fraser: Thanks to the minister. I agree. I mean, the job aspect of that is kind of where I'm going in the Alberni Valley. There has been significant job loss in the forest sector. Certainly, they are perfectly situated to potentially benefit from some employment opportunities through improvements on that road — Highway 4. That's good news.

Just a general question. Secondary roads. This year, it seems more than other years, we've got quite a few complaints about the level of maintenance. We had the snow issues, but set that aside for a moment — just the state of secondary roads in the area around the whole central Island, Qualicum Beach, north of Qualicum, the regional district of Nanaimo and areas there. Is there any potential for improvement on just the general shape of some of those secondary roads?

[1740]

Hon. K. Falcon: I appreciate the question. The winter we had, for the benefit of the member to give some perspective around it, was the second-worst recorded winter event that we've had for Vancouver Island in the history of the province. It certainly would have had an impact on those side roads that the member references.

I can assure the member that through our rural road program and the ongoing work of the maintenance contractors, we will do our level best to get at those projects and make improvements. Indeed, if they form part of the recommendations coming out of the district office or the maintenance contractors, it could even involve some of the dollars that we're talking about here.

But you know, I think the key thing is that we want to get people put to work now and get some of those improvements done quickly.

S. Fraser: I have one final question. I have quite a few more questions, but I'm mindful of the time. There are other members who wish to speak.

I had a visit with concerned citizens in a little community — well, it's not that little; it's a growing community — known as Little Qualicum Village Estates. It's north of Qualicum Beach. It's growing and becoming quite a bustling community with a growing population — potentially up to 2,000 in that region now.

There's only one real access, as it stands, from the lower highway — the older 19A. Travelling up through Corcan Road, it goes up towards the Island Highway, which is very close to this community, much closer than it is from 19A.

There's only the one way in or out, and actually the road is surprisingly challenging going in there — very thin. There's no shoulder. The hydro poles and telephone poles are right on the roadside. There's no room to pull over, and school buses and everything have to travel that.

One of their concerns — and it's been a repeated one…. Now that we're seeing that growth in that community…. Again, this is $20 million, and I realize this might be pushing that envelope. But is there any consideration towards the start of the project to access the Island Highway from this region, from Little Qualicum Village Estates?

Hon. K. Falcon: The member is correct in that the $20 million we're talking about would not be utilized towards trying to deal with issues like that. I think when the government of the day was building the Island Highway, one of the things they tried to do, rightly, was limit the accesses on and off the highway. You will very quickly defray and devalue your investment if you allow too many on- and off-ramps or intersections onto the highway.

I think it is incumbent, obviously, upon communities to think about how they develop in a way that will allow them to access the existing access points onto the Island Highway in a manner that is consistent with what the original plans were on the Island Highway.

I don't have details of that. My recollection of Corcan Road is that there was an access allowed for emergency vehicles on and off the highway, but it was never ascertained at the time it was constructed that that would turn into a full access for the community. Again, it's not within the gambit, obviously, of our discussion here on the $20 million. I just haven't got any more information except what I recall.

S. Fraser: Just for the record, that access is a gated access through private lands. It doesn't provide the universal access that certainly the residents are hoping for. The issues are more now around access for — I mean, there's ease of access, of course — emergency vehicles, school buses, that sort of thing.
[ Page 14126 ]

Hopefully, as — not this pocket of money — budgets unfold, that can be looked at in the interests of public safety as well as, of course, the growth of the communities there. Thank you to the minister and his staff for their time.

[1745]

H. Lali: I'd like to start off by thanking the staff that is with the minister and also his regional and local staff. We have a very good rapport with folks in the region in terms of answering some of the questions that we have on local issues. So I wanted to put that on the record to begin with.

I've got three questions that I'm going to ask. The first one…. I just want to point out that there's a road called the Summers Creek Road near Princeton. It's also known as the Missezula Lake road. I have talked to some of the local highways officials there. A little bit of extra funds are actually needed, perhaps not in one year but over a three-year period.

It's just for simple things like grading, gravelling, ditching and clearing some brush along the side that interferes with the daily traffic that comes in and out of Missezula Lake towards Princeton and even some large rocks cropping out from the road. It's about $250,000 over a three-year period. That's one road there.

The other one is a small community called Walhachin just off the Trans-Canada Highway between Cache Creek and Kamloops. If you're going to Cache Creek from Kamloops, folks are asking for a left-hand turn lane towards Walhachin there as they go across the river.

There are numerous places around the province. Spences Bridge comes to mind. If you're heading towards Vancouver from Cache Creek on the Trans-Canada, there are a couple of left-turn lanes that are painted on the highway for folks to make an easy egress off the highway. I'm just sort of wondering if the Summers Creek Road and the Walhachin left-turn lane would fit the criteria for this fund of $20 million.

Hon. K. Falcon: With respect to the Missezula, Member, my understanding is — and I think the member confirmed it in his comments — that we had committed…. Was it $250,000 over three years for improvements to the road? I'm not sure if that was what the member….

H. Lali: That's what's needed.

Hon. K. Falcon: Oh, that's what's needed. Okay. In the announcement that the member was at when we made an announcement together, did that include any dollars for the Missezula?

Interjection.

Hon. K. Falcon: Okay, it didn't. Thank you. I'm just going by memory.

What I'll do, then, is look into whether the items that they've identified in your area will include Missezula. Hopefully, that would have been on the radar screen of either the district office or the maintenance contractor, because I know we have talked about this before.

In terms of the Walhachin left-hand turn lane, it would be an unlikely candidate, primarily because it's probably just too large in terms of the design work. I don't know if there are property acquisition issues that would be necessitated by a project like that, but I suspect that's probably too large for the project we're talking about. Hopefully, that helps answer….

H. Lali: Yes, I understand these couple of items that I'm going to mention probably would not fit in terms of criteria. The minister was up in Lillooet in the summer, and I want to thank the minister and his staff for the announcements that were made for road and bridge improvements in the Lillooet area.

One issue up there that the mayor and council at the time brought forward was the Pioneer Road 40, which is through downtown in the district of Lillooet. Last time, obviously, the revitalization that took place was in '93-94, so it's about 15 years back.

[1750]

Obviously, there's potholing, and some of the surface is coming apart with heavy traffic that's going through there. Obviously, we'll be looking for support from the ministry on that.

As well, the old highway from Kamloops to Merritt — the old No. 5 highway…. There are a lot of heavy trucks that use that — the chip trucks coming in from Princeton and Merritt. They don't go over the Coquihalla; it's too much of a height. So they use that road quite a bit.

It's getting pretty beat up. I'm just wondering if the minister might want to sort of do a multi-year program to start chipping away at some of the investment that's actually needed. Some of the shoulders are falling apart because the trucks, as you know, are fairly heavy, and there's the pounding that takes place. Then we've had the last few years a couple of severe winters, so you get frost heaving and cracks that form in the road. Could any of that be done, if that road might be eligible under this fund?

Hon. K. Falcon: With respect to Pioneer Road 40 through Lillooet, that would be a good candidate. In fact, it may have been identified. I don't know, but it may have been identified as some work that could be done as part of the $20 million. Hopefully, that will be the case. I just don't know.

With respect to Highway 5A, as the member would know, he's right. It's a longstanding issue about the trucks that utilize Highway 5A, so we're trying to deal with this in a couple of ways.

One is that we are working with the B.C. Trucking Association to try and encourage the truckers to utilize
[ Page 14127 ]
the Coquihalla Highway. It is obviously wider lanes. It's much better from our point of view if the trucks would utilize that road. There's no toll on the highway anymore, so that ought to act as some incentive. I know there has always been a historical resistance to it in the trucking community because of the hill climb. They'd like to avoid that by using 5A. But again, that is work that is ongoing.

I also had the opportunity, with a member of my staff, to drive…. A number of months ago — I forget the exact time — we drove 5A so I could look at it firsthand. I had received a call from a rancher, while I was on a radio program in Kamloops, who suggested that the road was in really tough shape. It wasn't entirely borne out during my trip, but there were rough patches, for sure.

I know that ministry staff committed to undertaking some repavement. In fact, there was some work underway while I was driving the highway. We intend to do more on 5A to continue to improve the standard for the benefit of the communities.

[1755]

H. Lali: I thank the minister for that answer.

My final question. I'll just make a general statement first. You know, Highway 3 from Hope all the way down to the Alberta border is very essential for the southern part of British Columbia. It's a main route, as you know, with dozens of communities along the way.

Some of them might be small communities, but it is a lifeline for all of those small communities starting from the Hope area, my constituency, the Similkameen, through the Boundary country, all the way through the southern Kootenays and right to the Alberta border, with multiples of communities along that road. Like I mentioned, it's very, very important not only as a lifeline for business and commerce and industry but also for tourists that come up there. A lot of folks come up from the United States bringing their tourist dollars with them. So that's my statement.

At the same time, there's a committee of mayors along Highway 3 that had been formed over the last several years. They've met on a regular basis. The mayors themselves actually identified Hope to Princeton as the section that is most in need of upgrading, repair or repavement work.

It's been a while now. I know there are a couple of bridges that this present government has replaced and been working on over the last number of years. In terms of repavement it is direly in need of some repavement work, whether it's hot-in-place remix or two-inch overlay. The minister and his staff will obviously determine that. I've been getting a lot of complaints in my office not only from my constituents but from folks and elected officials who live along that road.

That's another issue that I'd like to put on the table. I was wondering if the minister, along with his staff — his expert advice — will put that on a priority list. I know there's work being done on the Trans-Canada and other highways. This is another one right across the southern belt of the province that needs help. I think if we start from a west-to-east route, that would probably be the best way to do it, especially between Hope and Princeton — if that might not be on the minister's priority list.

Hon. K. Falcon: I would agree with the member. I think the Premier made it clear that he wants to see some good investment on Highway 3 and particularly on bridge replacement opportunities. We will, on the section between Hope and Princeton, be doing some significant repaving. I think there's some bridge replacement work that's going to be underway this year. So we are moving forward with that.

We have identified Highway 3 projects as priority projects that we would like to see underway. A lot of the work and design work and property issues are being dealt with. We are hopeful that there will be a number of projects underway on Highway 3 this year and indeed in the coming years that will make, I think, a dramatic improvement to Highway 3.

M. Karagianis: The minister has kind of answered a number of the questions here of members, but we haven't really heard a lot of specifics. Will there be a series of announcements? I know the minister is talking about this $20 million being spent in a very short window of opportunity. Is that going to just seamlessly roll out by the local maintenance contractors, or will there be a series of announcements as these projects are identified in communities?

Hon. K. Falcon: The short answer is no, there won't be announcements. Announcements, frankly, would hold up the process of getting the dollars out into communities and getting people hired.

We announced that we were doing the program, obviously. The Premier announced it as part of the ten-point plan back in October to get the economy moving. Our whole goal is to get those dollars into communities, get people hired, get local equipment hired and get them to work immediately. That means there will not be announcements around that. It will just be work that's getting out there and people getting hired and put to work.

M. Karagianis: I do have one further question on the $20 million. The minister mentioned several times that existing maintenance contracts would be increased to take care of new work. I'm sure the minister is aware of the ongoing concerns here with the failure of vehicle inspections by private contractors around the province. Most recently reported out are literally hundreds of violations, and many vehicles are not even roadworthy in many cases.

[1800]
[ Page 14128 ]

Can the minister perhaps clarify whether or not there is going to be any oversight of these? Obviously, with new jobs, new money coming into these maintenance contracts, there's some concern here about the safety of these vehicles on the roads. Certainly if there's going to be more work and a bit of a flurry of work here in the next couple of months, could the minister perhaps just let the House know here exactly what the plan is for clamping down on these vehicle violations?

Hon. K. Falcon: Obviously, we're getting a little bit outside the gamut of the $20 million, but I think I follow the thread the member is following here.

First of all, our commercial vehicle inspection staff were the people who identified the problem vehicles as a result of pulling over some vehicles on the highway. I believe it was VSA and, ultimately, Emcon. They identified that there was a problem. They went to their yard and actually inspected all their vehicles. We found that there were some deficiencies, and we have worked with the maintenance contractors to ensure they put in place a system to ensure that all of their vehicles are held to the same standard we expect all trucks on our provincial road network to be, which is the highest standard in terms of safety.

With respect to the $20 million, no, none of this money would be able to be utilized towards any of their existing fleet. In fact, the requirement is that any of these dollars that are for jobs that have been identified in part by maintenance contractors will be for equipment that is not their equipment. It will be locally hired equipment. It will be equipment that will be identified as part of the day-labour lists that every district office has, and will be utilizing, in the course of doing these improvements.

The short answer is that we expect all commercial truck operators in British Columbia to adhere to the highest standards. I don't care whether they're maintenance contractors or not maintenance contractors. They'll all be held to the same standard. If they are not up to that standard, we'll deal with them, and we'll make sure they get up to that standard. Otherwise, they won't be operating on our highways.

M. Karagianis: I'm happy to hear that in fact some of this money will not be used in any way to rectify any of those violations.

I would like to move at this point into a separate line of questioning here that I hope that the minister is prepared to discuss, and this is the $100 million of funding from the consolidated revenue fund that is being provided in these supplementary estimates for "Loans, investments and other requirements," funding for an investment in the Transportation Investment Corporation related to the Port Mann project. I would like to ask the minister if he can enlighten us as to what this $100 million is going to be used for.

The Chair: The committee will recess for five minutes.

The committee recessed from 6:03 p.m. to 6:09 p.m.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

M. Karagianis: I did want to ask and clarify here. I've honed in on just the one aspect of the consolidated revenue fund, but in fact, it is $180 million.

Is the $80 million also attached to Transportation estimates, and what would that be for? Or is it only the $100 million that would be specific to Transportation?

[1810]

Hon. K. Falcon: The $100 million that we're referring to is specific to the Ministry of Transportation. That $100 million is to be invested as equity into the Transportation Investment Corporation, which was the Crown corporation we set up last spring, you'll recall, to oversee and implement the construction of the Port Mann/Highway 1 improvements. That would go towards things like property acquisition, construction, project oversight, project development — those kinds of things.

M. Karagianis: It does say that the contingency, the other $80 million is for all ministries and new programs. Are any of those dollars also going to Transportation?

Hon. K. Falcon: No.

M. Karagianis: I do have a number of questions related to the $100 million, but I do have one question here which is related to the Transportation Investment Corporation, which was created under Bill 14.

If we look back at that bill, it's actually called the Port Mann twinning act. Is there going to be an amendment to that act now that apparently the twinning aspect of this project is no longer relevant? Will there be an amendment to the act?

Hon. K. Falcon: No, there would be no amendment required whatsoever to the name of the bill.

M. Karagianis: Is that because, in fact, this has nothing to do with the twinning? That was the cornerstone of the debate at the time. We have now the Transportation Investment Corporation. Money is going into it. It was created under Bill 14. Does it make Bill 14 sort of an irrelevant move that was made?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm trying to follow the member's line here. The Transportation Investment Corporation was set up to undertake the Port Mann/Highway 1 improvements, including a new bridge and 37 kilometres' worth of highway improvements, including interchanges.
[ Page 14129 ]

What kind of bridge, obviously, would come out as a result of the RFP process we went through. So whether it's a twin bridge or a single bridge, it is still a new bridge. And the Transportation Investment Corporation is still there to serve the original purpose for which we brought in Bill 14, which is to oversee the construction and delivery of this very major important project.

I guess I'm failing to understand where this is causing the member confusion.

M. Karagianis: Well, it's actually just in the name of the bill. I do remember the debate on this. Transportation Investment (Port Mann Twinning) Amendment Act was Bill 14. That was the actual title of that. If that's irrelevant, then that's fine. We'll simply move on past that.

Then let me ask a little bit here about the progress on the Port Mann project. In August there was an announcement here by the government that they had granted the contract to a consortium that was made up of two builders, Kiewit and Sons and Flatiron; and one financier, Macquarie Bank. That contract was granted to the consortium.

The twinning project that we had been hearing much about for several years then was announced as being not a twinned project anymore but a single project of ten lanes. It's my understanding that in September some kind of construction began in some form or other and that by the end of '08-09 somewhere between $84 million and $94 million in construction costs will be incurred. Is that what this $100 million is meant to cover?

[1815]

Hon. K. Falcon: Yes, some of those dollars will be utilized for work today, and some will be utilized for future work that needs to be undertaken on the project.

One thing I will say to the member, just with respect to how it went from a twinned bridge to a single bridge…. Part of what we look for when we undertake these competitive processes, under the RFP, is design innovations and construction delivery methods that will deliver a project — especially an important, major project like this — most cost-effectively for the taxpayers of the province.

What we don't do is tell them exactly how to design it. What we say is: "Here are the requirements that government needs. Here is what the likely growth is going to be across this corridor." All the groups get to bring forward their bids and their innovation in terms of who can bring forward the best plan, the best design at the most cost-competitive price for the benefit of the public.

In this case, two of the three concession groups came forward with the idea of having a single bridge as opposed to twinning the bridge. That was primarily a financial decision, a good one, that was made because they recognized that over the course of being responsible for the new bridge and the improvements along the highway corridor over the next 35 years….

They recognized that we already have an existing structure that's 46 years old. In 30 years it'll be much older than the Pattullo Bridge, for example. They made what I think is a wise and, clearly, smart decision of saying that rather than having to look after increasing rehabilitation costs on the existing bridge, which is already almost 50 years old, it would make more sense to build a brand-new ten-lane structure with a 100-year design life span and go forward with that. The savings over the term would actually more than benefit from the decision they made not to utilize the existing bridge.

That's how it moved from a twinned bridge, which was the original thought in government, to a single-span bridge, which was ultimately the successful design that was put forward by the successful Connect B.C. Group and the contractors involved in that group.

M. Karagianis: So what the minister is saying here is that, in fact, the tender was open-ended on this for what this project would be. The minister has talked a lot in this province about the twinning, yet now I hear the minister say that he doesn't tell the bidder how to build.

Is that tender simply just open? We want to build a project, and whoever wants to come forward and bid on whatever can come in and then drive the process in a brand-new direction.

Hon. K. Falcon: The way it works, Member, is basically this. We go to the marketplace and say to the marketplace: "Here are the financial parameters that you will be operating in as you consider putting forward your bids, your design work and what you propose to do. First of all, here is the toll that you will be eligible to collect. It is a fixed toll with a fixed inflation factor and a fixed term. Here is the number of lanes that are required in the improvement, in terms of the lane requirements for every section of the highway, that must form part of what you are bidding on."

[1820]

The final thing is that there are functional requirements. Based on the consultations we had with the public, we know that there are going to be certain requirements that must form part of it.

Obviously, it has to meet all the latest highway standards in terms of lane widths and safety improvements, etc., but we also want to make sure that it incorporates the results of the public consultative process. So the RapidBus lanes have to be part of that. The queue-jumper lanes for both RapidBus and commercial vehicles on the interchanges must be part of that. All of that has to be part of the framework which the three bidding groups are looking at.
[ Page 14130 ]

Within that context, that framework and those parameters, they will then go to work with their engineering teams, design teams, contractor teams and financial arms, and they will put together a plan to present to government that will incorporate what they can do for the dollars that are available for the functional requirements that the government sets out.

Essentially, what we do as government is say: "Which one has the best design innovations and the best benefits, in terms of meeting the needs that government set out, for the best price?" We will make that decision based on those issues, and that's what happened.

In this case, the successful bid group came forward with a very innovative design plan, and not just on the bridge but on the 37 kilometres of highway improvement from Vancouver to 216th Street, including the interchange improvements that they were going to undertake. As a result of that, they were the successful lead proponent.

We then went into a negotiation process with them. As the member knows, we were unable to conclude on the financial portion of their group, but we were able to conclude with the contractor portion of the group on a design-build fixed-price contract on the basis of the work that they had undertaken as part of the Connect B.C. Development Group.

M. Karagianis: Well, in fact, this twinning of the Port Mann has been very misleading. There's been a huge public debate going on for several years in the Lower Mainland about this. The minister has been adamant for years about the twinning: "We are going to twin that bridge." I have heard the minister be very, very passionate about the fact that the bridge was going to be twinned.

A huge public debate has occurred. We have got mayors who've taken positions on this. There have been endless talk shows. There have been debates in this House, and now the minister just basically said it was nothing. At no point was there ever any real intention to twin the Port Mann Bridge. We have a bill, Bill 14, that's actually called the Transportation Investment (Port Mann Twinning) Amendment Act, but again, that twinning was apparently not a real factor in any of this.

So I would just ask the minister: has this not misled the public entirely in a debate for the last couple of years by claiming that this bridge would be twinned? Now the minister is telling me that an open tender has driven the process in some other direction, and gosh, we never did really mean to twin the bridge at all. That has been very misleading to the public.

Hon. K. Falcon: Let me try and walk the member through this, because I think when the member understands this, she will understand just how ludicrous the statement is that she's making.

First of all, the member should know — she probably doesn't drive the bridge very often, so I'll help her — that there are five lanes on the current bridge. If you twinned the bridge, there would be ten lanes. All that has happened as a result of the negotiation process and the design competitive process is that the contractor and the bid group have rightfully looked at it and said: "Actually, we think it would make more sense to build a single ten-lane bridge."

Five plus five equals ten. We're talking about a single ten-lane bridge, and why did they do that? They did that because part of the design innovation and part of what we look for in the P3 competitive process is what makes the most sense. In this case, the group quite rightly took a look at it and said that it makes more sense to not invest in a 46-year-old existing bridge and to build a brand-new bridge with a 100-year design life span — a bridge that, by the way, would be designed and engineered to allow for rapid transit in the future on the lanes that will be utilized for RapidBus and HOV.

That is what we would call a design innovation. It does not in any way take away. There is nothing remotely misleading about the fact that you could achieve that purpose by twinning the bridge — it would still be ten lanes — or you could build a brand-new bridge. They just made a very compelling argument that it should be a brand-new, ten-lane bridge. We agree with that. We think that the research and the homework that they did actually backed up, reinforced and supported the decision that was going to be made.

[1825]

The other thing I will say about it that is advantageous and that they also looked at is that with a single span across the bridge you would utilize half the number of bridge piers that would have been required. Because you've already got bridge piers on the existing Port Mann Bridge, if you built a twinned bridge beside it, it would require, obviously, double the amount of piers.

By utilizing a single ten-lane structure, they reduced the number of piers required by half. That reduces the environmental impact by having less shadowing, for example — fewer piers in the river. That's also a benefit that came out of the process.

Again, Member, you have to be careful about how you look at this. Government always said and always viewed that ten lanes would likely be a twin bridge. That just seemed logical to almost anyone that looked at it, but that is the beauty of the private-public partnership process.

You get the very best designers and folks from around the world that have experience in every part of this planet in terms of building major projects and infrastructure, and they look at it. They make those decisions based on what makes the most sense, has the minimal
[ Page 14131 ]
environmental impact, has the maximum benefit to the public, meets all the requirements that we set out as the Ministry of Transportation and gets the job done on schedule, on budget. That's what they did.

M. Karagianis: I do have many more questions, but noting the time, I would ask that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

The Chair: Resolution. Not on this portion, but resolution.

M. Karagianis: Resolution on the previous portion.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 6:27 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The Committee of Supply, having reported resolution and progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. I. Chong moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 6:28 p.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

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

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

Copyright © 2009: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

ISSN 1499-2175