2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th 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)

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 2, Number 7

[ Page 499 ]

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2009

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

C. James: I have two introductions today. The first is someone who is no stranger to this House. The former MLA for Cariboo South served in a number of roles, including Minister of Forests. Would the House please make welcome Dave Zirnhelt, who's here with us today.

Tributes

christina benty

C. James: Next, Golden, B.C., had a by-election this past weekend. On all our behalf, I'd like to congratulate the new mayor of Golden, Christina Benty, who's the first woman mayor of Golden. As a longtime resident and a past city councillor, Mayor Benty's work is well recognized in the community. I know she'll serve her constituents very well. I know we all wish her well, and I also know that the late mayor, Aman Virk, and the work he did will always have a place around their table and in the community of Golden. On all our behalf, congratulations.

Introductions by Members

H. Bloy: It's my pleasure to introduce some people in the House today that, with the Minister for Small Business, Technology and Economic Development, we had the opportunity of hosting at lunchtime. It's a group of young people from Port Moody–Coquitlam area, in a program called A Chance to Choose.

What it is, is they get a chance to learn new skills so that they can go back out there in the workplace. This program has been running for about six or seven years, and I can say that I've met many incredible young people from this program over the years. I would like to introduce them to the House. We have Sasha Anlovich, Jaime Balazs, Adam Boyd, Regina Challoner, Chelsea Foley, Aaron Mayday, Jed McAlister, Kenneth Homer, Corrina Kallstrom, Ashlee Lucas, Pavel Kokar, Polina Kokar.

They are the ones that are here as part of the program. But the program has been led from day one and there is great support for these young people from Evelyn Humphries, Thomas Tam and Bob Lewis, and we have Susannah Kloegman and Aman Tatla. If the House would please make them welcome.

Mr. Speaker: Member for the Cowichan Valley.

B. Routley: Thank you, Brother Speaker — hon. Speaker.

Interjections.

B. Routley: Eighteen years as a union representative, you all look like brothers and sisters to me. We kind of fight the same too.

Anyway, it's an honour and a privilege to have a group of my family here today. My sister Willa Routley is with us; Ken and Rev. Eunice Gaglardi — by the way, Ken is the son of Phil Gaglardi, who used to grace this chamber for many, many years; Rev. Wayne and Marilyn Myrie; Beryl and Fred Heath; Gordon and Amber Routley; and Donald and Daisy Routley. Please join with me in welcoming these family members.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Juan de Fuca.

J. Horgan: Thank you, Brother Speaker. Would the House please….

Mr. Speaker: I might make you withdraw that.

J. Horgan: I withdraw it, hon. Speaker. I withdraw it. Not the first time I've withdrawn, hon. Speaker, and probably not the last.

Hon. Speaker, Members of the assembly, I'd like you to welcome three constituents of mine who are here today to raise awareness about Lyme disease: David Bottles; Christine Powell; and their daughter Nicole Bottles, who has been struggling with the disease for the past 16 months. It's been debilitating for her and for their family. They were here today in the precincts. Would the House please make them welcome and give them good wishes for the future.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

WEST END SENIORS NETWORK

I rise today to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the West End Seniors Network. The network was born of a field study by undergrads from UBC's School of Social Work into the needs of my area's seniors. In 1979 a meeting to examine their findings occurred with the Ministry of Human Resources, Vancouver Health and West End seniors.

Originally funded by a federal grant, an information and referral centre was opened in 1982, a year after I was born. Three decades later the network now has over 700 members, eight wonderful staff and over 200 active volunteers contributing over 40,000 volunteer hours a year.

[1340]
[ Page 500 ]

They run a thrift store and an information and referral centre in Denman Place Mall. Their offices are in the historic Barclay Manor, where they work cooperatively with the West End Community Centre to provide free and low-cost programs designed to promote lifelong learning and increasing friendships among the West End seniors.

Some of the incredible programs offered by the network include the Happy Hookers. That's right — the Happy Hookers of the West End. Not quite what you might think. But they're a craft group, a group that creates and sells crafts to raise money for local seniors programs and seniors homes.

The network also offers popular seniors health and wellness programs, computer classes that help my constituents learn and brush up on their computer skills.

Being a senior in the West End, I'm told, can be challenging with some of the highest living expenses in Canada, especially when you live on a fixed income. We've heard many sad stories about seniors being targeted for eviction. The West End Seniors Network stands with them and helps them speak out for themselves.

Neighbours helping neighbours. That's always been what the West End Seniors Network is about. It's what the West End is all about. The members of the West End Seniors Network represent some of the best in my community.

It's my honour to invite all members of this House to join me in congratulating the incredible staff and the hundreds of volunteers of the West End Seniors Network on their 30th anniversary. Happy birthday, West End seniors, for your 30-years-young birthday. May there be many more.

B.C. SENIORS GAMES IN RICHMOND

R. Howard: Just last evening I had the opportunity to attend the 2009 B.C. Seniors Games in Richmond and declare the games officially open.

These games, running from Wednesday through closing ceremonies on Saturday, are expected to be the most successful ever with more than 4,000 participants. The B.C. Seniors Games not only show that Richmond is ready to host the world at the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games; they also show the vibrancy of our community, the dedication of our volunteers and are yet another example of strong partnerships with this government and my city.

Those of us who live in Richmond are very proud of our city, proud of our diversity, the many outstanding attractions our city has to offer and the warmth of our people. Perhaps it is no surprise that we are so eager to roll out the welcome mat and help others discover all that Richmond has to offer.

It certainly explains why more than 1,200 Richmond residents have volunteered to help make these B.C. Seniors Games the best ever, in many cases working more than 18 months towards this goal.

The leadership behind this great effort has been provided by residents of Richmond, and I would like to mention just a few: Jim LeMonde, president of the 2009 Richmond B.C. Seniors Games; Roger Barnes, vice-president; Evelyn Lau, volunteer director; Roy Ostergo; Donna Marsland; and many others. I ask the House to join me in congratulating all those who have worked so hard to make the 2009 B.C. Seniors Games a great success.

BURNABY WOMEN'S SOCCER TEAM
AT WORLD MASTERS GAMES

K. Corrigan: Well, apparently, we're on a seniors theme. Lenore Jackson is a retired elementary school teacher from Burnaby. She and 16 teammates are heading off in a couple of weeks to participate in the 2009 World Masters Games in Sydney, Australia.

This soccer team of 45-year-old-plus women are made up of participants from Burnaby's 30-something women's soccer league which Lenore describes as a varied and vibrant group. The emphasis of the World Masters Games is participation. It's not just for elite athletes. That's also the spirit of the Burnaby 30-something women's soccer league.

This league started with just one team 15 years ago and has grown to ten teams. It's made up of a variety of women of varying skill levels from all walks of life, some who just wanted to play soccer after being soccer moms, others who came back to the sport after years and others who just wanted to learn the game.

Lenore says it's a wonderful support group — that they enjoy fun, fitness and friendship together. So it really is a great example of what amateur sport in Burnaby and across this province is and should be all about. Although the focus is participation, the team has also been training hard and fundraising for two years. So I know they'll be a force to be reckoned with in Australia.

I asked Lenore what the name of the team is and she said: "The Rocks." I said, "Oh, as in Burnaby Rocks," and she hesitated and said: "No, it's Vancouver Rocks." I said, "But you're a team from Burnaby," and she said: "Well, we talked long and hard about it but decided to call our team Vancouver Rocks in order to promote the Olympic spirit in Sydney, in recognition of the fact that Vancouver is a host city next year."

[1345]

Again, Vancouver gets all the credit, but I guess it's for a good reason this time. I hope you'll join me in recognizing this great example of the spirit of amateur sport and wish the Burnaby-based Vancouver Rocks 45-plus soccer team the best of luck for a spirited but friendly competition in Sydney.
[ Page 501 ]

HEALTH AND WELLNESS INITIATIVES
IN KAMLOOPS

T. Lake: British Columbia really is the healthiest jurisdiction in all of Canada, and Kamloops is a community that is pioneering many of our achievements in health and wellness. This is a community that takes pride in its status as Canada's tournament capital and, in partnership with this government, has invested in athletic facilities and infrastructure like the Tournament Capital Centre.

This investment has paid off, promoting active lifestyles and fostering elite athletes like Olympians Dylan Armstrong and Sultana Frizell and also by hosting the B.C. boys double-A high school basketball championships. Higher participation in sports is one thing, but a huge benefit is improved community health.

In a partnership with Interior Health and the city of Kamloops, the Kamloops health improvement network helps prevent illness and restore health through a combination of exercise, education and social support. It provides programs for individuals and families to develop the necessary skills for health, wellness and the self-management of chronic conditions.

One of the network's major initiatives is the VIP or vascular improvement program, which brings together a team of dedicated health care professionals to find ways to manage cardiovascular health problems for both patients and their families. Cardiovascular problems are a leading cause of chronic disease in Canada, and they cost the health care system billions of dollars each year. Programs like the VIP can add years of quality life by keeping patients healthy following their acute care management.

After a referral from a family physician, the combination of nurses, dieticians and exercise specialists work with patients to develop an action plan for reducing the risk of heart attack, stroke and diabetes as well as increasing the skills and education for overall awareness of health.

I want to acknowledge this great partnership, the first of its sort in the province, and supported by the city of Kamloops parks and recreation and Interior Health and key people like Clint Anderson and Jennifer Edgecombe from the city of Kamloops, who have worked so hard to develop this innovative vascular improvement program.

SOLAR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
BY T'Sou-ke First NATION

J. Horgan: I take great privilege and pleasure rising in the House today to share with members an inspiring story of the T'Sou-ke Nation here in Sooke on southern Vancouver Island, one of the rural communities in my constituency of Juan de Fuca. It's on the wild west coast and is known for its great fishing, challenging hiking trails and very stormy weather — and the odd boisterous MLA as well.

Sooke is home to the 220-member T'Sou-ke Nation, which under the leadership of Chief Gordie Planes is quickly becoming a provincial leader in the area of solar energy. Recognizing the opportunity to be on the cutting edge of state-of-the-art technology, the T'Sou-ke Nation developed a plan, secured funding and is now the largest photovoltaic system operating here in British Columbia.

I had the opportunity, along with the Minister of Aboriginal Relations, to be the guest of the T'Sou-ke Nation this past summer, where I saw banks of solar panels decorated with local native art, designs on the roofs of the band office, the canoe shed, the fisheries building, and 37 of the homes in the reserve. Almost all of the remaining residents on the waiting list are ready to go, and the aim is to have all 86 houses using photovoltaic energy in the very near future.

Energy consumption has dropped by 30 percent over the past six months, and the B.C. Hydro metres on the reserve are now spinning counter-clockwise, meaning that clean, surplus power is being returned to the electrical grid. Another benefit, of course, of this program has been training and certification for nine band members to be solar panel installers.

Chief Planes is excited about the venture and recently hosted a conference where the minister and I were there to share with him knowledge about both first nations and non–first nations delegates about the hope of creating similar projects in rural communities across Vancouver Island and throughout British Columbia. The Chief, at that time, compared the gathering to a traditional potlatch, where information and experience is shared for the benefit of everyone.

The T'Sou-ke Nation is finding a new way to connect to the land and to ensure that their people protect traditional ways of life while using new technologies to meet the demands of modern society, a way that is respectful, supports conservation and treads lightly. Would the House please congratulate Chief Planes and the T'Sou-ke Nation for this innovative program.

UBC OKANAGAN

N. Letnick: It's the beginning of a new academic year across the province. As students head back to their studies, I wanted to take this opportunity as an educator to recognize the beginning of the fifth year of the University of British Columbia in the Okanagan.

[1350]

In 2005 our government created this autonomous and research-focused campus of UBC for the Okanagan. UBCO, as we affectionately call it, embarked on an ambitious course, creating a full-range facility for advanced education for Okanagan students.
[ Page 502 ]

UBCO has since been expanding and developing their programs, adding the new facilities of engineering and management, graduate studies, and anticipating the arrival of the faculty of medicine in 2011. The new facilities now have full curriculum and students in all four years of study. Last June more than 750 students graduated, including UBC Okanagan's first doctoral candidate. This coming academic year more than 6,000 students have enrolled in various programs, including a record 375 graduate students.

I would like to note, in particular, the recent opening of the new University Centre. This spectacular building, energy efficient and replete with B.C. wood products, provides a tremendous facility to meet students' needs from registration to dining.

UBCO is committed to creating a learning environment in which students from across B.C. and beyond can reach their full potential. Students, faculty and staff are working together with the community to ensure that the campus is not isolated from the community but an integral part of it and, in turn, the Okanagan has shown tremendous support for this institution.

I am tremendously pleased to see our Okanagan version of UBC begin its new calendar year and wish faculty, staff and students well as they come together to build a first class institution of advanced education in the Okanagan and British Columbia.

Oral Questions

FUNDING FOR ADDICTION SERVICES

C. James: This week three agencies providing critical addiction support programs on the North Shore were served with termination notices. West Coast Alternatives, Sea to Sky Community Services and North Shore Community Services will all lose their programs. These cuts are going to do huge damage to some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

My question is to the Minister of Health. Why are the B.C. Liberals making people with addictions pay for this government's budget deception?

Hon. K. Falcon: It's important for the member to know that, in spite of the fact that we are facing one of the most challenging economic environments we've seen in a generation in British Columbia, we have increased the budget in the Ministry of Health by almost 20 percent over the next three years — almost 20 percent. That means $2.4 billion additional dollars over the next three years in operating money.

Having said that, I have been very upfront with the fact that the health authorities wanted even more, and we have asked them, in light of the fact that we are facing the most difficult, challenging economic environment in a generation, to manage 3 to 3½ percent of their costs. That's what they are doing. They are focusing dollars on health services to make sure we are helping people where they need it, when they need it.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a supplemental.

C. James: Perhaps the minister would like to tell that to the people on the North Shore with addictions who are getting no services when these three programs shut down — no services.

These agencies are best at what they do. There's very clear evidence that community-based organizations save money and improve outcomes. In fact, West Coast Alternatives serves 250 clients at any given time. They have a four-month wait-list for services. Their executive director recently won an award for outstanding service. They have an incredibly important function in the community, but their programs are all being dismantled because of this government's incompetence.

Again to the minister: doesn't he realize that cutting these community-based supports is shortsighted and will leave children and families struggling and our system in crisis?

Hon. K. Falcon: The fact of the matter is that the Leader of the Opposition is wrong. We have actually increased funding for community addiction beds by 150 percent since 2003, from 874…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[1355]

Hon. K. Falcon: …beds in 2001 to over 2,100 today. And we opened up what is becoming increasingly an acclaimed facility, the 100-bed Burnaby Centre for Mental Health and Addictions. We continue to invest in record levels for mental health and addictions in the province of British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition has a further supplemental.

C. James: West Coast Alternatives, Sea to Sky Community Services, North Shore Community Services — all closing down, all losing their funding, because of this government's decision. The minister doesn't get it. Addiction services are in crisis in this province.

At a time when there's a shortage, we're seeing these effective community programs shut down. At a time when there's a shortage, what does this government do? They cut addiction services for adults, for youth, programs in schools, programs in communities — the very things that this Premier pledged he'd support.
[ Page 503 ]

My question is to the Premier. How does slashing addiction services provide support for the most vulnerable in British Columbia?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, this is a little hard to take from the leader of a party that promised a mental health care plan that didn't have a dollar in it. A little hard to take, Mr. Speaker.

What we have done is we have increased the number…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: …of community addiction beds by 150 percent. That is an increase. Health authorities are looking to make sure that every dollar they spend is going towards direct care, direct care in beds for patients to ensure they're getting the best possible care in the province of British Columbia.

N. Simons: One of these agencies is the Sea to Sky Community Services, which has been providing effective preventative programs to the community for years. These cuts will actually have an impact on not just the individuals who receive the services but their families who are concerned about them.

So to the Minister of Health: how can he explain how he's cutting these programs so severely when the exact opposite was promised to these people before the election?

Hon. K. Falcon: I'm very proud of the fact that this is a government that has put enormous additional resources into mental health and addictions. One of the things we have tried to do is make sure that we can improve and increase the number of beds available for those that are suffering through mental health and addictions. That is why we have increased the number of beds, as I said, by 150 percent. That is why we opened the Burnaby Centre for Mental Health and Addictions, which is receiving rave reviews right across the province of British Columbia.

We will continue to increase the budget for mental health and addictions every year that we continue to help in this important problem.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

N. Simons: I think the minister's response illustrates his lack of understanding that if you actually put money into the prevention services, which is what we're talking about today, you wouldn't be putting as much into those residential beds that this minister is talking about.

I doubt there's anyone in British Columbia who thinks that cutting a community-based service by $500,000 a year, who have a client caseload over a hundred, with a waiting list of 80…. Just cutting that isn't going to have an impact on the community? It defies belief, and I don't think anyone in this province is believing this minister's answers today.

My question today is not about the residential care beds. It's about the programs in the communities that provide services to people with mental health and addictions problems and their families, who are going to worry very much about the cuts to the programs.

So will the minister explain to the people in the Sea to Sky corridor how they're going to be able to manage without these important, vital programs?

[1400]

Hon. K. Falcon: Part of what the health authorities are going to do is make sure that the dollars they are investing are going towards services that provide the best possible benefit for families and those that are dealing with mental health issues.

You know, I can imagine…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Falcon: …that in this House, we're probably going to have to get used to the NDP trying to figure out ways to call a $2.4 billion increase a cut. They are going to try and find every possible way to look at a budget that has gone up at record levels and try and call it a cut.

Apparently, nothing in the NDP world can ever change. No program can ever change; nothing should ever change. I am proud of the record of this government investing record amounts of dollars in mental health and addictions when they voted against every single one of those increases.

A. Dix: Well, the Minister of Health is doing precisely now what he was doing all summer — that is, trying to justify cuts to community services, cuts done with the minimum possible notice and without consultation. In this case, we're asking about three specific programs — $1.5 million in addiction services on the North Shore alone.

Can the minister explain why this is good for addiction services on the North Shore? Can he justify in any way, other than rhetoric, what his specific decision is in this case?

Hon. K. Falcon: One of the things that we are finding, as we do more research and investment into mental health and addictions, is that they're often concurrent disorders, both mental health and addictions.

What Vancouver Coastal is doing is repatriating some contracts that were providing mental health advice and support, bringing them back to Coastal Health and providing the exact same services, but recognizing that in
[ Page 504 ]
many cases they're concurrent disorders, and it is better delivered through Coastal Health. They will continue to receive services to deal with the fact that many of them have concurrent disorders.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

A. Dix: These are programs that were recognized recently, not just by the community but by the Ministry of Health itself, to be effective at dealing with this exact point. What he's doing is cutting services in the community, increasing wait times for addictions and not replacing those services. These are budget-related decisions.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: The minister says: "Oh, there are no cuts in health care." They're cutting surgeries. They're cutting MRIs. They're cutting seniors programs, and they're cutting programs in the community for addictions. That's what they're doing. How can the minister justify an award-winning program like West Coast Alternatives seeing its funding cut on a few months' notice?

Hon. K. Falcon: Well here you have it. The member for Vancouver-Kingsway is once again fearmongering, once again trying to suggest, Mr. Speaker….

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: Well, I can wait.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Falcon: Once again the member is fearmongering. I just explained to the member that what Vancouver Coastal is doing is repatriating certain contracts and providing the exact same service but recognizing that many of these individuals have concurrent disorders. Best practices suggest they need to receive support and advice that recognizes they have concurrent disorders. So for those….

Interjections.

Hon. K. Falcon: Just a minute. If the members would listen, they might actually hear an answer here.

Every one of those clients, every one of those clients that were receiving one-to-one counselling through West Coast Alternatives will continue to receive one-on-one counselling through Vancouver Coastal.

[1405]

APPEAL OF B.C. SUPREME COURT RULING
ON ELECTION ADVERTISING LEGISLATION

L. Krog: Remarkably, in the midst of the worst economic crisis we've seen in this province in decades, this government is going to spend tens of thousands of dollars appealing the gag law. We've got cuts to legal aid, we've got cuts to autism funding for children, and we're even cutting $130,000 out of sports funding for kids. So I want to hear from this Attorney General today how he justifies this expense, this waste of taxpayers' money, in the midst of this economic crisis when British Columbians are really suffering.

Hon. M. de Jong: I actually think the principles that are at stake here are very important.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: I think the notion of asking the highest court in the province to render an opinion on the degree to which there should be regulation in a situation in which we have a set election date — by the way, the first province to have a set election date, the first province to eliminate the kind of political manipulation that used to characterize the holding of elections….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Attorney, just take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: I think that not only is it legitimate to ask the highest court in the province to render an opinion on the regulation that should or should not be in place around that set election date, but I'm glad we're doing it, and we're doing the right thing.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

L. Krog: Oh, it's a first, all right. It's the first law of its kind anywhere in a democracy in the western world. It stinks, and the public knows it. Justice Cole stated — and he had it right: "The right to speak out against or for the government is vital for the health of any democracy." What this bill did is restrict the right of free speech in the province of British Columbia, and no one accepted it except that government on that side of the House.
[ Page 505 ]

You don't have to be a Lady Byng winner to recognize a sore loser, and that's what we're talking about here today. Why won't this Attorney General stand up in this House today and, instead of wasting money on an esoteric legal point which has already been decided by a qualified judge in the Supreme Court, put the money back where it belongs — to maybe funding autistic children?

Hon. M. de Jong: I'm trying to think back to that Latin term we learned in law school, which I think accurately describes the nature of the member's submission. What is it again? Oh yeah — crapola. That was it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: The hon. member may describe these principles as esoteric legal points. I actually think asking a court to consider the degree to which there should be regulation covering the period immediately prior to a set election date, regulating the nature of the….

The Supreme Court of Canada, the member already knows, has said that not only is it advisable or permissible to do that during a writ period; it is probably advisable. The member can dismiss that as being insignificant or esoteric. We think, on this side of the House, the principles are worth defending, and they are worth asking the Court of Appeal about. That's why we've done it.

[1410]

S. Simpson: Hon. Speaker, the Attorney General seems to be saying: "Give me another crack at seeing if I can muzzle free speech, maybe during the budget period heading up to 2013, like I tried to do during this past election."

This is disregard for British Columbians' priorities, and it's a total disregard for common sense. This government has said that they're cutting a billion and a half dollars in what they call discretionary spending, and at the same time they're prepared to spend tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars on a discredited gag law.

Will the minister tell British Columbians where the priority is to do this when kids, families and communities are facing millions of dollars in cuts?

Hon. M. de Jong: The priority, as it has always been, is to ensure that an election law and election regulations are in place, which properly balance the fundamental right that all British Columbians and citizens have to participate in that process against the possibility that agencies or deep-pocketed groups might come forward and try to overwhelm their voice.

If the members and the party opposite's position is that it should be a free-for-all, let him have the courage to stand up, make that point, and call for the elimination of regulations during the writ period and any period prior to a campaign with a set election date. I'll be very interested to hear that from the member.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Simpson: If the minister would like to bring in a new law around elections, he could start with one that says the government has to tell the truth before the election.

The courts rightly threw this out. It was a discredited law. They said it didn't make sense. They said it would have breached the free speech during the period of the budget and the throne speech, among other things — not just the election period. They threw it out, and they threw it out for good reason. But this Attorney General is prepared to go back and try to create a law that will muzzle British Columbians again, because that's how this government works.

Hon. Speaker, spend the money. Spend the money on kids, on families and communities and not on trying to defend a discredited law. Will the minister withdraw this case today?

Hon. M. de Jong: I will repeat again for the benefit of the member who hasn't heard, but I dare say he is not interested in hearing either the rationale or the argument for asking….

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. M. de Jong: I don't know why the members ask the questions when it is abundantly clear they are not interested in hearing an answer.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue, Attorney.

Hon. M. de Jong: The member makes it abundantly clear by his question and submission that he believes it is inappropriate for the Court of Appeal of the province of British Columbia to render an opinion on something as important as the election laws that govern elections in this province. I disagree fundamentally with that point of view.

If I have been unclear about that, let me say it again. I believe it is appropriate to ask the highest court in British Columbia to render an opinion on something as important as the election laws that govern elections in British Columbia.
[ Page 506 ]

FUNDING FOR ARTS AND CULTURE

S. Herbert: Yesterday the Minister of Culture and the Arts said: "We've actually put more money into arts grants this year than we did last year." He went on to tell the columnist to check his facts and tell the truth instead of a lot of hysterical talk.

[1415]

Can the minister tell me how eliminating nearly 50 percent of the investment this year through gaming and planning on cutting 90 percent next year is more money? Or is it actually the B.C. Liberals who are not telling the truth and engaging in hysterical talk?

Hon. K. Krueger: This government's commitment to the arts is abundantly clear and….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Just take your seat, Minister.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: For example, in 2008 in a single grant of $150 million, which put that money in a cultural legacy fund under the care of the B.C. Arts Council…. We provided more funding on that one occasion — triple the funding that the NDP provided in their last four years as government in the '90s.

We have had to make tough choices this year. Everyone knows why, and that is the dramatic reduction in revenues. Nevertheless, we have flowed a million dollars more to the B.C. Arts Council than we did last year. In fact, a total of almost $26 million is flowing from the province to arts organizations this year.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

S. Herbert: I think we can see, based on this government's remarks, that the minister says there are no cuts. But then we see that we go from $47.8 million down to $26 million, according to the minister. That sounds like a 50 percent cut to me.

The Minister of Culture and the Arts also said this summer that the arts community wasn't…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

S. Herbert: …"lighting their hair on fire" over the cuts to the arts, when they actually had been angrily protesting for months. Now he also says there are no cuts to arts and culture investment, when this budget clearly shows a 50 percent cut this year and a 90 percent cut next year.

So if the minister doesn't believe artists are lighting their hair on fire over these cuts, would it be more truthful to say that the minister's pants are on fire when he claims arts funding isn't being massively cut?

Hon. K. Krueger: The largest amount that the NDP government ever flowed to the B.C. Arts Council was $14.8 million.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister, just take your seat.

Members.

Continue, Minister.

Hon. K. Krueger: The largest amount that the NDP ever flowed in a budget year to the B.C. Arts Council was $14.8 million. Since we've been government, the B.C. Liberal government has flowed $124 million to the B.C. Arts Council. That's in addition to the $150 million cultural legacy fund and $25 million in a renaissance fund to encourage arts groups to form their own foundations with matching money. They did that, and the result is $55 million in funds that arts groups have for permanent endowments for themselves — $55 million.

N. Macdonald: Kim Cattrall, an award-winning B.C. actor, recently spoke out against the B.C. Liberals' cuts to arts and culture, saying that she likely would not have made it to where she is in her career if it had not been for government investment in the arts.

Kim Cattrall said it's a cut. The minister says she doesn't know what she's talking about. But when you look at the minister's own documents, it goes from 2008-09 at $47 million; pre-election, it's $42 million; 2009, after the election, it's $23 million; next year it's less than $4 million.

Will the minister admit that he is wrong about the cuts and that Kim Cattrall is absolutely right?

[1420]

Hon. K. Krueger: I can tell the member and his caucus that the arts groups say to me that it is galling to them to hear the NDP challenge our government with its vastly superior record of funding the arts and culture communities — a $150 million cultural fund for BC150, a $25 million renaissance fund, $124 million in grants since we've been government.

The B.C. Liberals are delivering far better funding to the arts community during a worldwide recession than the NDP did during a North American economic boom, and it is absolutely preposterous for them to speak this way.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.
[ Page 507 ]

N. Macdonald: You must be kidding. The documents are right here — the documents that the minister signs off on. It goes from $47 million to $42 million pre-election. After the election it's $23 million, next year it's $4 million, and the minister stands up and tries to convince anybody that that's accurate. It's not.

Sarah McLachlan calls the B.C. government cuts — cuts — a tragedy. It's not just Kim Cattrall. It's Douglas Coupland, Brian Jungen. They all are speaking out against the government. These are cuts.

How does the minister, supposedly of culture and the arts, justify a 90 percent cut to arts funding?

Hon. K. Krueger: During the toughest economic times that we have seen in our lifetime, we were able this year to flow $26 million to arts and culture. The arts community expresses…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Krueger: …appreciation for our ability to fund them over the eight-plus years that we've been government, and we'll put our record up against the NDP's any day of the week.

[End of question period.]

S. Fraser: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

S. Fraser: I have petitions signed by over 600 residents of Vancouver Island and commuters to Vancouver Island supporting local airline K.D. Air, which faces extreme hardship due to unreasonable Olympic security measures.

R. Fleming: I present a petition to the House signed by 120 citizens of Salmon Valley, Silver Creek and Yankee Flats, all constituents of Shuswap, that oppose, due to health concerns, a proposed animal waste composting facility in their watershed.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, continued debate on the budget.

Budget Debate

(continued)

K. Conroy: I believe I have a few minutes left to finish the response that I started this morning. I was just about to start talking about the environment and the cuts to the Ministry of Environment.

This caused a ripple of concerns throughout our region. The one cut that was actually announced during the election — the one cut, I say — was the laying off of park rangers in the province. It had a direct effect in our beautiful parks.

[1425]

[L. Reid in the chair]

In fact, the ranger who had worked in the Valhalla Park area was gone after 20 years of commitment to the area. It wasn't just a job; it was a life's passion. He did an amazing job of ensuring that the park was kept in the pristine condition it should be. The Valhalla Society, the internationally recognized organization that has kept environmental issues front and centre in our province and region, supported me in this election.

They expressed their anger at the damage this government was inflicting on the environment, and that was before the cuts announced in this budget. Did we have some differences? Sure, we did. But we all agreed that for the sake of the environmental health of our province, we needed to work together to ensure there is a healthy planet we can pass on to our children and grandchildren. I was humbled by that support and will work in every way possible to ensure that our collective efforts are not forgotten.

We are actively speaking out against the cuts to the on-the-ground environmental protection positions and the increase of money for executive services in the ministry, by over 60 percent, to pay for a new political position created for a B.C. Liberal MLA. Do we really need a Minister of State for Climate Action and all the support that goes with that, when the minister of state does not even know when we need to have actions in place by?

What does that say to the people actually working out there on the ground, doing the actual work to protect our environment? What does that say to them? That's where that money should be going.

I think the answer is easy and just another example of political will gone wrong. Do we care for our environment and for our children's future? Or do we just give lip service and make sure one of the Liberal MLAs gets a bigger office, a raise and staff, which will do little to ensure climate change is really on the agenda?

I understand that the member for Boundary-Similkameen actually sits on a government environmental committee. I do hope this means he will actually stand with his constituents of Christina Lake and that area and strongly oppose a toxic waste dump that the Aquilini family would like to build in Christina Lake, one of the most pristine lakes in our province — a facility that would have far-reaching environmental effects for the area and for the entire region for years to come.
[ Page 508 ]

He also talked glowingly about the work of the Boundary Woodlot Association, a group I worked with when I was MLA for that region. They are an amazing group who truly believe in good stewardship and managed forests for a sustainable future. They have been asking for this government to recognize the work they do and to release some of the woodlots in their area to members of their association. This would create not only stability for the individual woodlot owners but stability for the future of forestry in the area.

I actually look forward to working with the new member to ensure these issues are addressed in a positive manner for the people of the Boundary country. There are, of course, many more issues I have with this budget and how it affects the constituency of Kootenay West.

However, there is one that truly bothers us in the greater Trail area. The people in our area do actually support the concept of the Olympics. We are a big supporter of sports in our region and have had Olympians come from our area. However, never did we think that our area would actually be penalized directly due to the Olympics.

And how is that? Well, our local airport, supported by the regional district of Kootenay Boundary, the municipalities, the people in the area…. They have all been told that that airport will have to be closed because there isn't any security. Now, other airports are in the same position, and do they have to close? No. There are very few airports in the province that will actually have to close during the Olympics.

Why? Because VANOC and the federal government, not the provincial government, has come up with ways of supporting those airports. Are they supporting the airport in Trail? No. Why? This government has no initiative, no support to ensure that the people of that area get to keep their airport open. It's wrong.

Again, I have to repeat that when half a million dollars is spent on a couple of hours for a party for the Premier and we have an airport that's going to get shut down for six weeks…. For six weeks people will not be able to utilize that airport. That will hurt the community and hurt the economy of the region.

It's a matter of priorities. I think these priorities are just screwed. Skewed.

Pardon me, Madam Speaker. I withdraw. Skewed.

[1430]

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

K. Conroy: It's close — skewed.

Although I do want to share a wee anecdote with the group. My husband, Ed, and I have a farm. For a retirement gift, we actually delivered a load of cow manure to Corky Evans and his partner, Helen. Corky is now engaging in farming. It was a wonderful retirement gift for him. He was very happy with his load of cow manure, and he said that it was the best load of b.s. he ever got from a politician. He said it's not like the stuff — or should I say the crapola — coming from the government to this day.

So I want to congratulate Corky for his hindsight in acknowledging what, obviously, the minister has acknowledged.

Deputy Speaker: Recognizing the member for Kelowna–Lake Country. [Applause.]

N. Letnick: Thank you to my colleagues for the rousing sound of applause.

I was asked to prepare a speech in response to the budget not too long ago, so if you don't mind, I'm going to do a little bit of notes and a little bit of winging it just to get the few ideas off my chest.

An Hon. Member: We're all ears.

N. Letnick: Oh, are you all ears?

Well, the first question is one of integrity. As you know, Madam Speaker, I'm new to this to chamber. But for the life of me, I just can't understand why the opposition keeps harping on the issue of integrity. I look back on all of the things that the NDP have done over the years as politicians, the hard decisions that they had to make. In the '90s when they were in power, they increased funding to health care in the late '90s by zero percent a year for five years straight. Then, they made difficult decisions.

To say integrity…. To call us here, that we lack integrity, I think is going back onto themselves a little bit. I would just like to say that the more they challenge the integrity of my good colleagues — good colleagues like the member for Shuswap or the member for Kelowna-Mission or the member for Westside-Kelowna — it just comes right back on all of the members of this House. Quite frankly, I did not go into political life to be lumped into the kind of people that they're talking about.

I think all of the members on both sides of this House go into this job for the right reasons. I wish that the people on the other side of the House would move on to a different topic, be opposition, hold us accountable for the decisions that we make and make sure that the esteem of the people in this House is kept high so that our children have something to aspire to.

But underlining all of that, there is obviously a difference in philosophy between the members of the NDP and the members of the B.C. Liberals. If there wasn't, we would all be B.C. Liberals — right?

We all want to do what's good for our province. We all want to do what's good for individuals, for people that are feeling the crunch of tough economic times. We all
[ Page 509 ]
want to provide a lot of grants. We all want to make sure that those who fall between the cracks....

People in my riding, for example. There are a lot of people there who would like to have better homing, people that are in transitional homes who are looking forward to another transitional home that actually I'll be helping to announce tomorrow — with the aid of Air Canada to get back to Kelowna.

There are all kinds of opportunities. We all want to do it, but at the end of the day, there's just so much money. No matter where we spend that money, wherever we invest that money, and whoever we invest the money with, the opposition will always find a reason, a person, a business, an issue where we didn't spend enough. I respect that. That's their job, but our job on the government side is to make those tough decisions, to make those choices.

Do we spend a lot of money now that later we have to pay back? Or do we maybe cut back a little bit on our spending — even more than we were doing before, but still cut back a little bit — and then save some of the hardship from future generations so they don't have to pay our bills back today? I think our particular approach to this is the farsighted one, the appropriate one, the responsible one. And just to come out in opposition and say, "Hey, let's spend more money on all these things," and to not have to come through and provide the funds to do so out of our current pocket and force future generations to pay for it, I think, is the irresponsible way of doing it.

[1435]

So every time that somebody in the opposition stands up and says, "Hey, we need to spend more money on this and that," I want to also hear where you would cut back. If you don't want to tell me where they would cut back, then at least be honest….

Interjection.

N. Letnick: I'll take that back.

At least be clear as to how long the deficits that they're proposing to have will go on for. I don't want my children, who are in their early 20s, to have to pay off the debts that I incur today for taking care of my mom or my other siblings that maybe are in health care.

Households, businesses, governments, during these tough economic times, all have to watch what they're spending. You know, I have an organization in my area called Campion Boats, and when times were good, Campion Boats had hundreds of employees. Now, with the economy the way it is, they've decided to cut back. But they're still building boats.

They're probably the only manufacturer of fibreglass-hull boats in the country, right in my riding, and they're hanging on. They're doing everything they can to hang on so that when the economy turns around, they're going to be the only ones, and therefore, they're going to have a competitive advantage over the rest of the country and over a lot of part of the world.

That is what we need to do as a government. We need to make sure that every penny that we invest, every penny that we put into infrastructure, into services, allows us to position ourselves as a government better, as a province better, so that when the economy turns around, and it sounds like it'll be turning around soon, we are there to compete — compete internationally, not only nationally.

I think we are making the right decisions; I know we're making the right decisions. People like Brock Elliott at Campion Boats says that we are making the right decisions. I think we have to continue to take the far look and make sure as we proceed with this budget, we do so with integrity and understanding that whatever we spend now, we have to pay back at some point.

Now, as I sat in the Legislature on September 1, keenly listening to our Finance Minister deliver his speech, I was taking some notes, thinking: "How does this work for the people back home? What are they going get from this budget speech?" I took down ten points I'd like to share with you at this point.

Point No. 1: hundreds of millions of dollars invested in youth program expansions at Okanagan College. I talked about that today — at UBCO and Okanagan College, looking at new buildings, looking at more students coming to Okanagan College. As you know, when we have a downturn in the economy, that's usually a signal for young people to go back to school, for people who are in businesses or in jobs who might look for training so that they can have an opportunity, as well, to move back into a better job once the economy turns around. They come back to school. So we've seen enrolments at Okanagan College and UBC Okanagan go up.

This government, through this budget, has shown commitment to those two institutions and institutions throughout this province, providing more funds for post-secondary education.

Over $430 million for Kelowna General Hospital and Vernon Jubilee Hospital. Now, Vernon Jubilee isn't in my riding. However, the two hospitals provide very good care for people from the whole central region, including down into the south, and we are looking very gleefully at the expansions that are happening at both. We're going to see a new wing of the Kelowna General Hospital that's going to be providing opportunities for our young people to learn how to be physicians right at home, and of course, that will help to maintain those people in the Okanagan area in the future.

We're also hoping that as we move forward with this, not only will we be able to provide stents for heart ailments in the near future but also, in time, we're going to be able to find a way of doing full cardiac surgery at
[ Page 510 ]
Kelowna General Hospital. That's only because this government has taken the right measures over the last eight years, now 8½, to make sure we have a strong economy.

Without a strong economy, we can't spend any money on anything. We have to make sure that we continue to reinvest in that economy, and that's what I saw as one of the major things out of this budget.

Our communities are also benefiting from Highway 97 and Highway 33 expansions. Just in the next week or so, we're going to be seeing the sixth lane of Highway 97 go through Kelowna. As anybody who's ever travelled through Kelowna knows, Highway 97 gets pretty congested at certain times of the day going through Kelowna, so the sixth lane will be an added feature.

[1440]

It's also going to be an HOV system. So both outside lanes in either direction and down in the central area of Kelowna will be HOV. We're going to do something not only good for the highway but also good for our environment to make sure that we reduce the amount of cars on the highway but increase the amount of carrying capacity by making it easier for bus rapid transit and for multipeople vehicles.

Highway 33 is expanding right in my riding — again a function of this budget. Highway 33 is going to four-laning on a very steep hill and also a truck passing lane going up another hill on the way to Big White — again, opportunities for millions of dollars invested because of this budget.

Our communities have also benefited from two new grade schools, supportive housing projects, new parks, multipurpose pathways, expansions to Kelowna International Airport, and the list goes on and on and on. That's only made possible because this government over the last eight years has seen fit to continue to lower business taxes and to lower personal income taxes to the point where if you're making under $118,000, we have the lowest taxes in the country; to continue to attract investment in our province; to continue to attract people with capital into our province.

I can tell you that when I moved or was thinking of moving to British Columbia some 11 years ago with some of my friends, they looked at B.C. and said: "Why are you moving there? The taxes are so high." Of course, then that was the NDP government. "The taxes are so high. Why are you moving there?" I said: "Because it's one of the most beautiful places on this planet."

I've travelled a little bit, and I've found that B.C. is one of the most beautiful places. The people here are wonderful, and I want to continue with my family in British Columbia and especially the Okanagan.

Some of my friends said: "Well, we're not coming with you because of the tax situation." These people were well-heeled, and they would've created a lot of jobs in the Okanagan specifically and, of course, in British Columbia.

As soon as I moved here — shortly after — the people of British Columbia elected a B.C. Liberal government. In 2001 one of the first promises they made they kept, which was to lower personal income taxes by 25 percent.

Then I called my friends back home, and I told them: "See, who made the right move now? Here I'm now living in paradise, and I also have a 25 percent cut in my personal income tax." After that, I can tell you that my friends were thinking: "Okay, now it's time to go to British Columbia." I can't tell you how many times that story gets repeated over and over again.

Capital moves around, and unless you have the right conditions, it'll move somewhere else. That comes right to the HST. One of the fundamental keys, one of the fundamental reasons that the Finance Minister in this budget said, "We have to move towards an HST," is because capital knows no borders. If we did not bring in the HST at this point, I know there'll be a few people on the opposite side of the House — and a few people back home, I must admit — that would be happy.

However, in the long term what would happen is that investment would dry up. People would decide to go elsewhere. Businesses would decide to go elsewhere because it would be cheaper to invest their dollars in other jurisdictions than to come to British Columbia and pay an unrefundable provincial sales tax.

Look at Bell Canada, for example. They announced just this year that they decided to invest over a billion and a half dollars into Ontario. One of the major reasons they did that is because they said Ontario was moving to an HST system. You're not going to get a whole bunch of people or a whole bunch of businesses being as upfront as Bell Canada. You won't get a whole bunch of businesses that say: "We're moving from British Columbia. We're going to Ontario."

What you'll get is, slowly over time, a cumulative impact of all these people making all these individual decisions not to move here because of the high taxes, not to move here because of the provincial sales tax. Over time we will not be able to afford the great health care that we have — the Conference Board of Canada says we have the best health care system in the country — the great education system that we have, the great ability to live long lives.

If you look at the whole world, we have probably the No. 1 and No. 2 life spans in the world in British Columbia. That's because of our investment in people, in health care, in active living. All these things that we're doing here in British Columbia will benefit everyone and our children and grandchildren over the long term.

I have to say again that it's not decisions that we make today that will impact people today. It's decisions that
[ Page 511 ]
we make today that will impact the people tomorrow and the day after. I'm really happy that this budget is courageous and takes the long-term view and really, at the end of the day, we make tough decisions here so that our children won't have to make the same tough decisions down the road.

[1445]

The province will run deficits to maintain key services like health care and education, before returning to balanced budgets in 2013-2014. Our projected deficit for 2009-2010 is $2.8 billion. I won't belabour the point about how Alberta's going to $6.9 billion and Ontario's deficit and Canada's deficit and the trillions of dollars deficit in the United States. Competitively speaking, we're doing fairly well, and I think that obviously will pay dividends as soon as the economy turns around.

Also in this budget the Finance Minister says that after returning to surplus budgets, the province is committed to dedicating every dollar of surplus cash to eliminate the debt we incur as a result of running deficits — again, the responsible thing to do.

It means we're going to have to watch what we spend our money on. It means that over the next four years and beyond, it's not going to be like it was perhaps over the last eight years, where we had strong economic times and we had maybe deeper pockets than what we're going to have over the next few years. We have to pay down the debt that we incur as soon as we have an opportunity to do so.

Social services spending is going to go up. Budget Update provides an additional $455 million for priorities, social services and programs, including $420 million over the next three years to support individuals and families in income assistance.

I know in my area there are people that require income assistance, just like all around the province. This will be good for them.

There will be an increase in the basic personal exemption to $11,000. This should save the average single person $72 a year, a family of two $147 a year and will eliminate the provincial personal income tax for an additional 75,000 British Columbians.

People will have more money in their pockets to invest in more consumable goods so that they can continue to keep the economy going. Even after HST, B.C. will still have the second-lowest tax burden overall in this country.

There will be an increase in the small business threshold to $500,000 and planned elimination of the small business corporate income tax rate by April 1, 2012. Of course, by doing that, we'll attract more investment. Small businesses will have more money they can put into jobs, job creation and purchase goods and services that will be provided by local businesses, for the most part, in British Columbia.

In the budget update the minister announced there will be no HST on residential energy. That was something new. Cost for oil, electricity, natural gas or propane used to heat or power our homes will not have any HST on it.

I can tell you after speaking to many people back home, either by phone or in person or by e-mail, that this was a major issue for them, especially those on a fixed income who thought that if they were on a low fixed income, they would actually see a benefit from the HST because they were going to get $230 a year in a rebate. But most of the money that they're spending their money on goes to non-taxable items like food, grocery stores and rent. They're actually looking forward to the HST for the most part but were concerned about their utility costs.

So the fact that utility costs like costs for oil, electricity, natural gas and propane to heat or power homes won't be taxable from the HST perspective is actually good news for those people that I represent.

Please allow me also to shed some light on the proposed HST. As I said before, low-income families and individuals will receive an annual B.C. HST credit of $230 for individuals with income up to $20,000 and $230 per family member for families with incomes up to $25,000. That will be paid quarterly with the GST credit. This will benefit over 1.1 million British Columbians and when combined with the recently introduced climate action credit, low-income British Columbians will now be able to look forward to $340 a year in provincial credits alone in addition to the existing GST credit.

The introduction of the HST follows more than 120 tax cuts introduced since 2001. Of course, the major one I talked about before — the 25 percent right away. As a result, B.C. has the lowest provincial personal income taxes in Canada for those earning up to $118,000.

For most taxpayers, B.C. personal income taxes have been reduced by 37 percent or more since 2001. An additional 325,000 low-income British Columbians now pay no income tax whatsoever.

Number 8 on the list that I heard and took note of was health spending. Spending on health care over the next three years will receive the largest share of funding increases in government spending. By 2011-2012 the Ministry of Health Services budget will increase by 18 percent, reaching a total goal of $15.7 billion.

[1450]

To help keep health care funding sustainable, however, MSP rates will increase by about 6 percent in 2010 — a maximum of $3 a month for a single person or $6 per month for a family.

Number 9 out of the ten is K-to-12 education spending. The budget update protects core K-to-12 education by maintaining per-pupil funding at an average of over $8,200 per student. Total K-to-12 education spending
[ Page 512 ]
will exceed $5.7 billion in '09-10, and $151 million for full-day kindergarten will also be added starting in 2010, to be fully in place by September 2011. That will help a lot of people who are struggling in finding child care. If they have kindergarten-aged students, they can now go to school and get educated prior to going to grade one.

The last one, No. 10, I had briefly touched on before, which is post-secondary education funding. Support for post-secondary education in B.C. will increase by $93 million in '09-10 from the 2008-2009 budget. Total post-secondary education spending will exceed $4.7 billion in '09-10.

I wish at this point to talk about the Olympics. The Olympics was mentioned in the budget. When I was living in Banff, I actually had the pleasure of living through an Olympic season in 1988 when the Olympics came to Canada.

It was hosted, as you know, in Calgary and in Canmore. I was living in Banff at the time, and I could tell you that it was a boon for tourism for Alberta, for Canada and especially for the area that had anything to do with tourism in the area. So Banff, Canmore, the valley between Calgary and Edmonton, Red Deer — all these areas that were attracting tourists. Head-Smashed-In Buffalo Jump down in the south, if you're familiar with that, Madam Speaker — a great place to visit. I am sure that the same thing will happen in British Columbia and for the Okanagan after the Olympics have come and gone.

So while it's the norm that there's a drop in visitors in the year of the Olympics, the following year is when the visitation usually climbs. Just as an example, Alberta posted average annual gains in international tourists of 3.2 percent for the first five years after the Olympic Games compared with an average annual loss for the rest of the country, excluding British Columbia.

Tracey Grindal, manager of market research for Tourism Calgary, said: "The most obvious effect of a city hosting the Olympic Games is the increase in international importance." "It will put us on the world map," she said. It will set us apart. "It will broaden your image."

I can tell you, from business, that you can have the best product in the world, but unless people know about it, nobody's going to buy it. That really applies here in British Columbia. I firmly believe we have the best place in the world to visit, but we have to get the message out and those three billion viewers are certainly going to get the message from us.

Tourism Kelowna has identified that the main opportunity to leverage the Olympics for tourism growth to our area is by ensuring that Kelowna and the Okanagan are given as much international media coverage as possible and therefore are completely connected to the B.C. brand. This exposure will build a greater understanding with future visitors as to what experience they can receive and expect to get in British Columbia — one being ours in the Okanagan.

So we're ready. We're doing video. We're doing photography. We're putting story lines for media. We're getting ready for the Olympics in the Okanagan just like they are in the Lower Mainland and up to Whistler. We want to be part of the games. We're going to have a torch relay run ourselves. We're going to be there. We're going to be visiting.

Interjection.

N. Letnick: Yes, we are. That's right. And I don't feel one bit that this Olympic experience will be any less than what we saw in Alberta back in 1988.

I actually believe that this will surpass what happened in Alberta. It's going to be good for tourism. It'll be good for British Columbia. I'm so proud to be part of this government that has the foresight to continue with that investment.

So in closing, because I think I only have a couple of minutes left, what I want to say is, you know, British Columbia has been hit by a global downturn. We've heard it over and over and over again, by members on both sides of the House. We all recognize that. Projected revenues from corporate and personal income taxes have fallen off dramatically.

We really have a fundamental choice to make. The choice that this government has made is to protect our vital services in health care, education, social services. Yes, that does mean some people will get funding and some won't, but you know, this government has shown clearly that it's able to make those tough decisions, that it cares.

[1455]

You look around the House, Madam Speaker, and I know individual stories of everybody here that really cares, that contributes back home to some non-profit group, food bank — you name it. I know everyone cares. But at the end of the day, this government cares enough that it's going to spend those funds in very important places like health care, like education and social services, so we can come out of this economic downturn stronger than we went into it, so that we can continue to fund all the wonderful things that the people of British Columbia look to us to fund with their tax dollars.

Thank you very much for an opportunity to speak to the budget, and thank you to the people of Kelowna–Lake Country for allowing me to represent them.

B. Routley: It is indeed a privilege to get up today and represent the people of the Cowichan Valley. You know, I spoke earlier about brothers and sisters. I'm proud of the legacy I have of working on behalf of sawmill workers, good union people, loggers, all kinds of remanufacturers
[ Page 513 ]
and other labourers in the community — everything. In Lake Cowichan, for example, it was union members that helped at the arena and drove the Zamboni. It was union members that helped take care of the water

I am not ashamed at all. In fact, I'm quite proud of the heritage I have of representing union people. And the fact that we're just after a Labour Day…. I want to acknowledge that it is indeed labour throughout British Columbia, through their blood, sweat and tears, that helped build this wonderful province. We should all be proud of the work that labour does throughout British Columbia.

Hon. Speaker, when I think about the people, the workers, I also think about the amazing people that I have encountered in my first few months here at the Legislature. I want to acknowledge the amazing work that they all do — the wonderful people that work in the dining room, the custodial cleaners. I've met some of them out cleaning the hall, and they believe it's indeed a labour of love to work in this great building. They're incredible people that do a wonderful job.

The security folks. I've got to tell you when they first gave me the key, I couldn't get used to the idea that I was going to actually have the key to this place. I thought maybe I'd have to report in. The security fellow said: "No, no, this is your place, Mr. Routley." I said: "Well, you know, the 'Mr.' you can do without too. I'm just good old Bill." I'll tell you, loggers and sawmill workers call you a lot of things, but I'm not used to "Mr."

When I was told I was "Mr." and he said: "No, no, that's the way it works here at the Legislature, and we're not going to change our ways, Mr. Routley...." So I got used to that. I have to say that everybody, including the security guard and right down to the folks that clean the floors and take care of the waste-paper baskets, do an amazing job. They're all friendly, courteous and make this a wonderful place to be. So I want to acknowledge all of them and thank them for the work that they do on behalf of all of the MLAs, certainly, in this Legislature.

I have to say, when I was wandering around and was told that I was given the keys to the Legislature, I thought: "You know, this government has a lot of different ministries, and you can find them on the doors." You go around and you see the door — the ministry of this and the ministry of that.

When you really get down into the basement of this building, there are a few places where the doors are locked, but I really expected I was going to find on a door, the ministry of jiggery-pokery and bafflegab. I thought that might be next door to the deputy of omissions and deletions because of all of the things that have been going on in terms of telling the people of British Columbia that the debt was going to be $495 million — that was it.

Then everything changed after the election. Boy, in just absolute ballistic speed, there was suddenly all this desperate news.

[1500]

I'd like to remind you, Madam Speaker, that this Liberal government told tourism operators in B.C. that the HST was not on during the election. I want to remind this House that the tourism operators specifically asked the question of both or all the political parties: "Would you be interested in the HST?" The Liberal government and the representatives that were running for election at the time made it perfectly clear to the tourism operators that an HST was not on, and they even responded with details on why it wouldn't be on.

Those are the facts. They said before the election that an HST tax was not going to happen, and then…. Now this government seems to have had some kind of collective amnesia. It really is a sorry day for British Columbians that this government says one thing before the election and something totally different after this election.

You know, it's a bit of a pattern. I recall this government saying: "We're not going to rip up B.C. Rail. No, that's not going to happen. We're not going to destroy or sell B.C. Rail." And they sold B.C. Rail. Then they said to health care workers, "We're not going to rip up your collective agreement," and those workers…. This government oversaw the largest mass firing of health care workers in the history of British Columbia. Shame on them that they had that kind of attitude towards health care workers.

While we're at it, I want to talk about what's going on currently with paramedics. You know, the paramedics throughout British Columbia…. I'm sure it doesn't matter what your political stripe is, if you had an accident, you'd be real glad to see one of those paramedics show up on the scene. You know, we all bleed the same, and we all can get hurt the same, and tomorrow it could happen to any one of the folks in this room. I hope that doesn't happen, but I'm awful glad those paramedics are there.

This government even goes so far as to say they're so important that they're an essential service. They're so essential that they can't take any action as far as a labour dispute. They are putting stickers up all over town and putting stickers on their trucks, and I bet the folks that are responsible for essential services think it's just wonderful that they can just ignore these paramedics. It's absolutely and totally irresponsible.

One of the freedoms that we enjoy in this country is that people can organize into unions, and they can take action to defend themselves and to get a fair collective agreement. If you believe in rights and obligations, when the day comes that government decides that you're an essential service, there ought to be a responding obligation to sit down with them and negotiate in good faith. If they're not prepared to do that, they ought to be providing final and binding arbitration mediation so that these folks can get a fair collective agreement.

What kind of government just ignores their plight and says that it's fine for them to sit out there with no kind of
[ Page 514 ]
collective agreement whatsoever? It's simply unacceptable in a democratic society.

They're too essential to go on strike, but not essential enough to sit down and bargain with under free collective bargaining, one of the democratic things that we have in Canada and certainly I thought we had in British Columbia. But apparently, sitting down and doing the right thing by the working class is not in any interest of this government. You know, back to before the election — no HST and they were going to do all the wonderful things — they were going to take care of health care and education.

[1505]

When we look at hospital care deteriorating under this government…. I've got to pause for a minute and talk about back in 1985, when my father died. This government's been around since 2001. I went with my own dad to the hospital right here in Victoria, and we were lined up with all those seniors and people that were injured. We were lined up in the hall like a bunch of planes taxiing for takeoff and not going anywhere.

I'm glad I was able to be there as a dutiful son to get my dad a glass of water and make sure he got to the bathroom, because he spent hours in that hall, and it's totally unacceptable in the province of British Columbia that that kind of stuff is going on.

I saw a young man come into that hospital who had cut his finger off, and they brought it to the hospital, and they put it in the fridge, and this young man was sitting in the hospital waiting room, writhing in pain after getting his finger lopped off in this motorcycle. He kept moaning over and over again: "My finger is cut off. I've got to get help right away, or I'm going to lose it." It was hours. I was shocked. I did not believe that British Columbia had deteriorated to such a state that that young man would sit there for hours.

Now, I finally got in after, like, five hours with my dad out in the hall, to a room. I never did find out what happened to that young man, but I'll tell you, it made my blood boil to think that people in British Columbia are arriving in hospitals and that's a scene repeated all over British Columbia. It's not good enough.

We've got $105 million for a bobsled run. We've got more than $880 million for a convention centre. We've got hundreds of millions of dollars to build all kinds of asphalt and roads to a ski resort. There's no problem with all of that stuff. But boy, when it comes to the stuff that really matters, they're not there.

Now I want to talk about Joanna Neilson. She's a speech pathologist who deals with autistic kids. I have a grandson, Gabriel. He's nine years old, and I'm very proud of him, but he has autism, and he needs the support of people like speech pathologists.

The speech pathologists are concerned right now in British Columbia. They're saying to me that 75 percent of their workload right now is dealing with autism spectrum disorder, and the other percentage, dealing with seniors who have had heart attacks and that kind of thing. She's understaffed. They could use ten speech pathologists. She is the only full-time speech pathologist in the Cowichan Valley, and she's got 45 people waiting on her waiting list.

She wondered out loud the other day when I was talking to her. She said, "How do I tell families that are already stretched to the limit that they're going to pay 12 percent?" — maybe even on her services. They are going to pay 12 percent for sure on all of the devices and tools that they need. That's the kind of government that we've got across here. They take away tax from the biggest business and corporations and load it on to folks with special needs that really need the help and are already at the bottom of the pay scale.

Let's look at what workers in British Columbia reported just on September 15, just a few days ago, in the Vancouver Sun. "The 2009 National Payroll Week employee survey, conducted by the Canadian Payroll Association, concluded, amongst other things, that 60 percent" — let me camp there for a minute; 60 percent — "of B.C. residents are so cash-strapped that they would have trouble paying their bills."

[1510]

This government's going to load another 7 percent on just about everything. "The big surprise," they say, "is that so many people were so close to the line that they'd have trouble if their paycheque was delayed even a week." The numbers jump to 64 percent of those that are aged 18 to 34.

Now we're going to transfer tax from big corporations in oil and gas, Madam Speaker — oil and gas — and we're expected to believe that somehow the gas companies are going to say: "You know, a gigajoule is just a little bit too expensive for the seniors, so we're going to give them maybe a month off."

Give me a break. As if that's going to happen. It's not likely. I hear all this stuff about how it's going to trickle down to the consumers. It's not going to happen.

The claim is that even though everybody in North America knows that there was a recession that started in 2008…. The lumber business. I was dealing with bankruptcies — lots of them — and mill closures. This government claims that just after the election, right after May 12, there was some kind of economic tsunami that swept through the province of British Columbia. They had no idea of the difficulties we were having in this province, and speaker after speaker gets up and explains how that's the case.

I suspect it's all from the folks at public affairs putting their spin on things, suggesting that there was some kind of bolt of lightning right out of the blue. One of them said it was at ballistic speed. It's amazing that just days after the election, they now claim they were caught totally unaware — just totally unaware.
[ Page 515 ]

It was a shock-and-awe kind of thing for them. In fact, the economic blast was so powerful that they were caught totally flatfooted. They were there, lost in a sea of red ink, looking for a lifeline. There through the fog — I suggest it was kind of a pink fog — they saw the federal government handing out a cheque for $1.6 billion. "Oh boy, oh boy, a lifeline. A lifeline of $1.6 billion. All we have to do is sell out the people of British Columbia, and we can cash in on $1.6 billion. Almost free," I'm sure they thought.

Have you ever been to Mexico? On every street corner they say, "It's almost free," and I'm sure the federal government was telling them it's almost free. Believe me, there is nothing free about the federal government's offer. You can be sure the taxpayers of British Columbia are going to pay and pay, and pay some more.

You know, they didn't want to look this gift horse in the mouth. And hold for this, Madam Speaker. They crafted a secret deal in just a few days after…. Apparently they learned about this in May, and here they were making announcements.

Just one small problem. This government forgot that they represent and are supposed to represent all British Columbians, not just their rich business friends. The plan now includes the elimination of B.C. jobs. They want the public to believe — just one more time they want the public to believe — that big business is going to hand down these huge savings to consumers. "That's what's going to happen." We've heard it repeated over and over again: "Just trust us, and it's going to trickle down to all the good consumers."

I can just see it. Let's talk about a big log exporting company that's been busy shutting down mills. I can just hear TimberWest and Paul McElligott phoning up one of his log-buying customers, and he's going to say: "Over the weekend we've been thinking about it. With all these tax savings, we're going to hand that on, so we're going to do a buy-one-log, get-one-free deal." Does anybody in this House honestly believe stuff like that is going to happen? Absolutely ridiculous. It's not on. It's not going to trickle down, and those are the facts.

[1515]

I don't often talk about the Fraser Institute, because they're not a fountain of information that we're interested in. But in the Vancouver Sun lately they talked about corporate welfare. Corporate begging in Canada has become even more blatant this year. They say corporate welfare is now a $182 billion addiction for these corporations. Business subsidies, bailouts and loans are all forms of corporate welfare, and now we're going to transfer tax dollars.

The Fraser Institute, a right-wing think tank, says that transferring tax dollars and employment from healthy businesses — like tourism and restaurants, by the way — to risky business is not smart. Research has found that corporate welfare may not have a demonstrable beneficial impact on the economy, employment and tax revenues because no new net investment or employment is created.

Now we're asked to believe that there is going to be all this investment because of these actions. Well, I'm just not buying it. We didn't see investment after softwood lumber. We haven't seen renewed investment.

The lumber industry is going to come back, by the way, but it's got nothing to do with the HST. When the lumber industry comes back, it's going to be because global markets have responded, and there's been help of some kind. Somebody's got to be doing something to get more customers going and to look at alternative products — value-added products and not the kind of thing this government is doing. They have no interest in a value-type forest or even value-added business. They've pretty well chopped that off at the knees.

You know, along with Paul and his two-for-one deal, maybe we can go to the barber, and he'll say: "We'll cut 7 percent more hair for less, and we're going to pass on the savings." There are some ideas for you. I know the people of British Columbia know that this is just more smoke and mirrors from this government's public affairs bureau, and there's no real substance to what they're talking about.

I want to talk about a growth industry that this government should be aware of, and it's a sad thing indeed in communities like the Cowichan Valley. I talked to Betty Anne DeVitt, who runs our Cowichan Valley Basket Society, the food bank and soup kitchen. She tells me that there have been over a hundred new families since January 1 of this year. That's what's going on out there — real families really in pain and hurting — and this government just wants to load on more tax to those same people. When they go to buy a cup of coffee, they're going to get to pay more tax.

This is the same kind of economic thinking that got the world into this economic crisis. "Just trust us," they said. "Trust us." Groups like Enron: "Trust us with your money." The big banks in the United States said, "Trust us with your money," and look at what they did.

People in three-piece suits saying all the right things, spinning all the right stuff, and everybody knows. It's transparent to the world that it was the big financial groups and all of these so-called spin doctors that destroyed the economy of this nation.

Not just this nation. The United States of America, the largest single engine in economic wealth, was destroyed by wealth and greed. That's what it was destroyed by, and by people who didn't understand that you've got to manufacture something and you've got to create jobs for real people. That's how you take care of the country — to create employment with real jobs, family-supporting jobs, not the kind of McJobs that this government seems to have in their future.
[ Page 516 ]

Madam Speaker, I don't know if you've seen the bank commercial with the guy running around. It's been on TV quite a bit, and it's one that I've always kind of liked. I always get a laugh out of it.

[1520]

We've got a new one for British Columbia. You know the one with the banker with his hand in your pocket? Well now, as of July 1, when the HST comes on, I suggest that we have a new version, with the Liberals with their hands in the pockets of every British Columbian, because no matter where we go, whether it's for a haircut or whether we go for a meal at a restaurant, we get HST to remind us.

When we go to a tourist destination, even when the kids save up their own money to buy a bike, when they buy a bike with their paper money, they're going to have the Liberals there with their hand in their pocket — those poor little kids with a Liberal with their hand in their pocket, if you can imagine that. It's an awful sight to think about.

Even when we die, down at the funeral home, there they are going to be with their hand in our pocket looking for the loose change to get the extra 7 percent, and they're going to wring it out of us right before we go to the grave.

That's the kind of government we've got. A secret deal done with no consultation, no debate, signed off by the government with absolutely no discussion. In fact, I'm sure some of the folks that belong to that side of the House had no idea. I've heard that some of them have said that maybe there was a bit of shock and awe for them too, in discovering all of this. It's kind of hushed tones, but some of them are indicated…. Their body language. You can look over there. They're not happy, not happy at all. Not all of them. Some of them are happy. Some of them are having a good time.

Meanwhile, this government has worked hard at giving $2 billion. I can hardly imagine that much money. They have given away $2 billion to their rich business friends, to the biggest, and they gave the list. They proudly stand here and say they're going to give an $880 million tax cut to the construction firms. Well, do you really think that in this economy that's going to work?

Do you really think that $140 million in manufacturing and $140 million in the forest industry and $80 million for oil and gas…? I don't believe it, and British Columbians don't believe it. The transfer in tax from the very, very wealthy, most of the time…. If they are having a bad time right now, what did they do with all the cash when they were having a good time, when things were going well?

Any family knows that when times are good, you save a little cash away, and when things get bad, you spend that cash. Well no, not these big businesses. They run off to their Liberal friends, give a little at the jar there for the political campaign, and the next thing…. I'm sure they can't believe their good fortune that all the wonderful things…. It's all very coincidental that these same industries provide huge sums for this government during the election.

We've got to take from the poor and give to the rich. It is shameful. We're picking on seniors, the little kids and the children, the kids and their sports program. No consultation, no transparency for the people of British Columbia. We had no debate. We get to have a debate now. The deal was inked. They were already planning on spending the money — no debate before a deal signed with the federal government.

You know, in any democracy, justice must be seen to be done. Where is the justice or the democracy in leading people to believe that the debt was going to be $495 million and basically no more? That was the line, and they clung to the line, even though other folks, other economists…. I mean, you go back and look at the newspapers all throughout even 2008-2009. You couldn't miss it, Madam Speaker. You'd have to be on the cartoon channel to miss it.

[1525]

You would have to ignore every news program, every Globe and Mail, every Vancouver Sun and every Province to claim that you had no idea that there was a major problem going on and that some of the promises that we thought we had, we couldn't rely on. Then the government says that, well, maybe they did know a little bit before, but they could handle that.

The real plan, when they reveal a $2.8 billion — really $3.5 billion — is not to mention the pre-existing debt that…. Let's talk about that for a minute.

This government has embarked on what they think is a wonderful plan. It's a philosophical divide between this group and theirs on the issue of having all these P3s, then selling off the resources of British Columbia to the highest bidder. It is very, very dangerous economics, because that side of the House knows that they have all kinds of money hidden….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Recognizing the Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts. [Applause.]

Hon. K. Krueger: Thank you, my friends.

Madam Speaker, it's a real joy to see you in that chair. It looks very good on you.

I've been listening to the NDP opposition members for days now. That was a remarkable speech that we just heard from the new member for Cowichan Valley. It's hard to believe that people still think that way and talk that way. That sounded like a speech from the Dirty '30s. [Applause.] Little applause there again.

It's clear to me that even the members who have spent four years in this wonderful place with all its traditions — all the great things that have been done here and can be done, the things that they should be learning how to
[ Page 517 ]
deliver to their constituents — haven't really cottoned on to their responsibilities or how to fulfil them here.

The new members have clearly not been well briefed. They don't know the NDP's past. They talk about the '90s as if they weren't the dismal decade, but everybody who lived through them must know how bad it was. What a travesty it was that our province was bombed down from the best economy in Canada to the worst and held there under their miserable incompetence for a full ten years.

They're not doing their jobs. They're not doing their jobs. They don't understand their responsibilities, having been elected to this assembly, and they're not…

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. K. Krueger: …representing their constituents well.

This is my 14th year in this chamber. I was in opposition to that NDP government from 1996 to 2001, and they were such unhappy years.

The member sounded as though he didn't understand the difference between deficits and debt. Deficits, I'd like to point out to him, are how much a government spends over and above its revenues in a year. When they accumulate, that is debt. The NDP doubled the debt of the province in ten years: 125 years of government at a certain level of debt, and the NDP doubled it in ten years.

The member for Cowichan Valley was talking about how governments ought to save up or businesses ought to save up money in their good years. We spent five surplus budgets paying off NDP debt. That's what that party left this province with, and everybody knows it. Those were grim years, and the NDP Premiers of that day, of the '90s, knew that their prospects of re-election were grim. So they ran out the full five years both times until they had to call an election.

There was a fudge-it budget in 1996. That's how Glen Clark was re-elected. He showed up in the Legislature and immediately said he needed what he called wriggle room. It became a famous statement quoted many times — wriggle room. It was deliberate.

That was a government that had to be sued by one of the entrepreneurs that the member for Cowichan Valley just scorned. Carrier Lumber from Prince George, a family-built company, developed a technology for portable sawmills — took them out in the bush and set them up, air-dried the lumber, made a big success of it.

[1530]

Then the NDP burnt them in a really cruel move. It ended up in a lawsuit, which the NDP only settled when they finally had to reluctantly disclose that they had found, I believe it was, 47 boxes of evidence stashed away that they had not released to the court.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Krueger: The member reminds me of the NDP donation to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the NDP think tank, on their way out the door in 2001. I believe it was a quarter-million dollars gifted to that propaganda organization to continue to advance the causes of the NDP.

We were very well-briefed when we started out as members. We had Gary Collins as the Finance Minister, and we had the same leader in those days that we do now as Premier. It's been a government that has stuck to its principles, stuck to its plan, done the things that it said it would do and done them faster — for example, income tax cuts.

I heard the members opposite and their predecessors in their ranks railing away for eight years that income tax cuts were giveaways. You know, Members opposite, people just can't understand how you can think it's a giveaway when the government doesn't take as much of people's own money out of their pockets and bank accounts as the government before did.

We fulfilled that promise our very first day in office, the day our cabinet was sworn in, in 2001. We cut income taxes to the lowest in Canada in the bottom two tax brackets, and we've kept cutting them. Now with this budget, $118,000 — anyone who makes that amount or less in British Columbia is paying the lowest income taxes in Canada, and that is a very good thing.

Over the eight years that we've been government, we have seen the number of people drawing paycheques in British Columbia go past two million people for the first time in history and hundreds of thousands of new jobs created. We hear the members opposite talk about jobs that have disappeared during the worldwide recession. We're nowhere near down to the much lower level of employment that British Columbia had when the NDP were government.

I don't think it's clear to the members opposite that they have responsibilities in a number of areas. They should be representing their constituents well, and one of the ways they do that is by also representing the communities they live in well and being credible members who can bring forward the requests of their constituents, the dreams and hopes of the communities they represent, in a way that is credible so that government can address those for them.

[H. Bloy in the chair.]

But instead of that, we just hear this desk-pounding, socialist rhetoric, a throwback to the '30s, a throwback, probably, to socialist eastern Europe in its bad days. It's
[ Page 518 ]
very unproductive. It's not something that facilitates the causes of the constituents or the communities.

When I was an opposition member, I went to the NDP cabinet ministers about issues for my constituency, saying: "We want to have a university in Kamloops. We don't want it to be a college. We want to have a university for these reasons." Wouldn't listen; wouldn't do it.

The Coquihalla tollbooth. I went to the NDP Transportation Minister when there had been an avalanche across the Trans-Canada Highway, through the Fraser Canyon — people had to use the Coquihalla — and said: "Couldn't you at least suspend the tolls for a couple of days?" No, wouldn't hear of it; couldn't do it.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: They had a number of major scandals, my friend.

In a very short time after we became government, our government decided to provide that university to Kamloops — Thompson Rivers University — and people tell me the sun has risen in a different way over the community ever since that day. There are almost 2,000 people on the payroll, and Kamloops is tremendously proud of being a university town.

The Premier, driving a large excavator, knocked down the tollbooth in the fall of 2008, wiped out the tolls, because we're a government that keeps its commitments. We prepared a tolling policy which said that tolls will be eliminated when the infrastructure is paid for, and that's what we did.

[1535]

My colleague Claude Richmond, who served in this House as a Social Credit cabinet minister and then as a B.C. Liberal cabinet minister, was there the day the Coquihalla opened, was there at the toll booth. He was there the day the Premier knocked it down.

That's the sort of thing you can get down as a constituency MLA, but you're not going to get much done if people don't respect you or find you credible because you come in here and rant and rave, say things you know are preposterous.

Everybody knows why the revenues are down. It's a worldwide recession. It affected British Columbia as one of the last jurisdictions….

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: This is something I wanted to get to. Powell River–Sunshine Coast wants to talk about gambling.

In the '90s the NDP began to flirt with expanding gambling, and we asked them not to do it. I was the critic, and I researched the consequences of expanding gambling, and I pleaded with them not to do it, told them what the consequences would be. I also told them all of the research says that once you do it, once you expand gambling in a jurisdiction, there's no going back. You can't fix what you've done with that Pandora's box. There will be addiction consequences, and they'll be severe.

So when Joy MacPhail, who had more horsepower….

Deputy Speaker: Members, you will please allow courtesy to the person that has the floor. Everyone will have an opportunity, including the member from Victoria–Swan Lake, and will show respect to this House.

Please continue, Member.

Hon. K. Krueger: Joy MacPhail, who had more intellectual horsepower than a lot of members over there put together, as Health Minister, said of me that "this critic has impressed upon the government the need to start to fund gambling addiction" and put the first-ever funds aside for that purpose.

None of the NDP cabinet ministers had researched the consequences of gambling expansion. They wanted it. They did it. And there's no going back. So when people over there selectively quote the research that was read into the record in those days, they're not doing themselves a favour. And they're being dishonest, because all of that research hangs together.

If you expand gambling, you face consequences, and there's no going back. I think it's really important not to compromise yourselves in this House. In our caucus we have free voice and free votes. The member for Peace River South has voted against government legislation a number of times. It didn't stop him from becoming a cabinet minister. He was always free to speak his mind, and he exercised those rights.

It doesn't have to be politics at any price in this place. You can fulfil your roles honourably, and you can fulfil them respectfully, and you should always tell the truth. I have heard a lot of people not doing that. We know that you're actually excited about the Olympics, yet the member for Cowichan Valley, like many other members on that side of the House, was decrying the Olympics, decrying the expenditure of building the venues.

We could not possibly be staging an Olympics at a better time than this. It is the most wonderful economic generating event that we're going to see in our lifetimes. Members opposite have not been shy at all to apply for a share — that is, the communities that they represent apply for a share — of the grants available for the torch run, for example. The member for Cowichan Valley, who just spoke — $64,500 in grants applied for out of his constituency. Does he not respect those constituents and the communities that they live in who have put in six different applications?

The member for Fraser-Nicola, who is always ranting and raving about our government — seven communities in his constituency have applied for $98,150. The
[ Page 519 ]
member for North Coast, who was also carrying on in classic class-warfare style the other day — five communities have applied for $95,000.

What do those people and those communities think of their Members of the Legislative Assembly speaking negatively about these events and about the Olympics? It's surprising to us over here. It's not good representation of your constituents, Members. We are tremendously excited about the Olympics, looking forward to hosting the biggest event in the world next year and seeing the economic benefits flow.

[1540]

I was just at a conference last week in Toronto, a federal-provincial-territorial conference of Tourism ministers. They're excited, right across the country. They're building Olympic pavilions here. They're going to be showcasing their provinces' talents and resources here.

The people of Maillardville, here in British Columbia, have a francophone festival every year. They're expanding it to, I believe, more than two weeks, and they're connecting it and its activities with the pavilion from Quebec.

This is going to be a great event, and we'd love to see the members opposite celebrate it, get enthused about it, build the excitement in their constituencies. It is actually palpable, when you go to an NDP-represented constituency often, the difference in mood, the way people feel about their present and their future. It's no wonder, because of the negative rhetoric that these members are always pumping out.

Some of the senior teammates in that opposition caucus speak as if they hate the Olympics, but I notice nobody over there has gotten up to question the $2.86 million expense of the torch run, because I think the members know that their constituents would react to that. Their constituents know they've got the B.C. spirit, they've got the spirit of the Olympics, and they know that the Olympics are a good thing.

The constant negativity from that side of the House is bad for local economies, bad for the province. Kamloops in the '90s had two NDP MLAs and an NDP Member of Parliament, and the climate there, the way people felt, was like the climate I see in those members' constituencies. It was negative. The community couldn't pull itself out of the mire. These were very, very tough times for Kamloops.

You know, it's completely different now, and our economic statistics are really good. Our flight numbers are way up at the airport. Our stays in hotels are way up as well. In Kamloops it's not nearly as obvious that there's a worldwide recession as it is in some of those members' communities. A totally different feel.

I hope the members realize that their negativity actually affects people's health. There are vulnerable people, seniors in particular, who, when they hear their elected people saying these negative and false things, it worries them to the point that it makes them sick. That is a frightening thing — that members would deliberately fearmonger and frighten elderly people, vulnerable people, make them anxious, make them sick.

I speak to the constituents that those members represent. I suggest to them that they call those members to account because they are so fantastically negative. It is bad for the constituents and their communities. Winston Churchill, I believe, referred to socialism as the equal distribution of misery, and you see that at the micro level in constituencies, and we saw it all around the province in the '90s.

The member for North Coast spoke of the dismal conditions in Prince Rupert. Hardly a good marketing move. Hardly reason people would want to go to Prince Rupert as tourists or as people considering living there. He referred to Prince Rupert as one of the neediest districts.

When Bill Belsey was the member for North Coast — Bill Belsey from Prince Rupert — he constantly raised issues in our caucus, and people listened. Prince Rupert got a new college. Prince Rupert got a new container terminal. Bill Belsey worked for his constituency, brought money home, and Prince Rupert was a much happier place than it is today.

Bill Belsey talked about Highway 37. Roger Harris talked about Highway 37, the electrification of Highway 37, in order to facilitate a whole new economy up there. Yesterday there was a federal announcement. Our government had already expressed its commitment. That's going to be happening. Some of the things that we work on as members in this House take a long time to deliver, but there's no member on that side of the House that can take credit for any of those investments.

That container port is going to prosper Prince Rupert for decades and decades to come. I was there not long ago, and it is something that the people of Prince Rupert are fortunate to have and happy that they have — a great investment. I wish that Herb Pond could sit in this House and deliver the kind of positive constituent service that Bill Belsey delivered, because folks who talk the way the members opposite do are pretty hard to work with.

[1545]

The member for Fraser-Nicola already has members lining up for constituent service from me. I had to do this all last term, had to represent him because his constituents said that they didn't find he could get anything done. The day after the election, people from Merritt were calling me to see if I would continue handling their files.

Donny van Dyk, Roger Harris, Ella Brown, Bill Belsey — positive people. I'd like to see the members try to emulate their behaviour in order to bring about a more positive atmosphere in their constituencies and begin to bring home benefits from their representation of those people in communities here in the House.
[ Page 520 ]

Instead, we hear this constant revisionist history, various little dodges about the '90s. "Oh, that was the last century." Or one member: "I was in school when the NDP were doing those things in the '90s." All sorts of false news, name-calling, offensive behaviour. How can anybody work with that? How can anybody find those members credible?

The Cowichan Valley member was just raving against the convention centre. That convention centre has already attracted more than $2 billion in economic activity for Vancouver, more than 60 conventions that we would never have had in British Columbia because we had no facility large enough. I don't believe any one of those members could tell me, if they've walked through that convention centre, that they didn't feel a lot of pride in British Columbia having a facility like that. It's beautiful, it's very well done, and the B.C. Liberals built it.

An Hon. Member: No, construction workers built it.

Hon. K. Krueger: The member opposite says that construction workers built it. Yeah, of course, that's the truth. It's got….

Deputy Speaker: Member, please direct all your comments through the Chair, and if all members would allow respect for the House so that we can all hear the speaker. Thank you, Member.

Hon. K. Krueger: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The windows in that convention centre were built in Kamloops. It's full of components from British Columbia. It employed people in many areas throughout British Columbia, and that's how we try to do things. We're encouraging all public buildings to be built with wood, because wood is the ultimate sequesterer of carbon dioxide, and wood is a wonderful renewable resource. It has been and will be again one of the major economic drivers in British Columbia.

For decades the forest industry paid for ¹⁄₆ of everything that the governments of British Columbia were able to fund — one of every six doctors, one of every six nurses, one of every six teachers — and I believe it'll get back to that. It's a sunrise industry, and we're doing many things, including expanding the markets for B.C. wood worldwide to make sure that it does come back.

The members opposite don't seem to know the statements that their leader has made about policy. I have seen her say that she is no longer campaigning against carbon tax. I've heard her say that the NDP is no longer negative to independent power production. But the member for Cowichan Valley was just ranting against IPPs. Got to get up to speed. Got to form more of a team and present yourselves as a team if you're going to have any credibility.

I heard a member today — or maybe it was yesterday — attacking shareholders. Shareholders in corporations are not your enemies. In fact, union funds are often substantial shareholders in corporations. The member doesn't appear to know that.

In the '90s I was the Labour critic when the NDP brought in the pension suspension bill. They had decided to punish union pensioners who went back and worked in their trade. For example, if their children couldn't find a job, couldn't go to university, the pensioner would supplement his meagre pension by going back and working at least part time. The NDP decided this was offensive, and they actually brought in a piece of legislation to suspend those workers' pensions if they were working somewhere else.

Mr. Speaker, if these members don't believe it, they should read the Hansard record. It's there. It's shocking, but it's there — the pension suspension bill.

I asked Brad Zubyk at the time: "Why in the world would your government do this?" He said: "I don't know. I keep telling them not to bring in legislation that the people don't want." We all know where it led to, and that was an almost wipe-out. A Corvette party in opposition from 2001 to 2005 — two members, a two-seater party.

[1550]

The leader of the NDP continually talks about their positive message. I haven't heard it. I hear nothing about the NDP's positive message. Any policy that they're contemplating, any changes that they think would be a good idea — it's unknown to us.

The NDP has a long history of shrinking economies, and I don't hear any new ideas. They shrink economies locally, and they shrink economies in the big picture.

So where is the positive message? Could we see some of that instead of the sandbox behaviour that we see, like mean little children over there. Where are the ideas? Will it be four years of this insulting behaviour devoid of policy, devoid of ideas, bad for the constituents? I'm urging the constituents of the members opposite to read the Hansard for the things they say. Read it and weep, because it's pathetic representation.

The Finance Minister, as he made his speech, talked about the greatest economic crisis of our generation. Surely all the members opposite know that this is the greatest economic crisis of their lifetime. But, no, they've got to continue to talk as if somehow a B.C. Liberal government caused the recession, somehow find someone in B.C. to blame it on.

We did have a made-in-B.C. recession in the 1990s. We were the only place that was going backwards, that was running huge deficits, that was suffering such high unemployment, between here and Chiapas, Mexico. That was the only other jurisdiction. We were the bookends of the continent, and it was a very pathetic thing — a made-in-B.C. recession.

It exported our children. Our school district….
[ Page 521 ]

Interjection.

Hon. K. Krueger: The NDP exported our children. That's right. Like a pied piper, except the NDP didn't go with them.

An Hon. Member: Unfortunately.

Hon. K. Krueger: That was unfortunate.

Eventually they left, of course. But the young people went away. They moved to Alberta, and they've been raising their families there.

Just this week the school board in Kamloops, school district 73, was asked about enrolment, and they said: "It actually isn't going down as much as we thought, and we've learned the reason is that the young people are coming back to British Columbia." It's taken three elections to give them the confidence that they won't be suffering through an NDP government, but they're back, and that's very good to see. We've been longing for them to come back.

We've had five balanced budgets, billions of dollars in surpluses, and our Finance Minister was continually reproached by the members opposite as to: "Surely he must have known that he was going to have such large surpluses." Now they've turned on a dime, and it's: "Surely you must have known that you would have this size of a deficit." You can't really have it both ways, can you, Mr. Speaker. If the banks believed and if the rating companies believed anything that the NDP is saying about B.C. Liberals and our economic policies, we wouldn't have a triple-A credit rating, but we do, and we surely didn't have one in the '90s.

The spending for health services that this budget sets out will rise to $15.7 billion by 2011. It was $8.7 billion in 2000 to 2001. That is a $7 billion lift, and the folks opposite talk about B.C. Liberal health care cuts. What baloney. A $7 billion lift. We'll have gotten very close to doubling in not very long. It will be $16.4 billion by 2011-2012.

This government has put the money where it promised it would. We always have patients first in our considerations of health care. We always have students first in our consideration of education. We have put huge amounts of additional funding, annual funding, into those key areas.

The members opposite decry P3s, but they wouldn't build a hospital in Abbotsford. We built it as a public-private partnership. We've doubled the number of doctors in training. We've doubled the number of nurses in training. We're good stewards of the public purse, and that's why people had the confidence to re-elect us as government this year.

[1555]

Surely we're going to see some more creative opposition, some more generation of policy and ideas that we can work with from these members in the four years stretching out before us — a lot more, hopefully, than we saw last term, a lot more than we've heard since this term started.

The statements that the members make opposite about the HST, the things that they say about giveaways to employers…. We've had 25 different employer groups at a time on a platform saying, "This will generate jobs. This is the best thing that could possibly be done for British Columbia's economy," and it will, Mr. Speaker. You know that. I know that. The members will have to see it to believe it, and they'll believe it after the next trip to the polls.

So 130 other countries have a value-added tax. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and pretty much everybody else in the know say that this is a far more progressive method of taxation than income tax. I know that British Columbians are very much enjoying paying the lowest income taxes in Canada. We never hear anybody ask us to change that.

Employers are not the enemy that the NDP class warriors profess them to be, and as long as the folks….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

S. Herbert: I just must respond to the previous member's comments. It was pretty interesting to be saying we on this side of the House are negative, negative, negative, when the only thing that he added to the discussion was how negative he was. It was a little hypocritical, I believe, and hopefully, we can turn the page on that.

So I wanted to start off my first full speech in this House, the first MLA for the new riding of Vancouver–West End, by thanking my constituents. It's an honour to serve the residents of the West End and Coal Harbour. It's a community with great dreams and great care for one another, a community of entrepreneurial spirit and a belief in everyone having the opportunity to benefit from our province's great wealth. It's a community with a strong history of standing up for one another.

I'm honoured to serve the Vancouver–West End. I've always said that my commitment is to every member of our community, no matter what political background. So thank you to the voters of Vancouver–West End for their commitment to me, their trust in me, and I will continue to work for you and with you every day of the year.

I want to thank a special constituent of mine, a special partner of mine, my love of my life Romi Chandra.

Thank you, Romi. I would not be here without you.

As all the members here will know, none of us would be here without our partners, although sometimes our partners are out there without us, wondering what we do here and questioning how we can be away so much. I thank all of our partners for their commitment to us
[ Page 522 ]
so that we can do our jobs as public servants for our constituents.

I would like to thank my campaign team. As everybody knows, it's many long hours again and again and again, and many members of my campaign team did it twice in six months, with a by-election for Vancouver-Burrard and then again for Vancouver–West End. The volunteers in the West End really showed their commitment to democracy and their commitment to their community.

So thank you, to my campaign manager Matt Smith in particular.

I rise today to address Budget 2009 — the second time Budget 2009 was introduced, since it was introduced this spring but never passed. It had a lot of promises at that time. It had a lot of promises running through to the election, promises which people thought were good. They thought they were worth their weight. We've discovered, though, that they are not, but I will get to that later.

We're in a very troubled economic time, what some have called the worst recession since the Great Depression. It's a time when we had one of the lowest percentages of British Columbians voting at all; a time when we see environmental catastrophes coming up daily, whether it's the horrifying news we've heard about our salmon or the spinoff effects now that we're hearing about our bears. We see the effects of climate change, horrifying fires across this province.

We also have many problems with child poverty — the highest child poverty rate in Canada for over five years, I believe, six years running now — and some of the largest numbers of homeless people living on our streets — in my constituency, and for a number of my other Vancouver colleagues, in particular.

[1600]

But what started off as a Vancouver issue has now spread across the province. Figures rate that from 10,000 to 15,000 people live on our streets, in our alleys, in our parks, on the front steps of our homes. It's truly shocking.

The divide is widening in our province between those who have the most and those who have the least. That's leading to more and more social conflict, which is bad for our economy and bad for our society. Low-income British Columbians are struggling. Our middle-income residents are falling further and further behind.

Personal debt is at highs not seen for many years. We just saw a recent study that showed that 60 percent of British Columbians feel that they are one paycheque away from disaster, one paycheque away from losing their homes. That's truly shocking and something that needs to be a number one priority that we focus our attention on here in the Legislature.

But in a time of great challenges we also see great opportunities, a time that's calling out for true leadership. That leadership, I believe, needs to be a vision that includes all of us — a vision with integrity, with care, with a belief in the value of each of our contributions.

As we saw with the Depression, there were many, many hard days and hard years, but that led to a new deal for our people, for the people in the United States, where the New Deal was crafted. But those kinds of policies also spread up here to the north — a partnership between government, business, labour and the people of our country and province.

We saw great visions come forward — public health care, a vision that had to be fought for again and again and again. And we see still, to this day, that public health care continues to need to be stood up for because it is still under attack.

We have public education, the social safety net, pensions — these kinds of programs which brought people together, a way to look out for each other, to realize that we are more than just individuals. We are a community.

These are the kinds of goals, the kinds of dreams of a better world for all of us that we all need to be paying attention to, especially now — where we all have a chance to get ahead, where we all benefit from our province's wealth, where we all have a chance to succeed and our neighbours live in prosperity as well, a province where we all get treated with fairness and with respect.

These are the dreams that I have, and these are dreams that I share with many, if not all, of my constituents in the West End. I talk to my constituents, and they tell me that these are dreams that they share with me and that they look forward to working with myself and the members on this side and, hopefully, that side of the House together to see become realities.

The West End. It's a great community where we live very close together. I'm not sure if it's because so many of us live in tiny little boxes so close together, but we learn to share and to watch out for one another. It's a community that continues to teach me much about how to live as a good human being. This is the British Columbia I want to live in.

The people that I speak with when I walk the streets of my community or when they come into my constituency office or when we have community offices out on Davie Street or Denman Street, Robson Street, down in Coal Harbour — they want hope. They're working to have their dreams fulfilled, but they're very concerned that our government is making their future harder and bleaker. I hear this when I tour across the province, including in constituencies of my colleagues on that side of the House.

As British Columbians, we should be excited for our future. As elected representatives for each of our communities, it's our job to help make our communities' dreams come true. But I've got to tell you that when I talk to my constituents, I ask them if they believe the government of our day, the government on that side
[ Page 523 ]
of the House, is going to do that, is going to help them fulfil their dreams. I get laughter, I see eye rolls, and I get anger.

The people of our province have told me that they are concerned about fabrication, corruption and politicians not telling the truth. They are concerned they may not be able to continue to live in our community as rents shoot up but their incomes either stay the same or decline. Right now there's a deep mistrust of government, a deep suspicion of our ability to do good for our province as legislators, concern about cheap wins that make us think we're winning the battle when we're really losing the war.

Our province's people are calling out for hope, calling for a dream that unites us, for leadership that puts them first, that recognizes that the work of government can harm them if it's done badly, or it can help them if it's done with respect. What they're calling out for is a renewal of hope, a renewal of their dreams.

[1605]

British Columbia's a unique place with unique people, as we all know. We are a people that have collectively fought against adversity in many forms. I think of the fight of the Japanese Canadians against the internment and the discrimination, and it brings me great hope that we now have a legislator, who has joined us from North Vancouver–Lonsdale, of that community.

I think of the fight for women's right to vote, and I see that slowly, although it creeps up and creeps back, we have a number of women legislators on our side and that side. The percentage has been increasing, but it's not enough. I think of our first nations community and their continued fight for recognition and for respect. I think of our gay-lesbian-trans community, who've been standing up for their right to be who they are.

The list goes on and on of groups who have faced adversity, who have faced challenges but who persevered and won. These were groups who, when they first started out, had government opposed to them, actively opposed to them, had the government fight them. But they joined together, reached out to British Columbians and trusted in the good hearts of our people. They forced the government to acknowledge and respect them as British Columbians deserving of the rights we all hold dear.

These fights were supported by the party I represent, by the New Democratic Party and its predecessor the CCF. That's one of the main reasons why I stand with this party — because it watches out for the little guy. It stands up for the little people of this province who have been put down and pushed down and ignored. This is the British Columbia that I love, and this is the British Columbia I'm proud to live in.

But there's another British Columbia. It's the B.C. Liberal version of British Columbia. It's a B.C. Liberal version of a British Columbia where a government feels that it can get away without telling the truth in the election to the people of B.C., that they can say one thing before an election and do something different afterwards and that somehow people will be okay with that.

Our province has a history of people who think the job of Premier is to be the big boss — not a leader but the big boss — to pull in a couple of other big bosses and then look after their own interests while British Columbians sit on the outside looking in. Our current big boss Premier follows this tradition but takes it to a whole new level. He somehow thinks that the best way to bring us forward as a province is to ram his decisions down our throats and hope that's so forceful that we won't be able to speak out or scream. We've seen it again and again and again.

It's a British Columbia where very few get very wealthy off the work of many and off the resources that belong to everyone in our province. It's a British Columbia that has little concern for the average person, a province led with hubris and little input from the people who put the government there, a province where the big boss thinks he knows best and what everyone else knows isn't worth listening to. That's not a province myself or my constituents want to live in.

I've got a couple of examples of the reason why I think this budget is so flawed. The first one, which is on the tip of tongue of many of my constituents, is the HST. We hear about rent. The apartment owners are seeking, because they know it's going to cost them more for the services they do, to increase the rent on their tenants over and above the yearly allowable increase. So instead of 3.7 percent, we could see an 8 percent increase next year.

For people on fixed incomes, for people who are working a job, working two jobs in many cases, that's very difficult to do. I hear from my constituents how difficult it is to continue to pay these high rents in our community. But they do it because they know that our community's a good community and a community they love. But they don't think it's right for government to be putting more burden on them. I think it's a challenge facing condo owners in my constituency, who will see their strata fees increase.

I talk to the small business owners in my community, whether or not it's the restaurants, about how their profit margins are so slim. They remember the GST, and they remember the impact it had on them.

If you look to the B.C. Restaurant and Food Association or the Canadian Restaurant and Food Association, they've got the figures to back it up. But the people in the restaurant industry in my constituency tell me they're already feeling a decline because of the recession, so right now is the worst time, they feel, to bring in a 7 percent tax increase on top of the GST that they're already paying.

[1610]
[ Page 524 ]

I talk to folks in my constituency who rely on the tourism industry. They rely on American tourists coming to our province and our great constituency. We have some of the most visited sites in the province. They tell me that adding a 7 percent tax more onto the cost of packaged tours, onto the cost of restaurants, onto the cost again and again and again, is detrimental to tourism.

It's going to hit them in their bottom line again, when they're already feeling the pinch. That's not good for employment in the West End. That's not good for employment across B.C., when tourism is the second largest in terms of employment in our province.

I turn to my role as a critic, as official opposition critic for Tourism, Culture and the Arts. I talked to COTA, the Council of Tourism Associations, who tell me that the HST will have a devastating effect, be catastrophic. These are words that this industry has been using. This is an industry that works very hard to be positive and to see the light at the end of the tunnel, but they look at this HST and at how they were told one thing, but now another thing has happened, and they feel that's not fair. They feel they were not told the truth. They feel they were manipulated.

On top of that we have, of course, Tourism B.C. and the elimination of a longstanding Crown entity — award-winning. It was an entity which led our country — and for many people I've talked to, they believe, the world — in terms of its innovative approach to marketing our province with performance-based funding which actually dedicated that funding. This was a creation of the NDP in 1997, and for eight years the B.C. Liberals seemed to feel it was doing just fine. But then they decided: "No, it's actually a waste of money."

Either they feel they were wasting money for eight years or they feel…. It's just incomprehensible — their suggestions of what they're doing here with Tourism B.C. So now the Council of Tourism Associations has come forward and said: "Okay, we know you're getting rid of Tourism B.C., but we want something which looks almost exactly like Tourism B.C." So you look to that industry, and you feel that they're being left out by this government and not being listened to as well.

Now I turn to an area of personal passion. My history is in arts and culture. That's the industry that I came out of. We look at what this government is planning to do on arts and culture — this year, approximately a 50 percent cut to arts and culture investment; next year, a 90 percent cut to arts and culture investment.

Now, this is coming from a government which claims to be good economic managers. But we see in their own study they've put out that for every dollar they invest in arts and culture, they make approximately $1.36 back in taxes. So you go: "Okay, let's cut the supports. Let's cut the investment in this industry." Why? To throw money away? To throw thousands of people out of work? To take the cultural heart of our province and tear it up, eviscerate it? It makes little sense. It makes no sense.

Every other province and jurisdiction in Canada is either holding the line on their investment or increasing it — in some cases, quite substantially. They understand it. They understand that we need a strong, creative economy in our province. But this government does not, and it has launched a war, an attack, on the arts and culture industry. It's disrespectful, it makes no economic sense, and it tears at the heart of our communities, as well as impacting our tourism industry.

I'd like to quote Douglas Coupland — he has recently spoken out on this issue — one of our well-liked authors in our province. He says:

"People come to B.C. not just because of the pretty mountains. They come here because they expect a place where society is both different and better. Haven't you noticed that when you say Vancouver to people, their eyes light up? For foolish, short-term reasons, we're killing that light, and all of the money in the world can't buy it back once it's gone. We become a parking lot with mountains, and it doesn't have to happen."

And he's right. It doesn't have to happen. This government can back down and realize they were wrong and reinvest in arts and culture in a real and committed way, show a real commitment to our creative economy and our people across this great province.

Sarah McLachlan calls the funding cuts a tragedy, and she, too, is right. The list of British Columbians from every constituency in our province is growing. It's growing daily, because people know that it's good for the economy and that it's good for society.

I think about the impact of this government's promise to protect health care and of the reality. We see the health care cuts in my constituency and their effect on some of those who have been waiting for months and months to get surgeries, only to be told, "Oh, you're going to have to wait some more, in pain," as the situation gets worse and only costs us more than if it had had an early intervention.

[1615]

Or I think about the challenges of the long-term care homes like Haro Park in my constituency. The way we treat our elders is a big reflection of how we are going to be treated in the future, and if we continue this way, none of us are going to want to get old and move into a care home, because the situations in many of these places are atrocious.

They try their best. The staff are committed, but they just cannot do all they need to do with the resources and the way this government has managed things. The number of seniors that are in hospital beds waiting to get into long-term care but cannot because of this government's broken promises….

The education cuts. We'll protect education, but we'll slash PAC programs. We'll slash support to PACs in our community. We'll slash supports to maintenance. In my community I've got a number of schools that need
[ Page 525 ]
to be seismically upgraded a.s.a.p. because, as we all know, one day an earthquake is going to come, and our children need the number one attention as I'm sure all members on that side of the House would agree. But we need to step up and actually fulfil the commitments this government made before, which they continue to push off, push off, push off.

I think about….

Interjection.

S. Herbert: I hear the Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts on that side of the House making remarks about this side of the House and talking about the '90s, as he always likes to do, because he does not want to talk about his own record, his government's own record — record of failure, record of deception.

I know the ministers and the members of that side of the House want to do their best, but it's our job as the official opposition to hold them to account on their words, and their words are not worth anything these days.

I look to gaming funds, something that that side of the House raised a lot of issues with. They said: "We need to make sure that we're supporting charities." Well, we've seen the number of dollars coming into gaming go up, and the number of dollars going to charities go down. This government, through their most recent actions on gaming, are picking the pockets of charities.

These are funds that the government said would be there. They committed to be there. Now they're taking them away. This is shameful. This is not anything that would give anybody hope about the future of our province.

I spoke earlier about the challenges to our environment, about how difficult it is these days to deal with the challenges of climate change. We also think about species at risk. We also think about the bears. We think about our elk. We think about the populations all across this province — our salmon. The things that are supposed to be there to protect those have been cut, whether it's officers looking out for conservation, whether it's B.C. Parks. On and on it goes.

Yet this is from a government that claims to be the greenest government, wants to be the greenest government. But as has been traditional, that lasts for maybe a year, and then you move on to something different, hoping that people didn't realize that it was just a put-on.

Now I would like to speak about deficits. Right now, under this government, we have the biggest deficit in B.C. history. That's just a fact. But I think we also need to pay attention to two other areas — a social deficit, because we look at child poverty. Now, somebody living in poverty as a child, growing up in poverty, without the supports to ensure that they too have the opportunity to reach for the top, that they too have the opportunity to benefit from the great wealth of our province….

Those children have incredible odds against them, and we've seen again and again cases of them falling through the cracks, and what do we get? More cuts. More cuts to child and youth services for watching out for those who we need to be paying attention to the most, because they are our future.

I think about the environmental deficit. You look at a number of problems with, for example, a site that's been made toxic, that will not grow fruit, grow vegetables, grow anything again, because this government has not been watching the ball, has not been paying attention to the fact that when you destroy natural environment, it takes many, many years to grow back, if at all.

Those are two things that this government seems to ignore, pushing the problems on to the backs of future generations. We need to pay attention to the budget deficit, the social deficit, the environmental deficit. What seems to be happening is a deficit in creativity, with the attack on arts and culture.

[1620]

So what's the way forward? Well, I think the way forward is respect for the people of British Columbia, respect for the people who brought us here. We need to reach out and listen to those people. We need to understand that not all of us — really, none of us — know everything. None of us knows everything, and many of us know little to nothing. We need to have that humility, that understanding that people, when they're working together, can think of greater solutions, be more creative and come up with better ways for us to move forward.

We need to listen to them, engage our public, engage our constituents, respect them in whichever political party they might be from. Listen to them, and act based on our commitment to them and their commitment to us. That's the only way we're ever going to see voter turnout increase. That's the only way we're ever going to see our way out of these problems — the largest deficit in B.C. history, incredible devastation in our environment and massive problems in our social sector.

Working together with the people that we represent — that's the province that I want to live in. I hope members on both sides of the House will join me in ensuring that we grow together with respect for one another and with a great love for this province.

Hon. B. Stewart: It gives me great honour to address the House on a very important topic in a particularly challenging time. I'm thankful for the opportunity to speak in support of the budget update, and I know that this is supported by members on this side of the House.

I can't think of a tougher time in recent memory when the government, the leadership of the Premier and the minister have had to put together a budget. I have to
[ Page 526 ]
say that I'm impressed, as a newly elected member to the House, by the integrity to create what I see as a very honest, transparent budget in these amazingly tough financial times.

It was a year ago just this last week that the economy was shaken right to the roots of its bases. Bear Stearns went down, followed by Lehman Bros. The reality was that the economy looked totally different just a few weeks before that, when we were basking in the fact that we had continuing-to-escalate housing prices. People were enjoying the benefits of, really, a golden decade.

We're now facing the reality of the fact that the crisis has hit not only the United States but all the other countries throughout the world. It's important to reflect on the fact that this is totally out of character for the government to not be able to forecast with the exactness that it's lived up to in the previous five balanced budgets.

This budget reflects the reality that our province has taken a real hit in this economic crisis. I think it's important to recognize that despite this challenging time, this government is strongly committed to building back the economy, creating jobs, and providing all British Columbians with safe communities, a solid education and an exceptional standard of living.

In the face of this ongoing economic downturn, government has stated that it will continue to protect vital services to the public and continue to build for the future. Health, education and social services will be maintained. In fact, funding for health services, contrary to what you might have heard in the House earlier today, will increase by 18 percent over the next three years. At that time the funding for the Ministry of Health will hit a total of $15.7 billion — almost 45 percent of our total revenue in government, a $2.4 billion increase over the next three years. I don't know how anybody can call that a cut.

Funding in our core K-to-12 education system is being maintained at over $8,000 per pupil, with a total of $5.7 billion going into B.C.'s world-class education system in the 2009-2010 school year. Soon parents and students will benefit through the all-day kindergarten. The additional $151 million for this initiative will significantly improve early childhood education in B.C., while providing parents with the added measure of support that they so desperately cry out for in terms of these tough economic times. The fact that both parents are often out working creates many of the social problems that we face today and has created many pressures.

[1625]

For British Columbians in need, the budget update includes an additional $420 million just to meet the requirements of greater demand for income assistance due to this recession. The recession isn't all that has made for a difficult year on the financial front. We have budgeted $409 million to pay for the cost of fighting some of B.C.'s worst forest fires we've had in recent years.

Speaking about this personally, in fact, in the middle of July, looking out from my kitchen window and spotting the first plume of smoke in West Kelowna, I was staggered to realize that in a matter of just minutes the fire chief, Wayne Schnitzler, initiated what he knew was necessary — a complete evacuation of almost 3,500 homes on the Westbank-Glenrosa subdivision.

Fortunately, he did that because, of course, in the course of the hours ensuing, one of the main economic drivers in the riding of West Kelowna, Gorman's lumber mill, was threatened to be burnt to the ground. If it wasn't for some of the quick action of the local firefighting community, B.C. forest fire fighting and the emergency social service network, we would have had a much different outcome — much more similar to an earlier disaster that I experienced personally in the Yarra Valley in the state of Victoria in Australia on February 7 this year, where some 175-plus people perished in fires that started in a very similar manner.

I have to say that I want to commend our firefighting community for what they've done this season not only in West Kelowna but throughout the entire province. The reality is that this type of unexpected fire season…. I know the opposition is critical of the fact that the number forecast on a rolling ten-year average seems unrealistic. The reality is: who's to predict what the forest fire season or the weather is likely to bring? I think it's commendable that they've done such a great job — not a single loss of life and very few structures.

This government intends to continue to implement the stimulus package in order to better position our province for a new decade of growth and prosperity. We're investing nearly $14 billion with the federal and local governments to build safe schools, health care facilities and other much-needed infrastructure. That means social housing, roads, schools, post-secondary institutions.

We need this infrastructure more now to create new jobs and new assets in every part of British Columbia. I'm sure that the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure's comments about direct input into communities throughout any riding in this province go to show the non-partisan nature that this government has looked at, where infrastructure spending is needed.

On the HST. Let me speak for a moment about the harmonized sales tax. Being in business when the GST was implemented, I had the opportunity to transition from the federal manufacturers' sales tax, that insidious tax that was hidden in the manufacturing of our goods across Canada. It was a different economy in those days. We were not in the global economy we're in today, but the reality is that the GST made us much more competitive globally.
[ Page 527 ]

Look at where Canada has come with the fact that we have a value-added tax federally. Although British Columbia was unable to necessarily negotiate in the past the same agreement we've recently negotiated with the federal government, the HST on our terms is a very good win for the manufacturing and resource industries in our province. It makes B.C. businesses more competitive. It will encourage new investment, lower our production costs and streamline administration to save both businesses and taxpayers money.

We have heard support from the business community and industry groups on the HST. They agree that it will result in more long-term, better-paying, stable jobs for British Columbians, and this is welcome news for communities all across this province.

You know, in recently talking and having an opportunity with the Finance Minister to invite different sectors — the housing sector, the lumber industry, manufacturing sector — in the ridings in the Okanagan Valley…. I can tell you that people from Tolko and Gorman are so appreciative of being able to preserve the hundreds of jobs that they maintain, which they currently have fought tooth and nail to preserve in this recession, and it will be that much easier going for the fact that we're hopefully seeing some signs of coming out of this recession.

[1630]

The reality is that we're looking at reduced export costs so that they can improve their margins in very tight, tough economic conditions and be able to get back into the U.S. market as the market emerges.

Another manufacturer, Campion Boats, has seen its workforce slashed from over 350 jobs — still Canada's largest boat manufacturer — down to 65 permanent jobs, thanking us for the fact that we've been able to help remove the embedded tax on a lot of their costs.

Our job now is to make certain that we make every small manufacturer that works along with people like Campion and other manufacturers in our region be able to understand how to get that embedded PST so they can lower their prices and help make those goods competitive around the globe.

There will also be an HST exemption for residential energy and a partial rebate for municipalities and qualified charities and non-profit organizations to help keep these organizations whole.

This government understands that the introduction of HST will have an initial impact on families and individuals and some parts of the economy. With this understanding, we have made adjustments. We've reduced or eliminated HST on any home heating fuels and energy costs for hydro going in for those services, and we're looking….

We've also raised the personal basic exemption so that lower-income families will be exempt from having to pay HST and receive an HST rebate cheque with their GST. With this understanding, we're introducing point-of-sale rebates on other items such as motor fuels, books, diapers, children-sized clothing and footwear, and car seats, to name a few.

I'm proud to say that this government is taking steps to protect the services that we deliver. As the Minister of Citizens' Services and the Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism and the Public Affairs Bureau, I am committed to continuing to provide leadership across government for the effective delivery of public services that meet the needs of citizens, businesses and clients. This newly created ministry brings together responsibilities for information, people, technology and service delivery — the touchpoints between government and the people of British Columbia.

This year Citizens' Services plans a new project called mass collaboration, which has been successfully used throughout many large organizations — Nokia, IBM — to help encourage citizens to get engaged in government policy as well as helping us deliver our services in an improved manner that's easy for citizens to get those services.

At the current time 92 percent of all British Columbians have access to high-speed broadband technology. With commitments we've made this year and within the budget, we're going to be able, hopefully, to increase it to 97 percent of citizens within the province that will have high-speed broadband Internet access. We're working hard to close that gap to 100 percent to meet our commitment to British Columbians.

The B.C. Public Service Agency provides human resource leadership for all organizations, representing the over 30,000 people working hard to serve British Columbia. Our public affairs bureau continues to lead and coordinate communications to make sure that the public is informed about government programs, policies and services and that information is communicated in an open and transparent manner.

One of the other issues that the public affairs bureau, which people often forget about its responsibility for…. It's the fact that they have to deal with statutory advertising such as road closures; forest fire bans; H1N1, the crisis in the springtime and how to properly protect yourself, where to get the service. The public affairs bureau is a very important integral part of the government.

Shared Services B.C. also provides a wide range of cost-effective infrastructure and services to ministry and government organizations that support the achievement of their mandates. Shared Services B.C. is accountable for government's facilities, technology, procurement and supply.

[1635]

I can say that during this economic slowdown, this ministry will be operating with a significantly smaller budget than it has in the past. We are prepared to embrace that challenge by working together to modern-
[ Page 528 ]
ize our operations of government and to become more efficient and more focused in the work that we do.

Our B.C. government agents are professional when it comes to the delivery of services to the public. Personally, I've had a chance to visit almost 15 of these offices recently, and I can tell you that the people who go there have a satisfaction that is unparalleled in the government operations.

I witnessed it firsthand when I toured Kamloops and the Prince George areas and stopped in to meet staff at several B.C. service centres. I would like to commend them for their ability to deliver a number of front-counter services to the public. That's over 700 services. They were helpful and friendly as they helped people get a new driver's licence, register for the Medical Services Plan, seek income assistance and look for some help in finding a job and some training.

Many other ministries depend on the fact that those government or Service B.C. centres provide access for Housing and Social Development, Children and Family Development first point of contact. In many communities, such as places like Mackenzie, where the entire community is now down to one mill…. It's restarted after significant wage cuts as well as the fact that the district has taken a property tax cut and the mill has reopened, but only one of six different operations there is back in operation. You can imagine the pressure on the staff trying to deliver services and helping people get through these difficult times.

I look forward to an opportunity to visit some of our newest Service B.C. centres — for example, in Masset or the new one in Port Alberni that just opened up. I'd also like to mention that these Service B.C. centres combine services from ICBC and the Ministry of Social Development to make for a one-stop shop for government services and that the signage out front greets clients in 12 different languages welcoming people of diverse cultures inside to access our many services.

B.C. is made up of many different diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds; 28 percent of our population comes from different ethnicities. In fact, this province is recognized as Canada's most multicultural province. Our budget continues to support programs geared towards building a provincewide culture of inclusion that welcomes and celebrates the differences between these cultures. For example, earlier this summer we released a new program called Embrace B.C. that supports diverse groups and sectors in creating community-based projects to promote multiculturalism.

This past year we hosted our first-ever provincial Nesika Awards to recognize B.C.'s cultural diversity and many first nation communities. Based on last year's success, I look forward to the 2009 awards presentation.

As I mentioned before, this government is committed to providing all British Columbians with world-class education, an outstanding health care system and access to vital services. The use of high-speed Internet connections is important to help citizens access these services, especially when they live in rural and remote communities. Some 123 of 203 first nations have high-speed Internet connectivity, and through NetWork B.C. we are working hard to bridge this digital divide.

Recently while visiting Kamloops, I had a chance to meet with Ruth Williams and the All Nations Trust talking about how we are in the proximity of signing agreements with major Internet service provision into many of these communities. It's going to be a first step in concluding that last-mile technology to those remaining 80 first nation communities. NetWork B.C. is working hard with local community groups to become the Internet service providers and all levels of government — the federal, provincial and local councils — to provide support to be able to connect those remaining communities.

In conclusion, the strong reality we are facing is that the world economy has changed and that the B.C. economy has changed. As a result, difficult decisions have had to be made. Families, individuals, businesses and governments are looking at their financial situations, and they are tightening their belts. It must be done. There is no way around it. Now is not the time to decide against non-critical expenditures but to focus on putting our money into the services that are vital to the public.

[1640]

We are not turning our backs on the underprivileged in this province. In fact, those who are most at risk are the most protected in this budget. This is why we are putting more money into health care, education, B.C. employment and assistance programs. This government has a reputable record of sound fiscal management, and we are building on that strong foundation.

We are being proactive at keeping debt affordable. We are well positioned to take full advantage of the coming economic recovery. We will come out of this difficult economic period and continue to lead Canada in terms of economic growth. I can firmly state that the Budget Update is a sound fiscal plan that rises to the challenge today.

We are preparing all British Columbians for a better future.

M. Elmore: Hon. Speaker, congratulations on your successful election.

I'm very pleased and honoured to rise and deliver my first speech, my first response to the budget here today, so thank you very much.

I'd also like to extend my congratulations to all members of the House, especially the newly elected MLAs. I understand the great sacrifice that this role exacts on everyone here, and I commend you all for your continued dedication and commitment to the people of British Columbia.
[ Page 529 ]

It's a great privilege for me to stand here today to deliver my first response to the budget as the proud representative of the community of Vancouver-Kensington. I'd like to say thank you to all the wonderful people of Vancouver-Kensington for allowing me to serve as your progressive representative in the Legislature.

My heartfelt thanks to a superb campaign team and to an inspired group of volunteers. Together they were first-rate, and they helped ensure that all phone numbers were called, all doors were knocked on and all lawn signs were put up. For many of my volunteers and even staff, it was their first time working on an electoral campaign here, so I commend them on the fantastic work that they did.

I'm also happy to be the conduit to their continued involvement in electoral politics in our province. Many of them are continuing to be involved in the community office and our different initiatives.

Thanks also to my parents, Maria and Ken, my sister Martha and my cousin Lena for their support and for bringing a seemingly endless supply of great home-cooked food into the campaign office. Thank you, of course, to my partner, Angelina, for her unwavering love, support and volunteer work on the campaign. Along with door-knocking and making phone calls, she made some fabulous campaign videos that captured our enthusiasm and will now forever be on YouTube.

To the Vancouver-Kensington NDP executive, many thanks for your commitment and for the long hours you put in the campaign. Thank you also to the former MLA of my riding, David Chudnovsky.

David, you've set a high benchmark for how an MLA should represent their riding, and I'm looking forward to building on the excellent work you and your staff have done over the years in Vancouver-Kensington.

Lastly, I would like to give a special thank-you to the Filipino community. [Filipino was spoken.] Thanks to everybody. We did it. Your tremendous support and encouragement is overwhelming. Again, I'm deeply humbled for the privilege of standing before you as the first elected MLA of Filipino descent.

I recognize the great significance my election holds for Filipinos in B.C. My presence in the B.C. Legislature is the result of the determination and diligence of all those before me. It is the result of the persistence of the early Filipino pioneers to carve out a new life in Canada, and the resolve of many others to have the Filipino voice heard across this great parliament.

[1645]

My mother was among the early Filipino immigrants. She came to B.C. as a young nurse from the province of Cebu in 1965, and like many other immigrants, grinding poverty in her homeland forced her to leave family and friends for a better life. She met my father working in Prince Rupert. He was working in the sawmill. They met in the hospital. My uncle, my father's brother, had a broken leg, and that's where they met.

From my mother, I also appreciate a great sense of compassion that I value from her, and from my father, as well, tremendous perseverance and ethic of hard work. As a young nurse in Canada, my mother had a lot of experiences with racism, and we grew up with that in the home. As kids, you don't really know what to think. Your mother comes home and tells you stories of struggling in the hospital and being faced with racist comments, but it becomes ingrained.

Certainly, I appreciate the early struggle of my mother and all early immigrants into Canada and also the contributions that they've made. I recognize that I am continuing and I'm here because of their struggles coming to Canada and B.C.

So four decades later…. Filipinos came to Canada and B.C. in the 1960s and currently in even greater numbers with the same dreams of a brighter tomorrow. Today there are over 100,000 Filipinos in B.C., which makes them the third-largest ethnic group in the province. Across Canada there are more than half a million Filipinos. Last year the Philippines was the top source country for permanent and temporary visas to Canada, so they're also one of the fastest-growing populations.

The Filipino community faces an array of issues that range from the need to address the recognition of foreign credentials to family reunification and protection for temporary foreign workers. An example is how immigrants need immediate access to MSP benefits upon arrival in B.C. They should not have to undergo a three-month waiting period before being given this much-needed medical protection. I've dealt with cases of individuals who have fallen through those cracks and are having to appeal those decisions. So it's a very onerous hardship on new immigrants here and certainly a loophole that I hope we can work to change, to ensure that immigrants coming into B.C. have the needed coverage that they deserve.

I also assure the Filipino community that I will continue to work with advocacy groups like Migrante B.C., and a committee for domestic workers and caregivers rights, as they forward many issues and campaigns like the campaigns for caregivers to be given landed immigrant status upon arrival.

The Filipino community is among the fastest-growing populations, yet there's much that needs to be done with respect to ensuring the representation of Filipinos in various aspects of society, especially in elected office. I'm hopeful that as I join with Richmond school board and other elected representatives, and two other Filipinos in provincial politics — one in Manitoba and Alberta, and a retired Filipino federal cabinet minister — many other Filipinos and also Filipino Canadians will soon join us in the coming years.

More so, I anticipate that as our community becomes more politicized, we will also recognize the importance
[ Page 530 ]
of electing progressive representatives that will protect and promote the rights and welfare of Filipinos and all Canadians, especially the marginalized among us.

The riding I represent, Vancouver-Kensington, is a wonderfully diverse community that is in the heart of East Vancouver. It is west of Main Street, south of East 16th and Kingsway, east of Nanaimo and north of East 49th Avenue. Within these boundaries are a great array of people from different cultures who, despite many barriers, contribute much to our community and our province.

Statistics B.C. indicate that many in my riding are low-income folks who struggle monthly to ensure that their rents or mortgages are paid, their fridges are full and all bills have been paid.

[1650]

A great number of them are in need of affordable housing. Indeed, our past MLA, David Chudnovsky, and his staff advocated and worked much with the tenants of the Fraser Street Villa and Little Mountain when they were forced to leave their homes recently.

Folks in my riding have a terrific sense of community. Because of this, they've been able to build strong neighbourhoods, especially through the great volunteer efforts of the many local groups like the Dickens Community Group, the Kensington neighbourhood group, the mountain neighbourhood association and the Livingston neighbourhood improvement group.

We also have SHINE, the South Hill initiative for neighbourhood development, and the South Hill Business Improvement Association, who are holding their AGM on September 17, and they have a great vision for South Hill.

We also cannot forget the TINGA, or the Tupper Integrated Neighbourhood Greenway Association, which is a collaboration of Sir Charles Tupper students, teachers, the parent advisory committee, city of Vancouver, volunteer master gardeners and constituents. They recently held a community gardening day that was attended by the volunteer master gardeners and Vancouver-Kensington constituents like myself.

TINGA has done a remarkable job of transforming a closed street at Sir Charles Tupper Secondary School in Vancouver into a neighbourhood greenway, a community meeting space and a place of remembrance for Jomar Lanot, who tragically lost his life on the school grounds five years ago.

Already I have had the pleasure of attending numerous block parties and festivals that showcase the great sense of spirit that my constituents possess. In the summer there was the South Hill Festival, the Canada Day festivities at Kensington Community Centre and the street party just off Fraser Street that was put together by our veterans with the army, navy and air force in Canada.

South Vancouver Unit 26, the Andy Capp Club, is also a great place for good deals at lunch and for burgers. So if any of you are around, I encourage you to drop in. There are always friendly folks in there as well. They're great community people, organizers, leaders, and they visit us often.

Just last week I was at the Polish Harvest Festival at the Polish Community Centre on Fraser and East King Edward. This was another terrific event that was very well attended, with standing room only. Entertainment was super, and they showcased a lot of cultural dances and songs that celebrated their community and recognized the contributions of the Polish-Canadian community. They also had many other multicultural presentations, great food and, of course, excellent cold Polish beer for the occasion on a hot summer day.

As my fellow members and Mr. Speaker can see, Vancouver-Kensington is a very vibrant and diverse community that is home to a great array of organizations whose members are among the most passionate, committed and hard-working. I am certain that despite the difficult times that lie ahead, given the bleak and devastating impacts of the government's budget cuts, they join me in persevering to work for change because of the certainty that a people united may indeed move mountains.

To the outstanding people of Vancouver-Kensington, I would like to say thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to serve you as your progressive representative in the Legislature. I look forward to continuing to work and serve you in the years ahead.

I'd also like to thank members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community for their support. I continue to work with the community. I came out as a lesbian at UBC when I was 20 years old, and I've participated in facilitating courses to overcome homophobia, raising awareness in the community and organizing events. I continue that support for the community.

I recognize that these programs are important to create an atmosphere free of violence and intimidation for people, particularly for youth in rural areas — for them to feel that they're free of bullying and also that they do not have to suffer the threat of violence. So I will continue to be an advocate for the GLBT community.

[1655]

This budget has been referred to by some as the Titanic. The province of B.C. was on the Titanic before the election. The government was steering the ship, and despite concerns from opposition and leading economists, the B.C. electorate was told not to worry and that we were fearmongering, raising concerns. Yet immediately after the election we learned that in fact, oh, we had struck the iceberg — that there was a pressing economic crisis indeed. In fact, the original budget forecasts of $495 million had expanded six times to nearly $3 billion.

With this budget, we learn that while we're in this predicament on the Titanic, the Liberal government and their friends already had abandoned ship in the lifeboats. Who do we find on the Titanic in the third class?
[ Page 531 ]

Relegated there in the lower decks, we see families in need of child care. We see school sports. We see children with disabilities, women who are in need of programs, fleeing violent situations. We see the marginalized and the vulnerable portions of our society relegated to the lower levels. Indeed, in this time of crisis when there's need for support for our most vulnerable in B.C., we find that there are not adequate lifeboats and that they're expected to go down with the ship.

In terms of the impact of this budget, we see a pattern before the election of broken promises. There's a long list. You've heard them. We can go over them. There would be no HST brought in — before the election. The HST was introduced. There would be no cuts to education and health care — before the election. Now we see that there are cuts.

Previously there was also a long line and evidence of broken promises along the way. We would not sell B.C. Rail. The list goes on and on, and with this budget, it seems to appear that this government is in an ethical crisis. There is a crisis of confidence in this government. This government with this budget has deceived the electorate.

My constituents have told me they feel that they cannot trust the government, that they feel they were fed a pack of lies. They feel that this government has created and operates in a culture of deceit. We see it's not an isolated incident, but it has actually developed into a culture now — a culture of habituated mistruths, of consistent falsehoods, of misrepresentation, of misleading the public, of saying one thing and doing another.

It seems to be that it's a culture of deceit from the highest levels, from the Premier right through to the members of the government. If in doubt or when faced with questions about budget cuts, instead of telling the truth, it seems there's a default to dishonesty and falsehoods.

The B.C. electorate — we're on the Titanic, being steered into the iceberg. We see that there's a culture of deceit that has developed systematically within the government, and on top of that, with this budget, we see cuts to programs and services that hurt people. We see the impact of this budget having a negative effect on the people of my constituency and targeting the people in B.C. who need the most support.

[1700]

This government and this budget have not demonstrated compassion. How is it that this budget helps people who are in the most need, when funding for addiction services and funding for services for children with autism have been cut?

I've had letters into my constituency from members of the arts and culture community of their programs being cut and also a concern with the breaking of the social contract for gaming funds. Gaming funds were recognized, and it's generally accepted — not to go to general revenue — that these funds should go to community groups to help support their efforts. Yet we see that gaming funds are being held back and that many organizations are having to undergo a lot of hardship because of these cuts.

We have the lowest minimum wage in Canada, six years of the highest child poverty rate, cuts to student aid, cuts to the loan program for leaky condos. These impact my constituents. I've heard about all these issues — and also no continuing commitment to become carbon-neutral, to promote energy conservation or invest in a green and sustainable economy that's going to take us forward.

One component necessary for a sustainable plan is the expansion of the public bus system. Currently there is a shortage of 500 buses in Metro Vancouver, a shortage of service hours to meet peak demand needs. There's a need for government support of TransLink to ensure that they are able to implement a service level adequate to meet demand needs, and there's also a need to expand the U-pass to all post-secondary institutions.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

I'd also like to talk about this record of the government in terms of mismanaging the economy. It's time to expose the myth that this government knows how to manage the economy. I think it's becoming clear. Operating in this culture of deceit with this current crisis and budget cuts, the impact in communities, this government and this budget have been characterized, also, as "the emperor has no clothes." I mean that figuratively, of course. The Liberals denied that there was an impact to B.C., with the global economic crisis raging.

Their imposition of the HST, another election deception, is a tax shift from corporations to consumers and a big hit to the service industry and restaurant sector. Opposition to the HST is widespread in Vancouver-Kensington and across B.C. Bill Tieleman has a Facebook group, NO BC HST, with over 120,000 members.

When times were good, this government did not save money, and now British Columbians are paying the price. This budget and the Liberal government have been steering the Titanic and using old thinking with their economic policies. This government with this budget is making short-term cuts that will cost us more in the long term, and the government has shown that it's incompetent to manage the B.C. economy.

The government has missed out on opportunities to secure millions of dollars in federal money for infrastructure programs, missed the opportunity for construction in the north. This is a missed opportunity to provide jobs in times of economic downturn, and the Liberal government answer with this budget is to divest in people by cutting programs and services.

I'd like to talk now about the child care system, as the deputy critic for the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It's clear. I've heard from across the province that the child care system is in crisis.
[ Page 532 ]

B.C. has one of the weakest approaches to child care in the industrialized world as a percentage of GDP spent on child care. It's currently 0.23 of a percent, which is three times lower than the average within the 30 OECD countries. Currently there are only enough regulated child care spaces for 14 percent of children under 12 in B.C., and wait-lists for licensed child care are years long.

[1705]

After housing, child care is the second-highest cost facing B.C. families. In 2008 an average Metro Vancouver family with a four-year-old in full-time care and a seven-year-old in after-school care paid 20 percent of their monthly expenditures, or $12,000, for child care — if they could find it. Staff wages are so low that recruiting and retaining professional early childhood educators are ongoing concerns.

This budget does not adopt a systematic approach. It is a patchwork of isolated services. The current child care system is very fragile and in danger of being further destabilized due to a lack of vision and support from this government and this budget. There's a need for an integrated, coordinated and comprehensive approach for early childhood education and daycare in the context of an anti-poverty priority.

While the all-day kindergarten announcement is welcome, it remains to be seen if it will be implemented by September 2010 as promised by the government. While $44 million has been earmarked for all-day kindergarten, on the other hand, $110 million has been taken out of schools. We're hearing that that's creating a big pressure on local school boards that have to try and find spaces to implement the all-day kindergarten. With child care, there's a need for wraparound care to provide access for working families, and all-day kindergarten should be part of a comprehensive integrated approach.

Currently we see that the StrongStart programs are well attended. They are family drop-in programs that require a parent or caregiver to accompany the child to the program.

These programs, however, do not meet the needs of working families, and they're impossible to access if a single parent is working. Most families need full-time, year-round services that support their workforce participation.

There's a need, which we don't see in this budget, for a comprehensive child care and anti-poverty plan that ensures low parent fees, more community-owned spaces and higher wages for professional early childhood educators. There's a need for a publicly funded, high-quality, affordable child care system, which we currently don't see.

The majority of British Columbians support this and recognize that what is good for children and families is also good for economic, social and environmental well-being. A system of quality universal child care services is a good investment and reaps strong economic returns of at least $2 for every dollar invested.

There's a new report just released from the human early learning partnership that outlines the benefits of investing in early human capital in the early years of children. The report was commissioned by the Business Council of B.C. to look forward and to understand what B.C. will look like in 2020 and to determine the economic impact of early vulnerability — what the impact would be on the province and the economy.

Today one in three children enters kindergarten at risk of failing to develop into a healthy, well-educated and productive adult. This is needed to secure long-term sustainability. The vulnerability rate is three times worse than it could be.

Our research reveals that eliminating early vulnerability is ten times more valuable to the B.C. economy than eliminating the provincial debt. That is the benefit of investing in early development. The cost accrues to more than $400 billion in the long term.

Vulnerability, paradoxically, increased from 2004 to 2007, from 26 percent of kindergarten-aged children to 29 percent, despite sustained economic growth during this time. This is because a lot of children who are vulnerable fall within the middle class, and they're falling behind. Without a comprehensive investment, we've seen child and family poverty remain high and the growth of income inequality.

Addressing early vulnerability requires a shift in understanding of the relationship between families, the economy and public resources. This is where we need to move as a society and have these priorities taken up, priorities which we do not see in this government and which we don't see in the budget.

[1710]

We need to move away from the old thinking contained in this budget and to a new way of thinking of investment in people to support families and children. We must move from treating illness, poverty and lack of education after the fact to promoting development in the early years, which would be a much more cost-effective use of public resources to ensure B.C.'s long-term economic growth.

This government has been steering the Titanic, leaving behind the most vulnerable, damaging B.C. communities and families. They've created a culture of deceit and have been shown to be incompetent economic managers.

Citizens must resist these cuts and speak out and stand up against them. Raise your voice and contact your local MLA.

I and the opposition will be holding this government to account. We will be voting against this budget, and the constituents of Vancouver-Kensington will be holding the government to account. We'll be working with community, with businesses and constituents.

We are the ones left to pick up the pieces. We will be involved in community-based organizing, and we will
[ Page 533 ]
be working together to ensure that no one is left behind with this budget and working every day and every hour to ensure that we build on a strong future for B.C.

R. Lee: Madam Speaker, first, congratulations for being elected as Deputy Speaker in the House.

It's an honour for me to be able to stand in this House again to respond to the budget. It's an honour given to me by the thousands and thousands of voters who put their trust in me to represent them in this Legislature.

When I was going door to door talking to the residents of Burnaby North, the major expectation they had was for this government to manage British Columbia's finances through the global economic downturn and pull the province out of the recession. I believe that it was the record of this government, which has shown the ability and the skills to manage the economy in the last eight years, that led British Columbians to give this government another mandate.

I have been working closely with my constituents and my colleagues to make Burnaby North a better place to live, and I'm pleased to have the opportunity to serve the community again.

The boundaries of the riding of Burnaby North were changed, although the riding name remains the same. It comprises the area between Boundary Road and Sperling Avenue north to Burrard Inlet and south to Canada Way but also including the area north of the Deer Lake Parkway. The area between Sperling Avenue and Duthie Avenue, which was in the old Burnaby riding, has been moved to the riding of Burnaby-Lougheed.

I'm pleased to see that Burnaby North now includes BCIT, an outstanding post-secondary institute; two major commercial areas located in Burnaby North along Hastings and along the Lougheed Highway, including the Heights area; and the Brentwood Town Centre.

New condominium developments and new houses are sprouting all over the whole area, and many people come to here live, work and play.

I have been living in the riding of Burnaby North ever since I got married and bought our first house in 1986. My three children were born at Burnaby Hospital, and they have attended or are attending schools in Burnaby. All my children will be graduating next year, as they are in their final years of university, secondary school or elementary school.

I would like to thank my family for helping me get re-elected. My wife spent many long hours managing the phone and door canvassing. My son and daughter spent many hours in tidying up the phone list. Without their participation, the campaign would have been less successful.

I would like to thank my campaign manager, Pato Chan. He has run three successful campaigns for me now, and his management skills are incredible. I'm grateful to my financial agent, Lok-Ki Ho, and his assistant for their professional services to keep a detailed financial record.

My many hundreds of supporters and volunteers came forward to help my campaign, and I cannot list them all, but I would like to thank them for their time, energy and enthusiasm in making the campaign successful. [Applause.] Thank you.

[1715]

I was particularly impressed with the students working on the phone and all the canvassing teams. Their enthusiasm and team spirit contributed greatly to the election campaign. In our democratic system it is important to cultivate the interest of young people in the political process. Since the election, I have resumed my constituency office monthly open meeting on Saturday morning, and I have met with many constituents in my office as well as in the community.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the seven years of service of Judy Chu, the continued service of Nancy Chan, and welcome Robert Gary Begin as constituency assistants. Their commitments to the constituents in Burnaby are exceptional. Of course, in Victoria I'm fortunate to have Jeff Merlin, Brittany Auvinen and Justin Molander assisting me. I am grateful to them.

Burnaby North has grown a lot over the last few years. Many large projects have been completed, and many others are underway. Still more will be starting soon, despite a global economic downturn. In fact, the value of many construction projects planned or underway across B.C. has risen to a record $188.1 billion.

In the last few months around Burnaby's Brentwood Town Centre many condominium projects and office buildings have been completed or have been under construction. The completion of the 665-unit Brentwood Gate residential development is a major housing project in this area. The Motif residential tower and the Prado condominium development, which are just outside my constituency office, are developments adding another three towers, mid-rise and townhouse units of residential and retail space in the neighbourhood.

Provincial and federal infrastructure spending will help to keep this economy moving in British Columbia and in Burnaby. The $14 billion capital infrastructure program supported by the province will create up to 88,000 jobs and help build vital public infrastructure in every region of the province. The September 2009 update provides capital investments of $7.4 billion in 2009-2010, $7.7 billion in 2010-2011 and $6.5 billion in 2011-2012.

Burnaby North is getting at least two major projects under this — $64 billion for a new 1,300-student Burnaby Central Secondary School and $39 million for the British Columbia Institute of Technology campus building expansion. When a seismic upgrade was shown to be less cost-effective than replacing the old Burnaby Central Secondary School, this government made the decision to go for a capital investment of $64 million.
[ Page 534 ]

When the federal resources became available for capital projects this year under the knowledge infrastructure program, this government took the opportunity to collaborate and build at BCIT a new entrance building, and that will meet the LEED gold standards for leadership in energy and environmental design.

It is remarkable to witness the resilience of the people of British Columbia and Burnaby North in this very difficult time, but the positive signs I have described in Burnaby North do not mean this recession is over. This international economic crisis has been very difficult, and we still have much to do.

To understand some of the decisions in this budget, it's important to understand what we have seen in this recession and how it has affected our province. World demand for our natural resources has decreased, prices have dropped, and now export volume has decreased as well.

[1720]

According to statistics from Industry Canada comparing the first six months of this year to the first six months of last year, exports from the province to the U.S. decreased by 24.1 percent, and our exports to Japan decreased by 20.7 percent.

In terms of products, there was a 28.4 percent decrease in lumber exports, a 35.5 percent decrease in natural gas exports and a 30.7 percent decrease in wood pulp exports. Total value of exports from B.C. decreased 11 percent. This has led to closure of factories, loss of jobs, reduction of economic activities and reduction of consumer confidence in general.

Less production means less royalty and tax revenue for the government. Higher unemployment means less personal income tax revenue to the government. Less economic activity means less revenue for the government in general. This is just common sense.

These are tough times. We all know that. It's no surprise to any fair or reasonable person that tough choices need to be made and that we must run deficits to get B.C. through this recession so that we are stronger than ever. Nobody hates deficits more than this government, but there's simply no other choice. It's necessary, because this government has committed to protect health care, education and the people most in need.

What else is there to do when facing a further $1 billion change in personal and corporate income tax, $1 billion in natural gas and other natural resources revenue and a $240 million decrease in social services tax revenue in the last six months?

The monthly natural gas export is a good indicator of why the provincial revenues have taken a sudden downturn in the last six months. In January B.C. exported $259 million; February, $197 million; March, $183 million; April, $135 million; May, $129 million; June, $104 million; and July, $122 million. In other words, the export value decreased 60 percent over six months. No one had a crystal ball that predicted this.

I believe that the experts in the Economic Forecast Council have done their best in forecasting the outlook of British Columbia's economy and that the Ministry of Finance has been prudent to use a GDP growth rate of minus 0.9 percent instead of the zero percent which is the average prediction of the twelve forecasters in the February 2009 budget. And again, it is prudent to use a GDP growth rate of minus 2.9 percent in this budget update instead of minus 2.3 percent, which is the new average prediction from July 29, 2009.

I have heard critics in the last few years saying that the government deliberately underestimated GDP growth and hence revenue so that we had a surplus at the end of the fiscal year to make the government look good. And the critics called for more program spending — well, we do not hear that regarding this budget. Now they are saying that the government should not increase the deficit in this difficult time. I think that's not practical.

The government is taking a balanced approach by maintaining vital services, stimulating the economy and creating more jobs as well as encouraging investment and making our province more competitive. It will increase health care services funding by 18 percent over three years and give us a record $2.9 billion in capital spending for health.

This budget update maintains education funding, invests in infrastructure to create jobs, raises the small business income tax threshold to $500,000 from $400,000 and reduces provincial income tax by increasing the basic personal income tax credit to $11,000.

[1725]

These measures mean that British Columbians who earn less than $118,000 a year pay the lowest provincial income tax in the country. Furthermore, small businesses in B.C. will pay no provincial taxes as of April 2012, and people earning up to $18,800 will pay zero income tax.

I would like to say a few words about HST, which is a form of value-added tax, VAT. My colleague the member for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain called the members opposite Her Majesty's loyal opportunists. It's a fitting label. What other reason could there be for opposing the single most important thing we can do to improve the economic competitiveness of our province?

When 29 of the 30 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, countries use the VAT system and in Canada only four provinces are left with the investment-hindering PST, it's time to move forward and adopt the HST. B.C. will not be competitive if we keep the PST, and our exporters will not be on a level playing field if we keep the GST plus the PST.

With the HST, manufacturers, exporters and businesses will have more financial resources under their control. They will be able to claim HST input credits to lower their production costs, increase their capacity to invest, increase wages or even to stay in business in these tough times.
[ Page 535 ]

No doubt the consumer will pay more in the short term, but the benefit of a more effective tax system will create savings in administration and lower prices in the long run. It will also create more and better-paying jobs. Besides, the federal government is providing the incentive of $1.6 billion to B.C. So this certainly will help our budget in maintaining vital services.

Some goods and services we do not pay GST on now, and there will not be HST charges for — such as basic groceries, agricultural products, prescription drugs and medical devices. The proposed provincial portion of HST will also include point-of-sale rebates for home heating, motor fuels and children's-size clothes, etc.

HST credits up to $230 for individuals are available for 1.1 million low-income British Columbians. On balance, I believe the most needy will not be negatively impacted by the HST. Qualified charitable organizations are also not negatively impacted with HST. The province of British Columbia must move ahead to be more competitive in order to attract more investment and create more jobs.

As Canada's gateway to the Asia-Pacific, B.C. is in a unique position to capitalize on its advantages in geography, culture and the business environment. As Parliamentary Secretary for the Asia-Pacific Initiative, I'm honoured to have the opportunity to serve this province in my role to enhance the trade and cultural exchanges between this province and the Asia-Pacific region.

It's clear from this economic downturn that this world is even more closely connected than most of us ever thought. The sub-prime mortgage crisis in the U.S. has deeply affected our economic outlook. On the other hand, we realize that no global market is more promising in terms of trade, investment and tourism than the Asia-Pacific region.

In the last six months of this year, while our two largest export markets collapsed, our exports to China actually increased by 7.6 percent. China now makes up more than 10 percent of our export market and 15.4 percent of our total trade. The total trade with the U.S. is 46.3 percent and that with Japan is 12 percent.

[1730]

As the Minister of Forests and Range has mentioned, B.C.'s exports to China have grown substantially. In fact, we saw close to an 80 percent increase from 2007 to 2008 in lumber. This year it's expected to be another record.

I am pleased to see that B.C. has now established six representatives in Asia, two in Europe and one in the U.S. to promote B.C. exports. The Asia-Pacific Business Centre in Robson Square is now open for business as a one-stop service window for Asia-Pacific trade development.

Under the Ministry of Small Business, Technology and Economic Development's international business developments branch, it provides invaluable services to connect local businesses, communities, associations and government to the exciting world of Asia-Pacific trade and investment opportunities.

Emerging global economies such as China, India, Korea and Southeast Asia and the more mature Japanese economy together offer increasingly more and more trade and investment opportunities for British Columbians.

To conclude, it's up to British Columbians to seize this opportunity, this moment. We are in very challenging times, and I believe the budget of September 2009 will go down in history as the budget which brought B.C. to the forefront of competitiveness and efficiency in the world. I'm sure British Columbians will have the courage to move our province forward as the best place to live, to work, to play and to invest.

A. Dix: Hon. Speaker, congratulations on your election as Deputy Speaker.

I wanted to, first of all, say what an honour it is for all of us, but for me in particular, to represent the community of Vancouver-Kingsway, one of British Columbia's most diverse and dynamic communities. It's the community in which I live, and it's my real honour to represent people so committed to the life of their community as the people who live in Vancouver-Kingsway.

We also have in our community a great tradition of representation of Members of the Legislative Assembly who have represented our community with passion and with pride for decades. People such as Glen Clark, Dave Barrett, Bob Williams and Alex Macdonald. People such as Grace MacInnis and Ian Waddell have represented the community of Vancouver-Kingsway and represented it in a remarkable way.

For me, because many of those people are people who I admire very much and who made a lasting impression on the province, it's humbling to think that I have the opportunity to do and to represent a community as they did, because our community of Vancouver-Kingsway, I think — and I know all members feel this about their communities — represents something that doesn't exist in many places in the world: a community of people who have come from around the world, who represent diverse languages and communities and who work together to improve and to support one another in good times and in bad times.

Now, I just heard one of the B.C. Liberal members speak and say that he thought that this budget was one of the best budgets he'd ever seen. Now, let's just put it in context for a moment, because this is clearly a budget of a government that's out of ideas, out of conviction and has seemingly no direction to address the very difficult problems facing our province.

They are a government that not just during the election campaign but all through the previous decade campaigned and argued against the GST and the HST. It's important to put this in context, because the Premier's
[ Page 536 ]
opposition to the HST — the government's opposition to the HST — goes back more than a decade. He repeatedly campaigned on this question. He repeatedly stated that it was a regressive tax, a tax that he didn't support. He repeatedly said year upon year, time upon time that we would not do it in British Columbia.

[1735]

Then here we were in the election of May 2009. There was nothing new. There are no new arguments. We heard the Minister of Finance say in his speech: "This is the single most important thing we can do to help the B.C. economy." This thing that they've opposed year after year and opposed during the election campaign has magically been transmogrified into something special, into something that is at the heart of government's policy.

Let's set aside the betrayal of people. Let's set aside the fact that for a decade they told restaurant owners and working people that they were against this thing and then weeks after the election signed a deal implementing it. Let's set that aside for a moment and try and understand what they're doing.

What we are seeing is a fundamental shift in who is responsible for paying for the critical institutions in British Columbia. We're seeing taxes imposed on working people who are already struggling in our communities. This is a dramatic shift in taxation onto small business and onto working people.

It will damage small businesses in our community. That's why, when I walk up and down Kingsway in our community and we walk in with petitions, everyone signs, because they know the effect — business people know the effect; working people know the effect — of this wrong-headed policy, and in their heart of hearts they know the effect of it as well. Otherwise, what were they doing for the last ten years?

What was the Minister of Finance doing for the last ten years if that wasn't the case when he was campaigning against the GST, when he was campaigning against the HST, when he was saying it was wrong for British Columbia? What was he doing? Was he just having us on? Of course not.

It goes deeper than that. I have the honour to serve as Health critic for the official opposition. One of the elements of the HST is its impact on care homes. I'm sure the Minister of Health is profoundly interested in this. The impact of the HST on care homes will be extremely negative.

Think of a care home in my community, the Carital care home. It's just off Grandview Highway. That care home, they estimate, will see an increase in cost of $200,000. It is all government subsidized. Essentially, their sole income is government-subsidized beds in their care home. A $200,000 incremental cost. No increase in care home rates — no increase. They're going to have to pay for those costs directly out of care standards.

By the way, just in case the minister of all those other things has any illusion, the minister for anything other than the Minister of Health….

Unless he has any illusions about it, we have the lowest care standards in the country. We have the lowest care standards in the country. So what they're doing is they're taking…. Can you believe it? Implementing a tax that will cost those care homes alone, which are principally private businesses but also non-profits, $42 million over the time of this mandate, cost 200 to 250 jobs and will lower care standards.

And they're already the lowest. This is what this budget does. This is what this HST does. It damages the long-term care system in British Columbia in this way.

The people who live in those care homes, the people who work in those care homes, the people who run those care homes, the people — in the case of private care homes — who own those care homes…. If they had looked during the election campaign, and if they had said, "I'm worried before I vote. What will the implications be for us," what would they have learned?

They would have learned that this government said they weren't implementing the HST. They campaigned on that. Every single member over there campaigned on that. They said, "We're not going to do that," and they did more than that.

Look around. All the MLAs over there and all the cabinet ministers over there did more than that in the case of care homes. They supported efforts, believe it or not, before the election and over the past few years…. This is why the depth of the shock and surprise when this government flipped and flopped and flipped and flopped on the HST was so profound.

[1740]

They went to Ottawa. The care homes went to Ottawa with the support of this government. The B.C. Care Providers Association went to Ottawa, and they said: "The GST shouldn't apply to us." Guess who supported them? Who supported them? Well, it's these MLAs over there. They supported them.

They supported them before the election. They supported them in Fort St. John. They supported them in Dawson Creek. They supported them in Vancouver. They supported them across the province. They supported them. They said: "We're against this."

The extent of the betrayal as a result of that is profound. If this were just about politics, it would be bad enough, but they have abandoned those seniors and those communities. The consequences of that are going to be serious.

We're talking again, just to keep it in context, after eight years of the lowest care standards in the country, and they're going to impose an additional tax burden of $40 million over the time of the mandate on that group of care homes alone, leading to further cuts in care
[ Page 537 ]
standards. That's the only possible result of this government's policy with respect to the HST.

It is a betrayal, and that's just one sector. It matters. It is illegitimate for a government to behave in this way, to say after an election, "This is the single most important thing we can do for the economy," and to say before the election: "We're not going to do it." That is a betrayal. This notion, this comical notion, that they just discovered there was a crisis after the election is, I think, really not sustained by the facts.

I mean, anybody who had access to the Internet, anybody who had access to a television, anyone who had access to a transistor radio knew what the situation was. But this government campaigned against the HST and implemented it weeks after the election.

It's a betrayal, and not a single one of those MLAs, not one of those MLAs who got up and spoke on this issue in this House, not a single one…. I'm reminded, and my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke reminded me of this just recently. I'm reminded: how could it be that 45 of them are going to stand up, presumably, and vote for a budget that they campaigned against only a few weeks ago, based on a tax they campaigned against? How is this possible?

I'm reminded of what Upton Sinclair said. The member for Nanaimo is a big fan of Upton Sinclair. What did he say? Well, this is apparent on the B.C. Liberal side. "It's difficult to get a man" — he was a man of his time — "to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

That appears to be what's happening over there, because there surely isn't a member on the government side who's gone back to his community and been applauded for bringing in the HST, been applauded for campaigning against it and voting for it.

There can't be a single member on the government side, and I challenge any of them to go back. Imagine a by-election fought on that question. They wouldn't dare, and I challenge them. People were not elected in this House to be representatives of the B.C. Liberal Party. They were elected to this House to be MLAs for their constituency.

In my constituency, I can tell you, people are profoundly opposed to this regressive, unfair tax — the HST. I challenge members on the government side to represent the views of their community, vote against this budget and vote against this regressive tax.

Now, if it was only the HST, that might be one thing. But what can we say about the government's position on health care? What can we say about their position on health care? We had discussion of this. This wasn't an abstract discussion. We had a discussion about this before the election.

We put forward a position; they put forward a position. I, on behalf of the NDP caucus, the Leader of the Opposition and others, said that if the B.C. Liberal government was re-elected, there would be dramatic cuts to health care services.

[1745]

Now, let's put it in context. On February 18, March 7, March 9, March 12, March 15…. It's virtually the same quote. I said there will be at least a $320 million shortfall in the health authorities. What did the Minister of Health of the day say?

Interjection.

A. Dix: On page 45 of the budget.

Even though he had been told in April 2008 there was going to be a shortfall this year, what did the Minister of Health say? I'm quoting him. Apparently, he didn't read page 45 of the budget. He said: "There's no budget shortfall in the health authorities." What did he say? There would be no cuts to services. We were wrong. We were…. What's that word?

Interjections.

A. Dix: We were fearmongering.

What's happened since the election? A cut of 9,000 surgeries in the Fraser Health Authority.

You know, just because it happened in summer — it was announced and released in summer — and other people weren't around to see it doesn't mean it didn't happen. They cut 9,000 surgeries in the Fraser Health Authority. That's what they did. That sounds like a cut in clinical services.

What did they do in the Vancouver Island Health Authority? Well, last year they did 22,000 MRIs; this year they're doing 18,000 MRIs. Is that a cut? That's a cut.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Seniors programs. The member for Langley was talking about seniors programs. On 30 days' notice they cut a seniors program in Langley that was helping isolated seniors — after 17 years of funding. Every year Ministers of Health have said: "That's within our jurisdiction." Health authorities said: "That's within our jurisdiction." Now suddenly this Minister of Health, when cancelling a program that keeps people out of acute care, says: "Oh, that's beyond our jurisdiction as a health authority. Don't worry about that. It's beyond our jurisdiction." So on 30 days' notice they cancelled programs in Chilliwack and in Abbotsford and in Langley.

In the Interior Health Authority just today they've announced — unbelievable…. In the Interior Health Authority they're cutting surgeries by 10 percent. If they had said before the election, "Here's what we're campaigning on. We're campaigning on cuts to surgeries. We're campaigning on cuts to MRIs. We're going to cancel, here and there, seniors programs. We're going to do all
[ Page 538 ]
of this. We're going to cut" — as we saw today — "programs for people suffering from addictions…."

If they had said that to the public of British Columbia, do you think there would have been a scintilla of a chance they would have been re-elected?

They have no mandate — none — to cut health care.

Interjections.

A. Dix: Ah, yeah. There they are. It's $495 million — $495 million maximum. There's no shortfall in the health authorities. There's nothing like that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Dix: Ah, listen to the Minister of Health. He's inspired. The Minister of Health should go back to doing what he's apparently doing….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Minister. Members.

A. Dix: The final thing I'll say, because I want to leave the Minister of Finance adequate time to attempt to explain this mess that this government's created….

You know, I think all of us know. It's one of those things people say all the time. I think I've heard government ministers say it a hundred times. Children are our future. But what did they do?

What did they do on education? Cut facilities grants. They don't follow their own law around class sizes. They have no plan to follow their law around class sizes. They're cutting parent advisory committees.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member. Member.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, just take your seat for a second.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. The member for Vancouver-Kingsway has the floor.

Continue.

A. Dix: I think that every study, every analysis of economy says that investment in education is what you do to promote economic development in the long run, even in the short run. We have a Minister of Health who's decided to cut research in British Columbia. We have a Minister of Health who's decided to cut research in the Michael Smith Foundation. We have a Minister of Education who's cutting facilities grants. We have ministers responsible for post-secondary education who are cutting student aid.

[1750]

This is the time when the people of British Columbia need their health care system. In health care, in difficult times, everyone knows — and the social determinants of health will tell you — that demand increases, that need increases. And this government is walking away from them.

This is the time when people need an education system to respond and to move on, perhaps, to other jobs, and the government is abandoning them. This is the time when children in care need more support not less support, and the government is arbitrarily reducing their budget targets for children in care, to save money.

This is the time when the people of British Columbia need a government that's on their side, but instead they have a government that only seems to care about trying to fix all of the things they said in the election campaign that, days after the election campaign, proved to be untrue.

I and our entire caucus will be voting against this budget. We campaigned against the HST. We campaigned….

Interjections.

A. Dix: But here's the difference, hon. Speaker. We campaigned against the HST. We're voting against it in this House. They campaigned against the HST, and they're voting for it. Let the people of B.C. decide who's been consistent and who hasn't.

Hon. Speaker, I ask all members of this House, all government members of this House who respect their constituents, to consider voting against this sham of a budget.

Mr. Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, the Minister of Finance closes debate.

Hon. C. Hansen: It's an honour to rise and close the budget debate that we've had over this last number of days. I thank all of the members on both sides of the House for their participation and their input. There have certainly been some spirited and sometimes actually accurate interventions as part of the debate over this number of days.

This is a budget that, as we were putting it together at the Ministry of Finance…. We set out with two very primary, fundamental goals to achieve with this budget. Those were to make sure that we could maintain vital services that British Columbia families depend on as we get through difficult economic times and, also, to
[ Page 539 ]
make sure that this is a budget that stimulates the economy, creates jobs and encourages investment in British Columbia so that we can actually put the foundation in place for the next decade of economic growth that we know is in front of us in British Columbia, as we see the global economy bottom out of a recession and start to rebuild once again.

In terms of protecting vital services, we wanted to make sure that we maintained health care, education and the vital social safety net that so many British Columbians depend on. That's why this budget actually provides an additional 18 percent in the ministries responsible for health services in British Columbia. That's an increase of $2.4 billion over the three years of the budget plan, bringing the Ministry of Health Services budget up to an all-time high of $15.7 billion.

This is also a budget that supports education, whether it's K-to-12 or post-secondary education in British Columbia. It makes sure that we continue with record-high levels of funding, to make sure that the next generations of British Columbians have access to the best quality education that we find just about anywhere in the world.

This is also about supporting those in need, and we recognize that British Columbia families have been impacted by the global economic downturn. We've seen unemployment rates rise, though still not to the levels that we saw during the 1990s. Nevertheless, we have seen unemployment rates start to tick back up from the record lows that we saw just a few years ago. Even in terms of employment numbers that we see today, we actually see as many British Columbians employed today as we did just two years ago, in spite of the recent increases in unemployment that we've seen around British Columbia.

For those British Columbians that are impacted by unemployment, we want to make sure that the supports are there for them, and that's why in this budget we have added $420 million since the February budget to make sure that families in need are supported until the job market recovers.

We are also doing our part as a government to make sure that jobs are created in every community around British Columbia today, and that's why, in partnership with the other levels of government, we have put in place public infrastructure construction plans that will create an estimated 88,000 jobs over this three-year period.

[1755]

It's not just the capital plan that we had in place as of last fall for the construction that would be built over these three years, but in addition to that, as a result of the Premier's initiative from last October 22, we actually accelerated construction programs in British Columbia. In addition to what was already in the capital plan, we pulled forward about $1.7 billion worth of public construction that we would have to do anyways, but we are pulling that forward to do it this year or next year to make sure those jobs are created. We have also announced an additional $1.7 billion of projects, which will be added to the construction plan, that weren't there previously.

This initiative alone, with these 480 projects announced just since February, are resulting in 21,600 jobs in British Columbia that would not otherwise be available to B.C. families.

This is also a budget that is about sound fiscal management. Even as we go through these very challenging global economic times, British Columbia is still seen as a leader in terms of the fiscal management and the diligence that we have brought to make sure that while we go into a time of deficit, those deficits do not create an undue burden on future generations.

It's a result of the fiscal management that this government has shown over the last 8½ years that British Columbia has earned the triple-A credit rating — a triple-A credit rating that is only enjoyed by one other province in Canada and is, in fact, the highest credit rating that a province can enjoy.

Even with the uptick that we're going to see in our debt burden, British Columbia's debt burden remains among the lowest in Canada. In fact, as a result of the years that we were able to run surpluses, we were able to pay down much of the debt that had been built up in the past. Over the past six years we have actually reduced the provincial operating debt from its high of $15.7 billion down to $6.4 billion, a decrease of almost 60 percent.

These reductions, the paydown of that debt that we were able to do during those years, has put us on a solid footing now as we try to weather the global economic challenges that have been thrown at us.

We know that that operating debt is going to go back up again over these coming years as a result of the deficits that are unfortunately necessary if we're to maintain the vital social programs that are a priority for British Columbians. But we will make sure that we return to surplus at the earliest opportunity, and we will once again start paying down that debt so that future generations don't bear the brunt of it.

This budget is also about making sure that we have a competitive tax system in British Columbia. We need to create the kind of economy where jobs get created and investment dollars can be attracted to this province, because that's the future of British Columbia. That's the future that actually drives the tax base for this province that funds the health care and the education and social programs of the future.

This is a government, since 2001, that has reduced taxes by more than 120 times. We've taken the small business corporate tax threshold in this budget from $400,000 up to $500,000 effective January 1. That will make a big difference in ensuring that the small business community in this province is supported as they go through difficult times.
[ Page 540 ]

We have also reduced the small business corporate tax rate. It was reduced from 4.5 percent to 2.5 percent recently, a reduction of 44 percent, and now we are reducing it even further. We have announced that we will totally eliminate that small business corporate tax rate effective April 1, 2012.

The general corporate tax rate, as well, is coming down, to make sure that this is a province that's attractive for investment and will, in fact, be one of the most competitive jurisdictions in the world by the time the tax reductions are completely implemented.

There are also reductions in terms of personal income tax. The latest increase in the basic personal income tax exemption that we announced in this budget will help offset some of the impact that average families in British Columbia will see as a result of the introduction of the harmonized sales tax.

[1800]

That's an introduction of over $1,600 in basic personal exemption that will bring it up to $11,000 a year, and that will put more money back in the pockets of British Columbia families. It will also mean that British Columbians earning up to $18,800 a year will no longer pay any provincial income tax at all. And it means that individuals earning up to $118,000 a year will, in fact, pay the lowest personal income tax of any province anywhere in Canada.

The economists have told us that the one single most important thing that we can do as a province if we want to stimulate jobs, if we want to make sure that the jobs are created and stimulate the economy going forward, is the introduction of a harmonized sales tax. With the introduction of the HST next July 1, it will mean that British Columbia will actually have the lowest rate of any province in Canada at a rate of 12 percent.

To make sure that we can help offset the impact on individual consumers, we have brought in provincially administered point-of-sale rebates on home energy. There are rebates for new home purchasers and also for consumers of motor fuels and other products.

The other thing we brought in with this measure is the low-income HST tax credit, which will benefit 1.1 million British Columbians. A quarter of the British Columbia population will get a cheque every three months to help offset and, in fact, more than offset the average impact of the HST on a low-income family or individual.

The last 12 months have been a challenging time for the global economy, and British Columbia has certainly not been immune to that. As we start to see the signs that the global recession is bottoming out, we start to see renewed signs today in British Columbia in terms of economic indicators. While they're not showing a quick rebound and there's certainly no crystal ball that says the worst is for sure behind us, there are lots of indicators that we will start to see slow and steady economic growth in British Columbia as we move forward.

In fact, most economists are now predicting that British Columbia will lead Canada in economic growth in 2010, and there is a reason for that. One of the primary reasons is the fact that we will be hosting the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games in February and March of next year, which will be one of the best economic stimulus initiatives that any jurisdiction could hope for in these troubling economic times.

More than just the economic activity that will be generated as a result of the games themselves, this is also an opportunity for us to showcase what's great about British Columbia. It will showcase British Columbia as a destination for world-class tourism opportunities and why visitors from around the world should choose British Columbia as their destination over the course of the next decade.

It's about promoting trade and economic development in British Columbia, as investors and individuals around the world see that British Columbia is a great place to invest and a great place to do business over the next decade coming. They will also see that with the talents of British Columbia, with the expertise that British Columbians have and the dedication and the compassion and the commitment that individual British Columbians have to this province, this is a great place for individuals from around the world to come to create the jobs of the future over the next decade.

Mr. Speaker, the 2010 Olympics are really not the landing pad for British Columbia. They are the launching pad, and they will launch British Columbia into new economic growth in British Columbia and a great decade that lies ahead of us.

We know that British Columbia will emerge from these economic times even stronger than it has in the past, and this budget that is before this House is one that will help lay that foundation for a better tomorrow in British Columbia and a great opportunity for British Columbia in the decade ahead.

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

[1805-1810]

Motion approved on the following division:

[ Page 541 ]

Hon. M. de Jong: Mr. Speaker, I call bill…. Ah, kidding. [Laughter.]

I move the House do now adjourn.

Hon. M. de Jong moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 6:12 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