2010 Legislative Session: Second 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)

Monday, May 3, 2010

Morning Sitting

Volume 16, Number 6

[ Page 5083 ]

MONDAY, MAY 3, 2010

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

CHILD CARE

M. Elmore: I'm going to be speaking to the member statement on child care.

May is Child Care Month. We know that the benefits of a comprehensive child care and early learning system have been widely documented, researched and recognized in British Columbia and around the world.

[1005]

[C. Trevena in the chair.]

Investments in the early years yield the most outcomes due to the opportune time in terms of the development of young people from zero to six years. This has been upheld in countless studies, particularly here at home at the University of British Columbia with the world-renowned research on human early learning development as well as here in Victoria, with the University of Victoria recognized as a research hub into early learning.

The benefits to children in a quality child care system include positive child outcomes and benefits, certainly a rich start for the youngest, greater success in school for all kids, greater well-being for kids who are in quality child care spaces and also an opportunity for earlier and more effective interventions for children with special needs.

As well, it's been shown in the statistics that access to a quality child care–early learning system decreases youth violence and that family poverty is reduced. We see greater participation of youth through school and accessing post-secondary education and more opportunities in terms of participating in the workforce in good-paying jobs.

Besides the benefits to children of a quality child care system, we see benefits to parents in the support of working parents to participate in the workforce, especially mothers. With the retirement of baby boomers, we're seeing that there is going to be an increased need for labour supply. Having a child care system in place has been shown to open up opportunity and to see entry of more parents, particularly mothers, into the workforce and support to parents in terms of their ability to live more balanced lives.

Benefits to the economy. Investment in child care provides the greatest economic benefits of all sectors of the Canadian economy. It's got the biggest job creation and a big employment multiplier. Besides creating sustainable, green jobs, it's also an economic multiplier, which results in a strong economic stimulus. For every dollar invested in a child care–early learning system, it generates $2 in investment. Also, research out of the University of British Columbia suggests that an investment of $1 yields a $6 investment over two decades in terms of growing the economy. There's a long-term investment payback and benefits for all.

From the business sector, Virginia Greene, the president of the Business Council of B.C., is quoted as saying that business leaders recognize the importance of investing in early childhood development as an effective business strategy to create a strong knowledge-based economy of the future and that the evidence is compelling. Investing in early childhood education is the foundation for creating the skilled workforce our province needs to prosper and grow in the future.

We're seeing the business community come behind the call in recognizing the benefits of a comprehensive child care and early learning system. As well, Warren Beach, the executive vice-president and chief financial officer of Sierra Systems, is quoted as saying that many parents, particularly mothers, struggle to balance work and family commitments. "While employers play an important role in promoting work-life balance, families need communities and governments to provide a range of supports, including early learning and care services."

In terms of the benefits of a child care–early learning system to children, to families, to the economy and also the recognized benefits to the business community and support for employers, there's a recognition that it's one of the top concerns for a knowledge-based economy — the ability to attract and retain young employees. A comprehensive child care and early learning system would be able to boost the competitiveness of these employers, allowing them to retain these workers and also to contribute to more productivity in the firm and in our economy.

However, in B.C. we face a severe shortage of child care spaces, a very high early vulnerability rate and no plan to address this. Child care, when available, is often unaffordable, and child care expenses now count as the second-highest expense for a family, after housing. We have high parent fees. Quality is important in a couple of aspects. The difficulties of recruitment and retention for early childhood educators, low rates of pay, high turnover among child care providers and a comprehensive underfunding of the system….

[1010]

Furthermore, we don't have a child care plan in place to address the shortage of spaces. We also do not have an early learning plan here in British Columbia. On top of that, there is no plan to address the serious shortages and also to be proactive in terms of bringing about some
[ Page 5084 ]
of the benefits that we can gain from a child care and early learning system.

We're very much more behind the ball because British Columbia does not have an integrated early childhood education and care plan, and this is where the majority of industrialized countries are moving towards. Canada is ranked last, in terms of a study conducted of the 25 developed countries, for lack of a plan.

An integrated early childhood education and care plan. There's a need for this policy framework to be brought together in order to have a systematic and integrated approach to our policy development and implementation and to create what is needed: seamless day programs that are inclusive and universal, a long-term funding plan and improved family policy. There is need for a comprehensive plan in British Columbia. There's a need for commitment to implement this plan, and there's need for funding.

Deputy Speaker: Might I ask all members to keep their conversations a little quieter so that we can hear the speakers on each debate.

J. Thornthwaite: I'm happy to be able to respond with regards to the child care issue. One thing that I'd like to just say right at the outset is that the provincial government does and has spent, this year, $1 billion total on early childhood development, on child care and on programs for children and youth with special needs. So we do have a major funding initiative through several ministries that help with child care.

Children are our future, and that's why we are investing record amounts in a wide range of child care–early learning and early childhood development, child health, and K-to-12 education options for children and families in B.C. Despite falling revenues, government continues to provide focused funding and programs for children and their families, because we are committed to building the best system of support in the country.

The budget for Children and Family Development has seen an increase of $330 million since 2005. However — and we must re-emphasize this — public dollars are not limitless, and balancing the books is also vitally important to our children's future because we don't want to be passing on this endless debt to them. We are still making very real and significant enhancements to lower vulnerability rates and, at the same time, ensure that we don't leave them with that legacy of debt.

We've committed $280 million over the next three years to implement full-day kindergarten for all five-year-olds in British Columbia, which will help to level the playing fields for so many vulnerable children and families. All-day kindergarten will also help to reduce the need for child care in British Columbia by providing a free early education option for five-year-olds.

We're investing $43 million to expand StrongStart B.C., with more than 300 programs already operating. We've increased the child care subsidy project by $26 million over three years, and we've got cross-governmental special needs support of more than $600 million.

These examples represent, as I mentioned at the outset, well over a billion dollars in provincial investments. They help put a snapshot of the initiatives in B.C. that the provincial government is doing to address early childhood vulnerabilities.

In addition, our capital investment helps build child care capacity. Since 2001 the major capital funding program for child care has supported the creation of more than 6,500 new licensed spaces, and operating costs are funded by the province. More than 3,000 new licensed child care spaces are opening or already operating across the province — more than a thousand spaces in the last year alone — as a result of direct investment from the provincial government in the past two years.

From 2007 to 2009 we presided over the largest single investment in child care capital in B.C. history, as $12.5 million went to create almost 3,500 licensed group and family child care spaces.

[1015]

In my own riding, I just wanted to mention the North Shore Community Resources as well as the North Shore Neighbourhood House childhood program. I was at an event this weekend and met up with Don Rutherford, who is the CEO of the North Shore Neighbourhood House. He had mentioned that he is extremely pleased with the funding that has gone into his program from the provincial government. That, in fact, has been increased this year over last year.

North Shore Neighbourhood House has been meeting the child care needs of the community since 1939 and is currently the largest provider of child care on the North Shore. They offer 11 different sites, some of which offer preschool services as well.

The North Shore Neighbourhood House also offers the provincially supported child development program at its day care sites to help families with children with special needs access quality inclusive child care. The service is voluntary and free of charge.

Neighbourhood House also offers a special needs teen club program for teenagers with a wide variety of challenges like autism, Down syndrome or general development delays. This program is partnered with the government's Community Living B.C. and gives teenagers with special needs the opportunity to gain social and life skills in a fun, supervised out-of-school environment.

Commenting, also, on the member's comment about the UBC human early learning partnerships, the HELP partnerships have shown that more than one in four children do not start kindergarten having met all the development benchmarks. That's precisely the reason why we've instigated the StrongStart program and the all-day kindergarten program.
[ Page 5085 ]

M. Elmore: Thank you to the member for her comments.

The picture in B.C. in terms of child care is that we have a system in crisis. Currently only 20 percent of children who are looking for licensed child care spaces can find them, and 8 percent for infants. B.C. ranks the lowest. We are last in terms of investment in child care and early learning among the OECD countries, and we lag behind even further in terms of a policy framework. We do not have a plan, and we do not have an integrated framework.

We also need to support working parents. Working parents are left behind. All-day kindergarten, the StrongStart programs subsidy — these are all positive aspects. But it doesn't address the needs of working parents who have to work nine to five and who have to fill child care to enable them to get to work. So this is the kind of comprehensive approach that's needed to support our children, to give them the best start but also in terms of addressing the realities of working families and to bring down child care as their second-highest cost here in British Columbia.

In terms of the recognition…. Fundamentally, we need a plan, which we do not have. We don't have a plan for child care, we do not have a plan for early childhood development, and we do not have a plan for an integrated system of child care and early learning. The business community recognizes the importance and the value and the benefits of investing in child care and early learning. They have a resolution that was passed by the B.C. Chamber of Commerce, which is:

"Quality child care is no longer just a social issue. The business community of B.C. now views child care as one of the key factors in addressing the labour shortage in B.C. The ability to recruit and retain workers in all industry sectors is underpinned with a worker's ability to secure quality child care that meets their needs. A comprehensive strategic plan for the child care system in B.C. is critical to staying competitive in today's global economy."

Madam Speaker, the time is now to invest in a program. We are falling even further behind. It's shown that the value in terms of investment in our children and in our economy is multiplied many times over. The later that we leave that investment, the greater the costs will be to our society and our children.

In terms of the question, the question is not: can we afford this system? The member mentioned that we can't afford to invest. The question is: how can we not afford to invest?

[1020]

We need a quality system. We need a plan, and we need a commitment. We need an integrated framework of early childhood education and learning. We need a universal, accessible, affordable and quality child care system to support our children in this province, who are our future, to support working parents, our economy and the business sector.

Respecting and Supporting
Local Government

S. Fraser: Madam Speaker, I guess I'm queue-jumping here, because I'm not due up until another time, but my topic today for a private member's statement is respecting and supporting local government.

Local government is the one example of real fiscal imbalance in Canada's governmental structure. Local governments have no control over the responsibilities assigned to them and are limited by provincial legislation to essentially user fees and taxes on real property as revenue sources. Furthermore, in varying degrees, there are mismatches between revenue sources and program responsibilities at the local level that exacerbate the fiscal problems.

It is important to recognize that mayors, councillors and regional district directors make a huge personal sacrifice when they put themselves forward for local government. They partake in, I think, the purest form of government — one that is the closest to the people. So the knowledge and wisdom of those local elected people should never, never be discounted. Unfortunately, we have a Liberal provincial government that has made a practice of ignoring virtually all input from local government, so that wisdom is being lost.

I have been to many, many regional local government association meetings and the larger provincewide UBCM conventions, and this government has made an art form out of completely discounting the resolutions that come out of local government. You have to know that the Liberal government needs those ideas and inputs. You have to know that those ideas and inputs are essential, because when it comes to ideas to protect the public interest or to provide a vision for the future or to give hope, the cupboard is empty when it comes to the Liberal government.

Here we are in B.C. attempting to come out of the worldwide economic downturn, and the Liberal government comes up with a budget void of any real ideas. Instead of listening to the public and respecting the resolutions of local government, the Liberal government does the polar opposite.

The cornerstone of economic recovery from the Liberal government is a massive shift of tax dollars to benefit a few corporate Liberal donors — a tax shift that picks the pockets of all British Columbians. This is in the face of formal resolution from the UBCM rejecting the HST. Of course, we already know that the UBCM resolution reflects the will of all British Columbians, who voted in the last election based on a Liberal election promise to not bring in the dreaded regressive tax.

The Liberal disrespect for local governments is much more far-reaching than just ignoring their sage advice. Liberals have made an art form of stripping essential rights and authorities, betraying local government autonomy and authority.
[ Page 5086 ]

Let's look at a few examples. Trade laws, like TILMA, that ignore the role of local government and threaten their authority are the hallmark of this Liberal government — for example, Bill 36, which restructured TransLink to remove the democratic process from the hands of local politicians and put it in the hands of unelected experts.

The slap in the face known as Bill 30, which we all remember, strips local government of all say regarding the privatization of rivers within their jurisdictions for the private gain and benefit of Liberal donors and insiders.

Then there's the Significant Projects Streamlining Act. That's Bill 75. It strips the rights of community leaders and their ability to protect the rights of their constituents from unwanted or damaging projects. It gives cabinet and individual ministers extraordinary powers — powers to overrule provincial or local government laws, regulations and bylaws. The whole role and point of local government is to bring those out in the public interest, and that has been taken away under that bill.

[1025]

Bill 11, the resort municipalities bill, is another stark example of the Liberals' betrayal of local government. Under section 15 of Bill 11 the Liberals have given themselves the authority to create resort municipalities without the consent of local residents or local governments. It is unbelievable.

Then there's the Private Managed Forest Land Act, which specifically — I think it was section 20 — strips the rights of local governments and regional districts from having any say, from using any of their tools of zoning or growth strategy or community planning when it comes to private managed forest land. This essentially takes away the ability of forest communities to protect the public interest. It allows private entities, often income trust giants, more power than local government.

Let's recap, shall we? The Liberal government ignores pretty much all local government motions and resolutions. The Liberal government has made an art form out of stripping vital authorities from local government. And if that wasn't enough to demonstrate….

Deputy Speaker: Member, one moment.

Point of Order

Hon. G. Abbott: I appreciate that there is some latitude with respect to private members' statements, but I think this member has, on a number of occasions, strayed over the line in respect of the spirit of private members' statements in this House.

Deputy Speaker: Please continue, Member, but do remember that it is private members' statements.

Debate Continued

S. Fraser: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I shall try to keep in the spirit and intent of the nature of the private member's statement.

I believe there is another issue that the Liberal government must be mindful of when it comes to respecting local government. It's called downloading. Ten years of cuts to social service have placed a great strain on communities and local governments. The Liberals engineered the highest rate of child poverty in the country.

Interjection.

S. Fraser: I disagree. I realize it's uncomfortable for the minister….

Deputy Speaker: Member, would you take your seat for a moment.

Members, a private member's statement does allow both sides to talk about political party and partisan issues. It does urge all hon. members to keep them as personal and relating to their own interests as possible and definitely does not allow any statement to insult any member of this House.

They are supposed to be private member statements, and I would urge all sides, when they are discussing both opposition members and government members, to remember that they are private members' statements, that they are supposed to be reflecting private members' interests, when they are discussing issues. I would urge both sides of the House to remember this when they are making their statements.

Continue, Member.

S. Fraser: Thank you, Madam Speaker. One of the things I like about these formats is that there is the opportunity — indeed, it is expected — that government members will respond and vice versa. I do not believe I have said anything factually incorrect. I will try to live up to the spirit and intent of what you have just ruled, Madam Speaker.

It's no coincidence that some of the highest costs of living in this country are in B.C., and we have the lowest minimum wage. These things fall down on local government. The collateral damage falls on local government. Policy and ideology has enshrined poverty as a reality for many British Columbians, and that falls on local communities.

T. Lake: It is indeed a pleasure for me to get up and respond to the member for Alberni–Pacific Rim. As you mentioned, Madam Speaker, we should have a personal interest in private members' issues. Certainly, as a former councillor and mayor of the city of Kamloops, I have a great deal of interest in local government and its relationship to governance throughout the province.

[1030]
[ Page 5087 ]

I can say unequivocally that most of the information coming from the member for Alberni–Pacific Rim was codswallop, total phooey — unbelievable statements about what the real relationship, the real dynamic, is in the province of British Columbia.

Let me remind the member for Alberni–Pacific Rim that the Union of B.C. Municipalities…. I was proud to be a vice-president of that organization that represents every single local government in the province of British Columbia. The UBCM said in the 1990s that the NDP off-loaded more than $800 million of costs onto local government with reduced grants, elimination of services and off-loading of highway maintenance and responsibility.

Between '96 and 2001 the NDP cut to local government 75 percent of their funding, from $141 million to $36 million. Carole James's NDP voted against flowing over….

Deputy Speaker: Member. Please remember, Member….

T. Lake: Sorry, Madam Speaker. The leader of the NDP voted against flowing over $2 billion in additional revenue to local governments, including traffic fine revenues, funding for LocalMotion, Towns for Tomorrow, Spirit Squares — even though they show up for the photo ops announcing those projects in their communities.

Let me just reiterate that small community and regional district grants have been doubled under the B.C. Liberal government. In 2009 the province disbursed $133 million in small community and regional district grants, supporting local governments to provide services in areas with smaller tax bases. The March 10 payment was $55.5 million for small community and regional district grants.

Another bonus for local governments — and something I certainly appreciated as mayor of a regional centre in British Columbia — is traffic fine revenues. Now 100 percent flows back to communities. In 2009 the province disbursed $96.1 million from the traffic fine revenue-sharing program. That helped communities like Kamloops, like Kelowna, like Prince George — all the communities around the province of British Columbia — look after community safety throughout the regions and in their cities. That was something they did not have under the previous NDP government.

Over $2.7 billion in additional support has gone to local governments since 2001, half of it for capital and infrastructure, the other half for local operational support.

This B.C. Liberal government has shown a great willingness to work with the Union of B.C. Municipalities. I've worked on the regional district task force. I've worked on the community safety committee. Many committees with UBCM work in conjunction with the province to make our communities stronger.

In my area, one of the areas that UBCM and the provincial government played a great role in was the wildfire interface management program, a program that flowed millions of dollars to communities around this province to make sure that the wildfire interface was managed in a way that will prevent the disasters that we saw in 2003 from ever happening again.

This government has a commitment to local government. We want to work with local government. Together with local government, we will keep B.C. strong.

S. Fraser: I see it's opened up. I know the Liberals tried to stifle my debate, but if anything was over the top, it's the hon. member from the other side. So I'll continue.

He's referring to the UBCM. These are members from local government that vote at the provincial level, and they make resolutions that are ignored by this government.

I met with the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities director Barry Avis yesterday. He reaffirmed that the cuts and the downloading and the stripping of authority and the role of local government by the Liberals has been devastating for local governments and has made it very difficult for them to govern and do their job.

I also met with the mayor of Qualicum Beach, Teunis Westbroek, yesterday. He was aghast that the government would actually be considering bringing in a vote for businesses in the municipal elections. He said: "It's been overturned by every UBCM in the history of the UBCM."

I will close with this. Thursday of last week the Liberal government brought in closure, slamming the door on the debate of the largest and most regressive tax shift in the history of the province. They took away the ability of the people of British Columbia to utilize this place, the people's House, to fight the Liberal election betrayal known as the HST.

[1035]

In so doing, the Liberal government also ignored and defiled the key resolution of local governments.

Deputy Speaker: Member, one moment. Would members please….

Member, you have had the opportunity to respond to this.

Point of Order

Hon. G. Abbott: I realize the member is in full oratorical flight here, but again, this is way outside the bounds of what one should be contemplating in terms of the structure of a private member's statement.

Deputy Speaker: Minister, thank you very much.

Members, would members please respect all members' right to speak. Would all members from both sides of
[ Page 5088 ]
the House remember that this is private members' statements. There are certain bounds that one can discuss in this, and they can be partisan, but they cannot be personal.

Member, please conclude.

Debate Continued

S. Fraser: As I pointed out, in shutting down the debate on the HST last week…. In so doing, the Liberal government also ignored and defiled the key resolution of the local government, who, like the official opposition, through the UBCM resolution, were trying to stop this massive tax betrayal on behalf of the people of British Columbia. Liberals' disrespect for local government knows no bounds.

clean energy initiatives

P. Pimm: I'll try my very best to get the focus back to trying to have a nice discussion around some good clean energy within the province.

You know, I honestly believe that we're extremely fortunate to live in the province of British Columbia and to have all the clean energy that we have. The direction that we're moving forward…. I believe that we're going to be a future powerhouse in energy, in clean energy in the province of British Columbia. I think it's a fact that I'm extremely proud of. Certainly in my area, I think, as the years go on here, we're going to be very, very proud of what we can deliver from our area. We're already very proud of what we deliver from our area of the province, and certainly that's going to be enhanced over the next little bit.

Some of the requirements that we're going to be looking at over the next 20 years or so…. We're going to be looking at an increase of 20 to 40 percent in the requirement of power over the next 20 years. That's going to be achieved through conservation, run-of-the-river projects, biomass projects, geothermal projects, solar, wind. In fact, we're going to look at all sources of clean and reasonably priced power for the future of British Columbians, both residents and industry in the province, and I think we're well on our way of getting to that direction now.

With the initiation of the Clean Energy Act that the minister has just brought forward, I believe it's a good act. It's a great act, in fact. It's going to set a foundation for electricity for self-sufficiency….

Deputy Speaker: Member, private members' statements don't discuss matters that are before the House. You need to discuss the clean energy bill when that's tabled.

P. Pimm: Sorry, ma'am. I'll just carry on to the next thing, then. I'll talk a little bit about something that's going on in our area. We're building on the heritage assets within our area, and we're going to be building on other assets as well. But one of the things that we're going to be doing is we're going to be allowing for the future of the province.

We're going to be creating jobs for the future of the province. Certainly, I'd like to talk a little bit about my area and the very exciting announcement that we've just had in my area around Site C. This is exciting news, and it's right in my back yard. So I can talk to this and talk to it. It's been something that's been around my entire adult life and practically part of my youth life growing up.

It's going to be something that's going to be within about ten kilometres of where I actually live, so it's certainly interesting for me. Like I say, it's been around for as long as I've been around.

Some facts about that project: 1,100 metres wide. The project's going to be 1,100 metres wide. It's going to be 60 metres high. It's going to be a reservoir of 83 kilometres. The reservoir is going to be backed up for 83 kilometres. It's going to deliver 900 megawatts of capacity, 4,600 gigawatt hours of energy. It's going to be a third of the capacity of the existing W.A.C. Bennett dam, and with that third of capacity, it's going to be all done within a 5 percent footprint of the W.A.C. Bennett dam.

[1040]

That's technology, and I believe that lives well with us. Being able to have that small of a footprint and deliver that kind of capacity is something that I'm looking forward to.

There's some discussion about flooding the valley. I have to, in lots of ways…. We're not going to be really flooding the valley to any huge, huge extent, and I'll just talk about that a little bit. There's going to be 5,300 hectares of land that's going to be flooded — 5,300 hectares. That's not a lot of land.

Out of that land, the Crown owns 81 percent of that land at the present time. That's 4,318 hectares of land that the Crown actually owns. B.C. Hydro already owns 12 percent of that land. That's 662 hectares of that land. And the private land owners are about 7 percent, or 360 hectares, of land. That's about a section and a half of actual land that is privately held by landowners in the Peace River Valley.

I think this is a project that is going to be very good for the Peace River. It's certainly a project that is going to be very good for the entire province. It's going to build on the legacy and the assets we already have existing. It's going to lend to the future of British Columbia and keep power at a reasonable price for all British Columbians, whether it be industry or general ratepayers.

J. Horgan: It's interesting that this is the second consecutive Monday where we've been discussing Site C. I guess if you've only got a few rabbits in your hat, even if they're skinny rabbits, you want to keep pulling them out as often as possible.
[ Page 5089 ]

I rise to respond to what was titled "Clean Energy Initiatives" in the orders of the day. I want to talk about a few things in my constituency, although it's difficult to resist the temptation. When a member says that flooding and alienating 5,000 hectares of prime agricultural land is a modest undertaking, one wants to engage in that discussion.

I know the constituents of the member for Peace River North, who I visited on a number of occasions as I've driven up and down the Peace River Valley. I actually had the opportunity to fly over it on my last visit. I think they'll have a few things to say to him about his position on the importance of agricultural land and on the importance of calving grounds and the various other wildlife values and natural environmental values that will be alienated by the Site C project.

I don't want to overstep the boundaries of the debate, and instead, I'd prefer to talk about clean energy solutions that really matter to people and that ordinary citizens of British Columbia can get their heads around. That's district energy systems — local solutions for local problems.

With the government on the other side, quite often — certainly with their independent power push — the motivation has not always been clean energy. We've had to beat back a few coal-fired plants in my time as a member of this Legislature. I know epiphanies are important, and they happen for a variety of reasons. For whatever reason, the Premier and government members were awakened to the harm that could be caused by coal-fired plants.

They did take them off the table after offering contracts to two companies, and that's a good thing. What the cost to the taxpayers will be from the lawsuits that will flow from that, I'm sure the Minister of Energy will advise us in the fullness of time. But the issues to the ordinary folk that we represent are very well illustrated by issues in my constituency.

In particular, I want to talk about the photovoltaic initiative by the T'Sou-ke Nation, the dominant First Nation on the west coast of Vancouver Island in my constituency. The member for Shuswap has visited the T'Sou-ke Nation and seen the extraordinary work that's been done there.

Every administrative building has PV panels. Every home, by the end of this year, will have PV panels. The T'Sou-ke Nation is now selling electricity to B.C. Hydro. They are generating enough electricity to meet their domestic needs, and there is a surplus that they're putting back into the grid out of the benefit of a net metering program that will be accelerated in the near future, a feed-in tariff system that will allow citizens to activate their own energy solutions — not at the expense of 5,000 hectares of agricultural land but in the interests of their local community and in the interests of their own footprint.

[1045]

I think that's the sort of clean energy initiative that a thoughtful, forward-looking government would want to focus their energy on. We haven't had that, hon. Speaker, as you know — a massive drive to independent power alienating hundreds of rivers with 35 contracts issued already and many, many more to come.

The debate over whether this is for our domestic needs or whether it's for export is convoluted. I mean, people who are paying attention in this House quite often ask me: "What is it that the government's doing? Are they building for self-sufficiency, or are they building for export?" And we'll get to the nub of that in debate in this place over the next number of weeks.

What the public wants to hear is not just the rhetoric that was spouted by the member for Peace River North. They want to see tangible evidence that the government is here, listening to what they're saying: local solutions, government Members; small-scale district energy supplies for local needs and local outcomes.

Conservation, I know, is a high priority for the government now, and I encourage that, but the public really doesn't get a sense that the government's going and pulling in one direction on this. They are conflicted by their desire to pay back their political supporters through the independent power sector. They're conflicted by a desire to drive wedges in the opposition rather than build bridges to communities and citizens.

I'm hopeful that over time, and perhaps in the response from the member for Peace River North, he'll focus on the issues that are relevant and important to British Columbians: keeping rates low and keeping our clean, green energy supply for local consumption. And if there's an opportunity to export our surplus power, by all means we'll do that to our advantage — but not building to export. That's outrageous, and I'm sure other members will agree with me on that.

P. Pimm: I'm glad you brought up the fact that we're talking about Site C for a second time. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to be here last week, and so I'm glad to take that opportunity. I'd like to talk about it more than a second time. I'd talk about it a third time and a fourth time. I believe it's that positive and it's that promising for the province of British Columbia.

It does build on a vision that W.A.C. Bennett had. Certainly, it's going to continue that vision and on into the future. It's going to generate power that we so badly need down in this area.

You know, I think it would be a good exercise for us to possibly shut the lights off for two or three days down south here and see what you think about having power then. Lots of areas where I come from don't have power. They have to go out, and they have to fire up their generators in their back yards. They kind of like the fact that they're going to have some power and possibly have some access to some power in the future.
[ Page 5090 ]

Obviously, you do bring up some good facts, and I like that, but I'm kind of curious. All these little, tiny projects — how is that going to meet the 40 percent needs that we're going to have to have? You do have to have energy. You have to have it from all sectors of the area, and you have to give the independent producers an opportunity to sell their products some place as well. So that's certainly something that's very important to our area.

As for your net metering and feed-in tariffs, I thought we couldn't talk about that because that was part of something that's coming up in the future, so I'm glad that you're able to touch on that for me.

Well, I'm very curious what the opposition actually want. You don't want large projects. You don't want independent projects. I'm very, very curious on what you actually do want for power in the future of the province. I think that putting 35,000 employees to work at the Site C project…. I think that's pretty important for the province. I think your brothers would even like that. I'm sure that they probably would.

Deputy Speaker: Through the Chair.

P. Pimm: You know what I'm going to do for my constituents as an MLA for Peace River North? I'm going to be looking after them. That's my duty in the next coming years as part of this environmental assessment process. I'm going to make sure that their needs are looked after. I'm going to be up there fighting for their rights — exactly what you're saying. I'm going to make sure that they get their proper compensation. I'm going to make sure that we get the recreation facilities. I'm going to make sure that the project is done in a proper way.

I think it's going to be very positive for the future of British Columbia, and I'm going to stand behind it a hundred percent. As the project was coming forward and it was a consultation process, I never took that position, but I can tell you today that I take that position. I'm going to stand behind that position for the rest of the project.

The Value of Innovation

S. Cadieux: We're all very fortunate to live in a country and in a province that ensures that we can all have access to quality medical care. You know, from our birth — well, even before our birth, in our prenatal time — we all need that health care. Some of us, myself included, have the distinct opportunity to benefit much more from our health care system than others, but everyone, regardless of their good health, will at some point need our system and can be assured that it will be there for them.

[1050]

Throughout history, medicine has evolved. It has evolved through an expanding knowledge base, through research, through technology and through innovation. It's that innovation and the value of it that I'd like to focus on today.

Every year over 2,800 people in British Columbia, mostly women, are diagnosed with breast cancer, and every year over 600 of those British Columbian women will die from breast cancer. Those are startling facts, and I know they affect every individual or family in some way, through a friend or close relative who's been affected by breast cancer and touched by the disease. Two of my aunts fought breast cancer. I know that a number of members of this House have fought breast cancer, and today two of my close friends, both under 40, are fighting breast cancer.

I can't presume to imagine what it feels like to find a lump, and I can't presume to know how I would react. I do know it would be scary, it would be worrisome and, for your entire family, all-consuming. That's why I'm really proud of British Columbia and our health care system for its innovation — specifically, the only one of its kind in Canada, the rapid-access breast clinic at Mount St. Joseph Hospital in Vancouver for its innovative and patient-focused direction.

I was fortunate to visit that centre last year, and I marvelled at it. It is home to one of the province's screening mammography sites, and it offers a seamless transition to diagnostics, including the latest in technology in the form of a digital mammography machine with tomosynthesis capabilities, which I believe is the first in Canada. If a positive diagnosis is suspected or confirmed, there is a transition to one of three dedicated surgeons.

It is B.C.'s first comprehensive one-stop clinic. It received over $1 million in pilot funding through the Lower Mainland innovation and integration fund to streamline services. It's based on a European best-practice model, serving as a single point of intake where diagnostic testing for breast cancer is coordinated and organized.

As a patient, this one-stop approach can not only speed up a usually lengthy process but also lessen the stressors of repeat intakes and scheduling and the challenges associated with that.

I know from my own experience with the health care system that one of the most frustrating and challenging — both emotionally and physically — was the need to continually re-explain why you're visiting, what your history is, what the process has been to date, who your doctor is — all of these things that you go over time and time again in a system that is supposed to be meeting your needs during your very delicate emotional and physical state.

Before this clinic opened the patient wait time for breast cancer diagnosis averaged 43 days in British Columbia. After a one-year trial at Mount St. Joseph the wait times averaged eleven days — one-quarter the time, and half the average time of a European hospital. What a great example of innovation, with very positive results for patients.
[ Page 5091 ]

The clinic's multidisciplinary team is composed of a medical director, clinical director, breast surgeons, breast radiologists, breast pathologists, a nurse navigator — one of the pieces that I find the most innovative — and a nurse practitioner. For all of the patients, triple assessment is conducted, and what's best is that the clinic prepares a coordinated plan organizing direct referrals for other services, whether that be radiation or chemotherapy if necessary. It coordinates the further diagnostics such as an MRI or surgical bookings or radiation consults or consults with the breast cancer agency.

[1055]

The nurse navigator — again, as I mentioned, my favourite part of the program — can help the patients navigate through the system and access one point of contact for questions and emotional support, both of which are incredibly important. To know that you have that support of one person going through this process can be very reassuring.

I think that the most important unique aspect of this program is that benefit to patients. However, the other unique aspect is that the hospital is rewarded in that that money goes back into the clinic when it exceeds its expectations and exceeds results, and I think that's really great. It's better for patients and better for hospitals.

This fantastic example, made possible by the innovation and integration fund that was announced as a part of the throne speech in 2008, is tying funding to performance and increased service levels. We're addressing things like surgical wait-lists in other programs with this model, rewarding integration, standardization, consolidation, and encouraging process improvements that focus on activity levels, using existing people and resources to improve outcomes.

I think that innovation like this rapid-access clinic at Mount St. Joseph's, and others around the Lower Mainland, is leading the way for the future of continued health improvements to an already great health care system.

M. Karagianis: I am very happy to respond to the statement this morning by the member for Surrey-Panorama. In fact, this, too, is a topic that I feel deeply passionate about. The issue of how we deal with a very fearful event in families' lives, I think, is at the heart of what the member has talked about here in finding fast, effective and streamlined medical process and innovation.

The clinic at Mount St. Joseph's is a good example of that, and here on the Island we are very, very fortunate to have one of the proudest achievements of the New Democrat government of the 1990s, which is, of course, our amazing Vancouver Island Cancer Centre.

Like the member, this has touched my family as well. She talks about having friends currently touched by breast cancer, women under 40. I will say that in 2008 when my then 31-year-old daughter was diagnosed with breast cancer, I was most distressed, as was she, to find out there is an epidemic of breast cancer of young women in their 30s.

No longer is breast cancer something that is tied to family genetics or a history of family cancers. It, in fact, seems to be striking young women who have had no encounters in their family history, so I think this idea of innovation and finding ways to, first of all, deal rapidly and effectively with the process is one that's important to families.

I know that in my daughter's case the first fearful diagnosis that hit our family was devastating, but the immediate response from our cancer clinic here was something to behold. It was fast. It was effective. It was quite seamless. The clinic itself was an absolutely amazing facility, an absolutely wonderful facility here, which was started and opened just in 2001, started by the previous government.

The cancer centre also hosts the Trev and Joyce Deeley Research Centre, which has led the way in innovation here on Vancouver Island. I have the great fortune to be friends with Trev and Joyce Deeley. As Joyce was going through her cancer, they realized that there was a real need for this kind of research opportunity to drive the very kind of innovation that the member has talked about this morning, so they built this research centre there — also, an extremely exciting immune-system-response research facility that has done some really, really amazing work.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

I'd like to take a moment in this statement to express to the House here my absolute profound gratitude to Dr. Andrew Attwell at the Victoria Vancouver Island Cancer Centre for his amazing treatment of my daughter, who is now, two years later, cancer-free, passing all of her MRIs with flying colours and who is fortunate enough to have a non-genetic cancer, so the likelihood of it coming back is much less. But so many women will not have the same experience.

[1100]

While we're talking about innovation, while we're talking about these really amazing centres that deal with this, I think it's just as important for us to remind every woman here, every woman in British Columbia: get out and get your mammograms. Make sure you are staying ahead of this. For all those young women who think that they're too young, that it's too early for them to try it, I say no. Absolutely, the sooner you start mammograms, the better. The sooner we catch cancers, the better.

Certainly, these innovations, these research projects are really imperative and important for us to find ways to take this disease down — to make sure that we are not standing in here celebrating the lives of women or mourning the lives of women, and that in fact innovation leads to a
[ Page 5092 ]
cure for breast cancers. That's my hope in the future, and I thank the member very much for bringing this up this morning.

S. Cadieux: I'd like to thank the member for Esquimalt–Royal Roads for her comments and her support for innovation. I think it's really important that we continually look for new ways of doing things and that we are open to doing things differently in order to have better outcomes.

You know, in B.C. we're really fortunate to have some of the best health outcomes in Canada. We're lucky, as well, to have some of the best cancer and breast cancer outcomes in Canada. I think that comes from the efforts of our physicians and our researchers here in British Columbia but also of our governments and our private sector and our citizens for seeing that putting resources towards these innovations and these projects is vital to our ultimate health as a province.

We've seen now proven results with the innovation at Mount Saint Joseph. We've seen other examples of innovation in the forest industry or in health or in education, all of which are important to the health of the province. With proven results, I guess the next question is: where do we go from here? I think that the value of innovation is clear. We've seen improvements in diagnostics, we've seen improvements in outcomes for women in breast cancer specifically, but we've seen it in other things as well.

We've seen it in the innovation around surgeries and surgical wait times and the projects that have reduced wait times for hip and knee surgeries, for cataract surgeries — and also, with those surgeries themselves, the innovations and technologies that have led to reduced length of surgery time, the improvements in how we do those surgeries that are less invasive and that allow for speedier recoveries. I think we want to continually look for those and encourage those initiatives and improvements.

With the UBC Hospital Centre for Surgical Innovation that helped us achieve and exceed benchmarks for joint replacements, I think we have also seen that that can be financially beneficial. We've seen the costs per case reduced from over $13,000 to $12,000 — money and time saved that can be used to do more surgeries and improve outcomes.

I'd like to thank the member again for her comments supporting innovation. I know through my experience….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Hon. G. Abbott: I call private member's Motion 9:

[Be it resolved that this House debate the importance of post-secondary education and skills training to ensure that British Columbians have the skills and abilities to excel in tomorrow's green economy.]

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 9 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

[1105]

Leave granted.

Private Members' Motions

MOTION 9 — POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION
FOR GREEN ECONOMY

D. Black: I'm pleased to have the opportunity today to debate "the importance of post-secondary education and skills training to ensure that British Columbians have the skills and abilities to excel in tomorrow's green economy."

We're faced with a changing economy. B.C.'s economy has been going through major transitions. We can no longer rely on our resources to be the driver of our economy and provide the family-supporting jobs that British Columbians have relied upon in the past. In the past nine years 71 mills have shut down in B.C. With the loss of those mills have gone thousands of jobs — jobs that not only supported families but that supported communities and small businesses throughout our province.

Only in B.C. has there been a decline in average earnings over the past few years. The latest census data show that between 2000 and 2005 full-time median incomes have declined by 3.4 percent. B.C. is falling behind both over time and compared to other Canadian provinces. It's clear that much more needs to be done to diversify our economy in British Columbia and to educate the people of British Columbia.

The B.C. government has acknowledged a looming skills shortage of up to 160,000 skilled workers in the next few years. Yet, this government has failed to take advantage of many training opportunities which have presented themselves in the past few years. In contrast to B.C., the 2000 Sydney Olympics invested heavily in skills training for their future. With their Olympics training strategy, they saw an increase in the number of apprenticeships by 21 percent. Sadly, B.C. failed to use this golden opportunity of the Vancouver 2010 Games to leverage training opportunities for British Columbians.

It's clear that here in B.C. we must diversify our traditional resource economic base. We're already falling behind other jurisdictions both in Canada and around the world. We need to develop the future for our province and broaden our economic base by encouraging new green industries and a knowledge-based economy. We need to invest in education, skills development, and research and development to create a future for British Columbians where knowledge and innovation drive our economy.

This is the way to improve opportunities and prosperity for all British Columbians. We have the talent right here
[ Page 5093 ]
in B.C. Breakthroughs have been made in B.C. in environmental technologies, in health sciences and in arts and culture. This is the way forward for our economy and for the people of our province. What we need to see is a government committed to investing in education and skills development to create a sustainable future for our children and our grandchildren.

With innovation and creativity, we have the ability, right here in B.C., to create a province that is strong, green, smart, healthy and fair. Let's build upon our successes. Let's invest in our future. Let's ensure that B.C. is a leader in the knowledge-based economy.

To do that, we need to invest in people. We need to invest in education and skills training. Unfortunately, what we've seen the last eight or nine years in B.C. has been tuition that has more than doubled for students and cuts to student aid. We cannot afford to continue to saddle our students with debt loads that mortgage their future.

We have the brightest minds right here in British Columbia. Let's make sure that they have the educational opportunities here in B.C. to flourish and to build a healthy economy and a green future for all British Columbians.

T. Lake: I am happy to stand in this House and respond to the resolution that this House debate the importance of post-secondary education and skills training to ensure that British Columbians have the skills and abilities to excel in tomorrow's green economy.

Madam Speaker, there can be no debate. We all understand the importance of having an educated population. The B.C. Liberal government has, in fact, recognized that for many years. Since 2001 $1.9 billion has been expended on capital expansion at post-secondary institutions.

This is the largest expansion in post-secondary institutions in the history of British Columbia. It includes more than 900 capital projects on campuses throughout this province. There are 50 new buildings or major expansions under construction, and seven new campuses have either been completed or are under construction as we speak.

[1110]

It is critical that we have an educated workforce and that we look at the costs of education. The member for New Westminster said that we have to make education affordable, and that is precisely why we have full universities in every part of this province.

No longer do you have to attend in Vancouver or Victoria or Prince George in order to get a full university degree. You can now get a full university degree in Kelowna, in Nanaimo, in multiple locations in the Fraser Valley, in North Vancouver as well as Emily Carr in the city of Vancouver itself.

This makes education far more affordable. As someone who had no choice but to leave the province to get a degree in veterinary medicine, in Saskatchewan, I can tell you that the largest single cost of a post-secondary education is the cost of room and board. With these new universities throughout the province, the biggest cost, the biggest barrier to education has been removed.

In my own hometown of Kamloops, we have had full university status for the beautiful campus at Thompson Rivers University where over 11,000 students attend on a full-time basis. That means that people from the Interior can stay at home, can get a full degree, can get a master's degree at Thompson Rivers University. Not only that, not just for the domestic students but international students…. Over 1,100 international students are at Thompson Rivers University — which, of course, makes a great economic impact on our city as well as gives us a glimpse to the world.

The B.C. Centre for Open Learning at TRU also expands educational opportunities and reduces barriers for people seeking a post-secondary education. With continuous enrolment and flexibility, offering 52 programs and 400 different courses, it's for people who want to do distance learning and have that degree, eventually, at the end without the barrier of having to pay room and board in a distant city.

Our commitment to not only post-secondary education but increasing the amount of green technology in our post-secondary institutions and the amount of research and innovation going on into sustainability is clear.

We have invested $94.5 million to create the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions — a unique collaboration between B.C.'s four research-intensive universities, the private sector and the government — to develop innovative climate change solutions and technology. Having the opportunity to listen to Dr. Tom Pederson recently, I can tell you that the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions is a great resource not just for post-secondary students but for all British Columbians and, in fact, people throughout the country.

At TRU we have some very innovative research going on. We know from the work of the Ranching Task Force, which I've had the opportunity to work with, that the cattle industry has faced some very tough times. At Thompson Rivers University we have Dr. John Church, who is the B.C. Regional Innovation Chair in Cattle Industry Sustainability. Dr. Church is doing some very exciting research on looking at grass-fed beef, the healthful benefits of grass-fed beef and ways of making sure that the cattle industry in this province remains sustainable and strong.

We also have Dr. Lauchlan Fraser, who just received another $99,000 for his research into grasslands, because we often think of trees as the only type of carbon sink, but grasslands, which are an important part of the Interior, can also act as a carbon sink as well. So this government has been clear in its commitment to post-secondary education and training. We'll continue that commitment into the future.
[ Page 5094 ]

M. Mungall: Post-secondary education, preparing for the future of tomorrow and what young people can offer as they grow older in this province is, of course, near and dear to my heart because I'm talking about my peers, quite often. I'm talking about the very people that I have backyard barbecues with in the summertime, that I go skiing with in the wintertime, that I stop and have a coffee with at one of my favourite coffee shops in Nelson, Oso Negro. These are the people that are contributing today for the long-term benefit of this province.

[1115]

One of the ways that they're contributing, of course, is by learning. Learning has tremendous benefit, of course, not just for the individual but for us collectively. It's not just me saying that. Quite a few people were saying that this Friday at an event held in Vancouver called Our Province, Our Future put on by our leader on this side of the House, the Leader of the Opposition. The issue of post-secondary education being critical to B.C.'s economic future came up over and over again throughout the day.

It really came to a head in a conversation that was actually started by a very bright and, of course, leading voice on economics in this province, Jock Finlayson, who is the executive VP on policy for the Business Council of B.C.

He led a discussion about this very topic: the importance of post-secondary education and the dream of every British Columbian having access to post-secondary education by 2020. It wasn't just a dream because that's a nice thing to do and something that we ought to do for our young people and the young at heart in this province, but it's a dream that will benefit our province.

One of the ways it will, of course, is by addressing the skills labour shortage that's anticipated by 2017. In fact, their own studies done by the provincial government have identified that there will be a tremendous skills shortage just seven years from now, and that shortage is going to be most acute and mostly felt in the areas of health sciences and social services. It's going to be mostly felt as well in retail, in day-to-day consumer points of…. What am I trying to say here, hon. Speaker? What I'm trying to say is in retail as well as tourism.

These are going to be the areas where we have the largest skills shortages, where we're going to have the number one demand for jobs, and we're going to need to fill them.

The B.C. Federation of Labour has also done some analysis. They warn that by 2015 the province may have a skilled-worker shortage of 160,000 jobs that we're going to need to fill, that people are going to require training in. In fact, 75 percent of new jobs are going to be requiring post-secondary education. That's exactly why we have an obligation to ensure that post-secondary education is accessible, that it is affordable and that it is available to people across this province.

That's a key point here: the affordability of post-secondary education. The member before me spoke about how room and board has been addressed because we've been able to expand colleges and universities throughout the province, and so now the most expensive cost for students has been addressed. That is such a limited perspective. It's too limited to even get into in detail.

Let me say that one of the big issues that came up at our discussion on Friday with Jock Finlayson was that in Canada, B.C. is the worst for non-repayable student aid — the worst. If we start investing in a proper grant program, we are doing justice for young people and for the young at heart who are looking to go back to post-secondary education and get the training that they need so that they can start contributing to B.C.'s economy.

With that, hon. Speaker, I pass on the debate to others to fulfil their role in, of course, discussing the importance of post-secondary education in this province.

J. Thornthwaite: I am very pleased to be able to respond to Motion 9. The B.C. Liberal government has record investments in post-secondary education. Since 2001 we've invested $19.7 billion in post-secondary education and operating funding to post-secondary institutions, and it has increased by 53 percent to $1.9 billion in 2009-10.

As a result, every single college and university in British Columbia has seen their provincial funding increase, and since 2001 $1.9 billion has been expended on capital expansions at public post-secondary institutions. That includes more than 900 capital projects on campuses throughout B.C. since 2001.

[1120]

I'd like to just talk about my own riding. Capilano University's School of Motion Picture Arts is the largest film school in western Canada and offers a wide range of full-time certificate and diploma programs that prepare students for a variety of career paths, including motion picture production, cinematography, costuming and indigenous digital film-making.

I talked about this in one of my two-minute statements last year. The $30.2 million investment that the provincial and the federal governments have provided is to fund the construction of a new Film Centre Building at Capilano University, and that'll create as many as 192 jobs.

The new Film Centre will be approximately 6,400 square metres in size and will serve up to 400 students annually. The $30.2 million construction project will generate, as I mentioned, 192 jobs and will replace the outdated facility that's there right now. The Film Centre will be built to LEED gold standards under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program.

I'd also like to mention, again about Capilano University in my riding, that we've also developed new degrees. Two of the new ones that will be instigated in September of 2010 are….
[ Page 5095 ]

The bachelor of motion picture arts degree — again, this series of courses will allow students to have a production-ready project completed after they graduate. These projects could include a series pilot, a feature film, a webisode series or a movie of the week. Another degree that's going to be started in September 2010 is a bachelor of legal studies, paralegal. This new degree provides a training option for applicants who don't have prior legal experience or post-secondary education.

Then we've got the bachelor of arts in applied behaviour analysis for autism and the bachelor of early childhood care and education degree. So there are lots of things happening in the province — but, in addition, in my riding in particular — with regards to post-secondary training.

The other issue I'd just like to briefly mention is that we've expanded and exceeded our 2001 campaign promise to add 25,000 new spaces. Since 2001 we have added 36,000 new full-time spaces for students to B.C.'s 11 universities, 11 community colleges, three provincial institutes and the Industry Training Authority.

I'll talk just briefly about the Industry Training Authority. We're preparing our skilled trades to be part of this growing sector. In partnership with the industry training organizations, the ITA is supporting emergence opportunities in the green tech sector, such as the wind turbine technician — of course, that would be of help to our wind turbine that was at Grouse Mountain; working with industry to determine industry training needs; and, based on feedback, looking at options to integrating training into existing trades and/or as a stand-alone, depending on the demand.

The Industry Training Authority, ITA, is a provincial Crown agency established in 2004 and responsible for managing B.C.'s industry training system to develop the skilled workforce needed to ensure the competitiveness and economic prosperity of our businesses and our province.

I do agree that we have to grab on to the Olympic message of building our businesses and investing in people and education. I feel very proud that…. Given the examples that I've said briefly here today, I think we're doing a pretty good job, and we're on the right track.

D. Routley: It gives me great pleasure to rise and speak to the House on this motion encouraging us to support post-secondary education and trades training in B.C. I'd like to address mainly the ITA and trades training, but before I do, I'd like to contest some of the claims that have been made.

In fact, the Auditor General has found that the increase in spaces that this government promised has gone off the rails and is not even keeping up to the demographic increase in those aged 18 to 24 in this province. In fact, we have some of the highest student debt levels in this province.

Upon graduation from four-year programs, the average student debt in this province is $25,000, and the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation found B.C. to be the least generous in student financial assistance. So those are the facts that students grapple with every day.

[1125]

As we face the recovery from a record downturn in our economy, we need to be investing in our future, investing in the upskilling of our workforce. When it comes to trades training, the abolishment of the ITAC and the adoption of the ITA, the Industry Training Authority, was a brutal policy implementation. In fact, the ITAC was swept out of existence and replaced by an 8½-by-11 sheet of paper that made promises.

There were seven lost years, according to the tradespeople of this province, where this province was flying blind. The New Zealand and Australian experience in implementing a compartmentalized trades program warned this province, when they toured those jurisdictions, that this was not a means of saving money, that it would in fact cost more to implement this type of program but could offer students flexibility.

Instead, the government came back and invested at a level only 30 percent of the per-capita investment of New Zealand, a similar-sized jurisdiction.

In an arrogant, we-know-better fashion, this government listened to Phil Hochstein and government insiders and obliterated the trades-training programs in this province. They pushed away the stakeholder partners — labour and other partners, public institutions — from the table of trades training, and B.C. and our students have paid the price for that.

They had the warning. They were warned that they needed to invest. They didn't. They were warned that they shouldn't push partners away, that they needed the support of the partners. They didn't. They pushed them away. They have starved our public bodies since.

They cut student advisers. Student advisers helped apprenticeship candidates through their programs. When they had trouble completing their in-school work, they would communicate with employers and arrange release. That isn't happening. As a result, completions are down.

This is particularly measurable when you compare the general public programs to the union-sponsored trades schools — which have very, very high completion rates, upwards of 80 percent. They have student advisers. They are involved in their students' lives and keep those students on track.

They increased registration reporting time from one year to 18 months. Someone could languish, reported as a registration, for 18 months. We had no idea that they were no longer registered and no longer pursuing their apprenticeship.

They included high school trades programs as registrants and advertised a huge increase in registrations
[ Page 5096 ]
when, in fact, most of those students do not go on to complete their apprenticeships.

We are flying blind. We are flying blind during a skills shortage. It was mentioned before that during the Olympics in Australia, the Australians trained full-scope training apprenticeships for approximately 11,000 people. We have no idea how many were trained through B.C.'s Olympic experience because no one was keeping track.

We need to upskill our workforce during a downturn. We were told on the Select Standing Committee on Education, as we studied adult literacy, that a 1 percent gain in adult literacy rates in this province equates to a $1.6 billion GDP increase. Student supports…. Child care in Quebec has been linked to Quebec having the highest participation of women in the skilled trades of any province. These are the investments that we need to make.

To sum up, the B.C. Liberal government mismanaged prosperity when there was a demand for trades, and now they've mismanaged the public interest so that B.C., the students and the future of B.C. will pay the price for that.

R. Sultan: I'm delighted to respond to the motion up for debate. I think we are all indebted to the member for New Westminster for putting this very important topic on the agenda for debate this morning.

I would reiterate the points already made by my colleague from North Vancouver–Seymour about the strong support this government has given to advanced education in the province — budgets up 53 percent since 2001, a growth rate, which I just hastily calculated, comparable to that of the health sector, which we always accuse of growing so fast it's going to squeeze out everything. Obviously, it hasn't squeezed out the advanced education budgets, which have been growing at an equally fast pace. So the government has certainly put its money into this sector big time.

The big question, to me at least, is having created a whole menu of new institutions, new universities — in fact, five of them: Fraser Valley, Kwantlen, Malaspina, Capilano, Emily Carr….

[1130]

I checked out the journalism of the day when these new institutions were announced. Maclean's magazine, for example, said that the province was careful to make sure these new institutions maintain their focus on undergraduate education and vocational training." So if the schools continue to focus on education and not research, are they really universities?"

To answer that important question and, certainly, going to the heart of the issue in terms of the mandate of these new schools as they sort out their mission in life, I was struck very much by this article in the Globe and Mail over the weekend, May 1 — the headline. "Drawing a bead on 'the fragmentation and trivialization of the curriculum,' opinion-shaper Camille Paglia tells Globe columnist Margaret Wente that narrow thinking, computers and the Internet are no replacement for libraries and the long view of history."

My pitch this morning is that as these new institutions try to sort out a new role consistent with their teaching mandate, there's a great big, juicy, important, compelling opportunity open to them in — guess what — the liberal arts and the humanities. That may surprise you, coming from someone of my background, but let's hear what Ms. Paglia says about the current state of the humanities. The headline, in fact, kind of gives you the punchline: "A Landscape of Death in the Humanities."

Now, we will wiggle off that hook by pointing out that she's referring, of course, to the American university system. But I suppose some of what she has to say applies in Canada. To preface these remarks, I should point out that she is noted as a social critic, an iconoclast who specializes in outraging people and has done so for years. She teaches art at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia.

But her point is that…. Participating in this panel sponsored by the Globe and Mail, her topic is education and what's wrong with it. She refers to her own liberal arts training in Philadelphia. Her parents paid a few hundred bucks a year only, and she wondered what has happened to liberal arts education, this cornerstone of advanced education. When she went to Yale, the most distinguished people on campus were the professors of poetry. It's not even clear that Yale even has any professors of poetry left.

She goes on to say:

"Teachers have no sense that they are supposed to inculcate a sense of appreciation and respect and awe at the greatness of what these artists" — and we could extend that to many other fields — "have done in the past. The entire purpose of higher education is broadening. But since then, we've witnessed the fragmentation and trivialization of the curriculum.

"Post-modernism and post-structuralism don't go in for the long view. They believe the whole narrative of history is a fiction."

She goes on to berate the fact that the long view of history is ignored, and in fact, the problem today is that the professors feel far too sophisticated and self-important "to do something as mundane as teach a foundation course."

In fact, to wrap up here, "Critical thinking sounds great," she says.

"But it's a Marxist approach to culture. It's just slapping a liberal, leftist ideology on everything you do. You just find all the ways that power has defrauded or defamed or destroyed. It's a pat formula that's very thin. At the primary level what kids need is facts."

And she's talking about university students, of course. "They need geography, chronology, geology. I'm a huge believer in geology." This from a liberal arts humanist.

I believe I've run out of time, but the point is that there's a huge opportunity here if these new universities seize what is, in fact, a very low-budget approach. Please do it.
[ Page 5097 ]

G. Coons: I rise to join in the debate of the importance of post-secondary education and skills training to ensure that we have the skills and abilities to move us forward in today's green economy.

You know, in the advance of a growing economy, it's not only defined and measured by jobs and products that are produced but also by hard commitments by government to ensure that we have the opportunities and the necessary policies in place to effect this shift to tomorrow's green economy.

[1135]

It's imperative that we all understand the potential labour market — the skills needed, the apprenticeships necessary and the demand by all the sectors out there that must shift their definition to what green and green-collar jobs are.

We must recognize, acknowledge, that job training, post-secondary education, skills training, apprenticeships are vital and are the key to moving forward in today's green economy, and our post-secondary institutions are the key to this shift.

Now I'd like to look at the green industry sectors and some of the jobs that we have to prepare for, whether it's in energy efficiency or it's getting more use out of the energy we already have — the HVAC engineers; building control technicians; electricians; energy auditors; insulation workers; the smart energy; the power engineers and computer technicians to design, manufacture and provide maintenance; renewable energy jobs; solar panels and wind turbines; biofuels and biomass; all types of different occupations from farmers to technicians going up to biodiesel companies.

Green buildings. We need the architects in green design. We need alternative transportation, whether it's technology designers or right up to maintenance workers. Recycling waste management, whether it's waste treatment operators or technicians.

Then more importantly, sustainable agriculture and horticulture, stemming from organic farming to urban agriculture and designing where we need to go in the future.

While many new occupations…. Most green jobs and green-collar jobs are existing jobs we already have to ensure that we move forward.

We've talked about the commitment from government. Despite one of the Liberal government's five great goals being to create more jobs per capita than anywhere else in Canada, there's been little commitment, from what I've seen, in skills training and support for apprenticeships.

StudentAid was cut by $17 million and frozen for the next three years. No significant increases in Advanced Ed. Over the past nine years, despite what we've heard from members, this government has consistently underfunded universities and colleges.

A few of the headlines out there are: "Green Jobs Are Flourishing," "Green Jobs Are Blossoming," "Green Jobs Abound, but Few Takers." It's all because of the lack of a trained workforce to manage and build it.

We talk about post-secondary. Cindy Oliver, the president of the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators of B.C., says that despite the tax cuts that this government said would work, it was "voodoo economics," and they haven't been working. What we need is "substantial new investments" in our post-secondary education, in skills training and in apprenticeships to ensure that we move forward in the green technology.

Paul Bowles, president of the Confederation of University Faculty Associations of B.C., also said that despite the government's mantra about funding, basically the funding is frozen. It will "inevitably go up over the next three years," and that's going to impact what's happening as far as skills training and apprenticeships in our institutions.

The recent B.C. Stats from January 2010 used data from 2006, and it said that B.C. is ranked second in the country in environmental employment. Over 93,000 jobs are expected, and that was in 2006. But what we need is commitment, the capacity to move forward and for the government to take a stance.

For B.C. students to have the skills and abilities to excel, we need forward-thinking and major investments, not a fly-by-night strategy that deinvests in developing our most valuable resource — our students.

There is a perfect storm brewing that will see shortages in numbers of trained personnel, devastating shortfalls in apprenticeships. We need to ensure that to have the skills of tomorrow in green technology, we invest in the future of our province, and that's our students.

J. McIntyre: I'm delighted to rise to speak to Motion 9 this morning because I think that we all agree on the importance of post-secondary education and skills for moving forward in a green economy. It's something that I think we've found some common ground on, although I'd like to directly refute the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan and, before me, the member for North Coast, who seem to think that we're not making progress on skills training in particular.

[1140]

I'd like to put on the record that this government has invested more than $166 million in capital funding to support trades training and create more opportunities for apprenticeship training in British Columbia. In fact, this year there's going to be more than 50,000 registered apprentices and trainees. That's nearly triple the number that were registered in 2001, after a decade under the NDP. So we've made huge, huge progress.

Not only that, but over 84 percent of the apprentices are satisfied with the efforts. That's gone up 10 percent since 2005. So we're indeed making progress, and I'd like that on the record.

Also, in terms of this investment in a green economy, in a recent GLOBE 2010 report they noted that B.C.'s
[ Page 5098 ]
green economy accounts for just over 10 percent now of our GDP, which is over $15 billion that the green economy accounts for. And that's not tomorrow. This motion from NDP talks about the green economy of tomorrow. We're in the green economy for today, and this government is progressing well, and I would like to make that point.

Also, in direct refute to what the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan said, we have, in fact, more than created our 25,000 spaces for post-secondary. We're at about 36,000 new spaces now — 11 universities, 11 community colleges, three provincial institutes and, of course, the Industry Training Authority. We've had huge success. We're adding 2,500 graduate spaces now to B.C.'s four research-intensive universities.

The member before me — from our side of the House, for Kamloops–North Thompson — talked about the $94.5 million that we invested several years ago for the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions. We're moving ahead on green technology, green economy, investing in solutions for climate change, and that's something to be very proud of, I think.

Others before us have talked about the seven new universities that we created recently. Of course, the member for North Vancouver–Seymour before me talked about the pride we have at Capilano University and the new film centre there. It will be serving up to 400 students annually, and it's a new state-of-the-art facility being built to LEED gold standards. We're very proud of that. I won't go into all the details.

The interesting thing about that is that I spoke in the House just a week ago in my tribute to the motion picture industry when Pixar…. We had this great announcement just several weeks ago that Pixar, a subsidiary of Disney, is moving here. The first time they've moved outside of the U.S. They cited our talent as one of the main reasons for coming here. There were several quotes that I put into the record last week. They were talking about "the most important thing for us is the talent" and that they were very pleased with Vancouver's deep computer-generated animation talent pool.

That's the kind of effort we've been making in attracting businesses here and developing clean, green jobs for our youth and keeping them here in the province.

I also want to spend a few minutes this morning talking about the life sciences industry. I'm very proud. I've been working for the last four or five years, as has, actually, my colleague from West Vancouver–Capilano. We've been great fans of the progress of the intellectual development in this province.

We are known around the world. As a life sciences sector we're, I think, the seventh cluster still in North America, but we're home to some of the largest and most successful biotech companies in our past — QLT, Aspreva, Angiotech — and we have now invested about $25 million in the Centre for Drug Research and Development. That's promoting collaborations between researchers, post-secondary institutions and industry to help researchers commercialize their discoveries, because it's very important.

Not only do we have the intellectual property here, but we obviously want to commercialize that and develop jobs and keep jobs here in British Columbia. We gave a $25 million grant in April of '07 that they levered for another $8 million from the B.C. knowledge development fund to help the centre close this gap between primary research and actual medicines.

I was very proud, actually, on Friday to be at a breakfast hosted by the life sciences group. They were hosting a huge delegation from Queensland, Australia, who was here to sign later that evening with the Premier…. Their Premier, Anna Bligh, was signing with our Premier a new memorandum of cooperation that is furthering the ties between our two jurisdictions in six areas.

I'd like to note those, because they're exactly the kinds of jobs that the member of the NDP was saying we should be having, and we're already working on that. This is action on clean energy; water stewardship and climate change; maximizing knowledge-intensive sectors, including biotechnology, life sciences, health and medical research; responsible resource management; regional economies and indigenous communities; promoting bilateral education opportunities; planning and growth management, including exchange of information and ideas.

[1145]

I think those are exactly the kinds of things that…. You know, now we're being recognized by other capitals around the world as a great place to build partnership and collaboration, because it's exactly the kind of way we're moving in this new green economy.

B. Routley: I want to focus this morning on the issue of skills training. B.C. is, sadly, falling far behind. For example, in Alberta they're producing almost twice the number of apprentices that we are in British Columbia, and I feel that, sadly, B.C. is not doing its part in dealing with the crisis that's looming.

Currently, too many of B.C.'s young people are sitting there unemployed or underemployed, looking at people coming in from other places to do work that they didn't get a chance to be trained for.

On the Okanagan College website, they say:

"Canada is experiencing a shortage of skilled tradespeople. With the impending retirement of thousands of baby boomers, this situation will only become more critical. Employers in British Columbia need highly skilled workers now and are seeking out graduates from apprenticeship programs."

It's clear that it is time for government to take additional action to support new and innovative recruitment and skills training opportunities to support our youth today and prepare for B.C.'s skills development future needs. As I say, sadly, we're not doing enough.

While the economic downturn and senior worker retention has somewhat been limiting the impacts of
[ Page 5099 ]
looming shortages, it is nonetheless a fact that skills shortages in B.C. are a serious problem and concern.

The issue is not merely a shortage of employees. To succeed in the workplace, many applicants will need a higher level of essential skills. Far too many students are finding that tuition and loan costs are limiting their options. Sadly, this government has failed to do enough to encourage low- and middle-income families with potential students to consider entering skills training or skills upgrading.

The skills shortage issue is not unique to British Columbia or even to North America. A recent German report states that against the background of the demographic situation as well as structural and economic change, an increasing demand for skilled labour is the emerging trend, requiring people to have the ability to engage in lifelong learning skills.

For example, you only need to look at the electrical trade and the tremendous change that that trade has undergone in the last ten or certainly the last 20 years. It's just a totally different job.

Globally, Manpower Inc.'s 2007 Talent Shortage Survey found that of 37,000 employers in 27 countries, 41 percent of employers were having difficulty filling positions due to the lack of skilled talent. Second to the top in terms of difficulty worldwide were the skilled manual trades, which include construction trades.

In its breakdown of these results by country, this study found that Canadian employers ranked skilled manual trades at the top as the most difficult to fill.

The trades or skilled worker shortage will not be easily resolved by immigration policy either, as worldwide shortages of skilled workers will put B.C. in competition with other countries and jurisdictions for skilled workers as shortages become even more critical.

With baby boomers, the workplace exodus is now underway, and government clearly needs to do more to prepare for the pending serious skills shortage.

Now, with regard to post-secondary education, Cindy Oliver, the president of the federation of post-secondary educators, says that instead of building a legacy, this government has failed to address a growing problem in post-secondary education.

"Operating grants for B.C.'s public post-secondary education institutions remained effectively unchanged as a result of the recent budget, despite the fact that B.C. currently needs to increase access and opportunities for citizens wanting to start or complete post-secondary education….

"What is particularly shocking is the hefty burden that post-secondary students must carry in higher tuition fees. This current budget continues a trend that was put in play by this government several years ago when it became obvious that post-secondary tuition fee revenues were poised to surpass corporate revenue."

[1150]

Sadly, recently the 2010 tuition fees exceed corporate tax revenue by almost $300 million. This province is not doing enough, sadly, and we need to take corrective action now in order to deal with the serious crisis that will be there in the future.

R. Howard: It's my great pleasure to rise in my place this morning to debate this important Motion 9 pertaining to the importance of post-secondary education and skills training to ensure that British Columbians have skills and abilities to excel in tomorrow's green economy.

I'd like to talk a little bit about some of the accomplishments of this government in investments and additional choices and in promoting the green economy. Then I'd like to highlight some of the differences in our two approaches, government to opposition, because I think yet again we hear from both sides of the House that there are some remarkable differences.

I would say this on a backdrop, too — that flexibility and responsiveness are going to be important as we move forward. The world is changing very quickly, and if we don't offer flexibility and responsiveness to that, we will be at risk of graduating large numbers of students who are perfectly trained to deal with a world that no longer exists.

I want to talk about our investments, because I've heard a number of members opposite talk about the lack of investment that this government has made in post-secondary education. You know, it is so frustrating to sit in this House on a daily basis and hear this kind of nonsense, really, in the face of the facts. Since 2001 — I offer this up to the member for Cowichan Valley; he may have missed this — funding to post-secondary institutions has increased by 53 percent to $1.9 billion in '09-10.

Since 2001, $1.9 billion has been expended on capital expansion at public post-secondary institutions. There are 50 new buildings or major expansions under construction, and seven new campuses have either been completed or are under construction.

I'd like to talk about choices, because I think choices are extremely important, again, as we move forward. Today, over 430,000 students and 24,000 international students are enrolled in public post-secondary institutions in B.C. That is the highest number ever.

To meet the needs of students' growing interest in obtaining post-secondary education, seven new universities have been created since 2001. We all speak as members in this House with great pride, and I'll offer no exception to that. We have a new university in my riding of Richmond Centre, Kwantlen Polytechnic University. I think the member for Kamloops–North Thompson spoke about the great benefits of having a university close to home — letting families stay closer together, a more affordable approach for many of the students — and it does great things for this province.

This government saw this coming. It has acted on it and put action plans in place that are enjoying great success. The government has exceeded its 2001 campaign promise to add 25,000 new spaces. Since 2001 we have added 36,000 new full-time spaces for students to B.C.'s 11 universities, 11 community colleges, three provincial
[ Page 5100 ]
institutes and the Industry Training Authority. And we are adding 2,500 graduate student spaces to B.C.'s four research-intensive universities from 2007-08 to 2010-11.

Another success story. We have doubled the number of doctors who will graduate in B.C. compared to 2001 — 256 a year by 2011. Moreover, the University of B.C. now has the highest number of seats of any English-speaking medical school in Canada.

[1155]

Just for a moment, Madam Speaker, on the green economy. We're investing in the skills of tomorrow with major projects such as Okanagan College's new $28 million centre of excellence in sustainable technologies and renewable energy conservation. We have invested $94.5 million to create the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, a unique collaboration between B.C.'s four research-intensive universities.

Of course, it's not all up to government. We look to partner with various entities in the province. As a part of their living laboratory approach to climate change, UBC is undertaking a first-of-its-kind bio-energy project that will generate enough clean electricity to power 1,500 homes, reduce the university's natural gas consumption by up to 12 percent and eliminate up to 4,500 tonnes of greenhouse gases per emissions year.

I want to just spend a minute on contrast again because, as I've said, we hear two different approaches in this House. I want to point out that the opposition in the '90s froze tuition. Of course, I think we all know that that didn't go well because they neglected to make up that funding with their own revenues. I think even their Leader of the Opposition has recognized that it didn't include additional moneys for colleges and universities and was not seen to be successful.

The opposition have voted against virtually every measure we've introduced to fight climate change, including low-carbon fuel requirements, carbon tax, a cap-and-trade system and clean energy projects such as run-of-the-river and power and biomass.

Madam Speaker, noting the hour, I will end my comments with that.

R. Howard moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. P. Bell moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Deputy Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:57 a.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 © 2010: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

ISSN 1499-2175