2014 Legislative Session: Second Session, 40th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 6, Number 8

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)
ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2014

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

M. Mungall: Yesterday I was surprised to look up into the gallery and see one person visiting me from Nelson-Creston, but today I look up and the entire opposition gallery is filled with people from the West Kootenay. Supervisors Mr. Huttemann, Mrs. Lunde and Mrs. Salsman have a large charge on their hands.

The B.C. Debate and Speech Association is hosting the Law Foundation Cup this weekend in Victoria, and no surprise, the West Kootenays have a large delegation to the debate. So getting inspiration, they're here today.

Please welcome Taavi Wickman from Nelson, who's also a volunteer member for the NDP in Nelson-Creston, and Tia Huttemann, Lilly Huttemann and Annabel Vrba. From Rossland we have Aven Cosbey, Bronwyn Moore, Madeleine Grace-Wood and Hannah Klemmenson; and from Trail, Emily Dawson, Maggie Chan, Matthew McConnachie, Kyla Mears and Keegan Fry. And last but not least, from beautiful Castlegar we have Andreas Smithies. May the House please make them welcome.

[1005]

Hon. D. McRae: People in this chamber may remember our former colleague Dave Hayer, who would talk about the best school in British Columbia, which was in Surrey. Dave's not here to defend this, but he was wrong.

There is a school that is near and dear to my heart. Not only did I actually teach in this school for 14 years; I graduated from high school there. My dad went to school there, and in fact, I even had the opportunity to go to daycare at this school. So it's been part of my life for my whole life.

Today in the gallery we have 40 students from the G.P. Vanier explore program. They are joined by their teachers. I see Ilene Yeomans. I see Dave Neill. I don't see Grayson Pettigrew, so if he is there…. I would like the House to make them welcome. And let's see…. I don't know how to finish off my speech. Anyway, could we all make them welcome.

J. Horgan: Of course, as a collectivist group it's rare that we want to single out an individual, following the Social Development Minister's introduction, but in the gallery with us today as part of the G.P. Vanier delegation is the granddaughter of a former NDP Premier.

Lauren Rhemsvold is the granddaughter of my good friend Dan Miller. She's joining the group here today to watch both sides of the House. I'm fairly confident she'll be listening to us more attentively than the government. But either way, would the House please make her very, very welcome.

M. Bernier: It's indeed an honour for me today to rise to introduce, I would arguably say, the best legislative assistant in this House. What better way to have her spend her birthday today but by inviting her to come and witness question period firsthand. I'd really like the House to acknowledge and say happy birthday to my legislative assistant, Kristen Blake.

With that — probably second to question period for Kristen — we're really excited to also welcome in the House today her parents, Kathy and Rick Blake, who came to visit her from White Rock, and her grandparents Mavis and Peter Sieben from Edmonton. I know they're really excited to be here in Victoria and spend some time with their daughter and granddaughter, and I'm hoping the House will please make them welcome.

Tributes

BILL RITCHIE

S. Gibson: I have a sad announcement here. Former MLA Bill Ritchie passed away. He was the MLA for Central Fraser Valley, where I lived. He was also a Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Bill was a great guy. He was a passionate supporter of agriculture, both in the family business, which some of you still know as Ritchie Smith Feeds, well known around the province…. His very first speech here was all about supporting the land reserve and his excitement and thrill to see the growth of agriculture in our community.

I know that we all feel a sadness, and we wish our very best to the family and friends of Bill Ritchie, who passed away after serving as an MLA here in the Legislature.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL M203 — STANDING COMMITTEE
REFORM ACT, 2014

J. Horgan presented a bill intituled Standing Committee Reform Act, 2014.

J. Horgan: I move that the bill intituled the Standing Committee Reform Act, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.
[ Page 1664 ]

J. Horgan: Currently the standing committees of the Legislature have limited powers, rarely meet and are often not established in certain policy areas. They can only examine issues specifically referred to them by the government, and these restrictions represent a missed opportunity for private members, as well as a missed opportunity to have a broader discussion about the role of MLAs in the governance of this province.

The Standing Committee Reform Act creates 11 statutory standing committees that will meet year-round and will be comprised of members of the Legislative Assembly from all parties in proportion to their representation. The act grants the standing committees broad powers to consider matters on their own initiative and also requires the House to debate and vote on reports submitted to them. The act also ensures that committees remain in existence during the duration of the parliament.

At a time when we have rampant, runaway rate increases at B.C. Ferries and B.C. Hydro, when we have controversy around the CEO of the Lottery Corporation leaving without notice, it's imperative that the Crown Corporations Committee meet more regularly than every five years.

When we have disruptions in the education system, it's imperative that the Education Committee meet more than every seven years. With respect to Aboriginal Affairs, when we have a stalled treaty process, it has not met since the passage of the Nisga'a treaty.

[1010]

This act will improve parliament. It will improve accountability and allow all members of the House to participate fully in the governance of this province, which was what the voters intended when they sent us here.

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

Bill M203, Standing Committee Reform Act, 2014, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

COLLIERY DAM PARK

D. Routley: It's time for me to give my seasonal update on the Colliery Dam Park issue.

In Nanaimo there's a beautiful park called Colliery Dam Park, and it's maintained by two dams that are over 100 years old. They were put there in order to conserve water for washing coal, but they have become jewels of the community. In the recent past a provincial government regulation has defined these dams as highly dangerous. The city responded the way cities do, the way bureaucracies do — with an expediency that suited them. They have a problem; you remove the problem. Their solution was to remove the dams and, thereby, remove the park.

Well, the people responded with anger. They wanted to preserve their park. It wasn't a case of the people in the highlands saying: "Damn the people in the lowlands. They can drown." It was the people who were imperilled by the dams should they fail who responded and said: "No. We want our dams."

This is something, I think, that is important to us all. People are creative, and they expect government to be creative. They expect government to reflect their values. They expect government not to ignore their voices. A cynicism and disengagement grows out of such disregard of people's opinions.

Central heating wasn't designed in Jamaica, and refrigeration wasn't designed or invented in the Arctic. We respond to negative challenges. Often people respond to negative challenges. When government ignores them, they respond and they fight back.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could show the people of this province that it was worthwhile to engage with government in public process for positive reasons? Wouldn't it be nice if their voices were heard in consultation and the decisions of government actually reflected the voices that were heard?

This is what the people of Nanaimo expect. This is the lesson from the Colliery Dam Preservation Society, and it's a lesson I think that everyone in this House, particularly the government, could well take.

MOSSOM CREEK HATCHERY

L. Reimer: Today I would like to speak to the House about the Mossom Creek Hatchery, a beloved salmon hatchery and education centre in Port Moody. The Mossom Creek Hatchery opened its doors in 1976 thanks to the tireless efforts of the students from Centennial High School and their teachers Ruth Foster and Rod MacVicar.

The hatchery opened at a time when salmon was scarce in Mossom Creek, and through the diligent work of the countless volunteers and organizers, strong salmon runs returned to the area. For decades it remained a popular weekend destination for volunteers and families who visited with their children to share in the history of stewardship and salmon conservation.

Unfortunately, tragedy struck this cherished institution on December 11, 2013. An uncontrollable fire devastated beyond repair the buildings that housed the hatchery, and with it, over 200,000 salmon eggs were destroyed, threatening future salmon runs in Mossom Creek. Not surprisingly, after word spread about the fire, there was an outpouring of community support. Volunteers, supporters and local businesses came togeth-
[ Page 1665 ]
er to organize efforts to rebuild.

We take time today in the House to honour and recognize the hard work and unwavering determination of volunteers and organizations for the last 38 years and those who continue to work tirelessly to rebuild the Mossom Creek Hatchery, a beloved community treasure.

WORK OF PRINCIPAL PAUL McNAUGHTON
AT COQUITLAM ALTERNATE SCHOOL

S. Robinson: I stand in the House today to recognize the achievements of one of Coquitlam school district's principals, who was named one of Canada's Outstanding Principals from the Learning Partnership.

Principal Paul McNaughton leads a team of dedicated teachers and staff at CABE, Coquitlam Alternate Basic Education School. This is a school in our district that focuses its energies on those students who have ongoing challenges outside the learning environment and for whom a traditional learning setting doesn't work quite well.

[1015]

In spite of some of the most difficult financial challenges in this district, Paul McNaughton has been responsible, with his team of educators, for almost tripling the number of students who graduate from this program. He notes that by fostering relationships with these students, encouraging them to learn at their own pace and offering flexible scheduling, staff are able to reach out to these students and to make a difference in their lives.

He is appreciative of his great staff and school board, acknowledging that alternative education is not cheap, and he values that school district 43 continues to see the value in these young people.

On behalf of the community, I offer my heartfelt congratulations to principal Paul McNaugthon for his outstanding achievements.

NANAIMO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
BUSINESS ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS

Michelle Stilwell: On February 21 I had the privilege of attending a gala for the Nanaimo Chamber of Commerce at the Vancouver Island Conference Centre. One of the things that struck me about the night was how these awards served to inspire so many others.

As an athlete, I'm keenly aware of how the hard work, the dedication and the accomplishments of people who are successful have inspired others and have inspired me in the pursuit of athletic excellence.

That same kind of inspiration happens to people who are working hard to find success in business. At the Nanaimo chamber gala, Dave Hammond was presented with a lifetime achievement award for his longstanding career in real estate and a being true patron to our community. Dave is a champion of business in Nanaimo. He also is a tireless promoter of community groups such as the hospital foundation, Rotary, hospice and the schools foundation.

Though lifetime achievement awards are often given to people whose contributions are behind them, Dave promises that he still has plenty of work in front of him.

At this time I'd like to mention the other business leaders who were nominated for the lifetime achievement award as well: Ron Brown, who operates Ron's Landscaping Service; Mike Herold from Herold Engineering; Bill Scott, a business adviser from MNP — all highly respected in their fields. Also, Bob Moss of DTZ Nanaimo Real Estate, along with Dave Hammond, are proven leaders in real estate in our region.

When I meet people like this in our community and around our province, I often wonder what drives them. What inspired them to their success? All of us, in one way or another, have been truly inspired by someone else to achieve a goal or to overcome failure. Inspiration sparks new ideas and fuels our drive to succeed.

What I saw in the Nanaimo chamber awards was a group of people who are very inspiring. Their work ethic, perseverance and achievements make me believe that I can do the same with my life.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to pay tribute to these wonderful people.

BASKETBALL AND WRESTLING TEAMS AT
VANCOUVER-KENSINGTON AREA SCHOOLS

M. Elmore: Look no further. In my constituency of Vancouver-Kensington resides the best high school basketball and wrestling athletes in the city — and among the best in the province.

The Sir Charles Tupper Tigers are the current Vancouver city champions, and after victory last night over the Richmond R.A. McMath Wildcats with a score of 74-63, they'll be playing for the Lower Mainland championships against St. Thomas More. And they're headed to the AAA provincial championships in Langley, March 12-15.

This is a great accomplishment, and these basketball players are leaders on and off the court and have been involved in many fundraising and community events. Although their journey is certainly not yet over, I'd like to congratulate all of the players and the coaches, led by Jeff Gurley, on this team.

Congratulations also to the John Oliver Jokers wrestling team of 13 students, who are in the 2014 B.C. Secondary School Wrestling Championships which begin today in Prince George.

The Jokers recently won the 2014 Vancouver/North Shore Zone Wrestling Championships in the aggregate, boys and girls combined, and it marks the first time that all of the wrestlers that participated won their individual match.
[ Page 1666 ]

These young athletes have various backgrounds. Some even have part-time jobs to help their parents. But on the wrestling mat or on the basketball court they're united, determined and driven to win — for their team, their schools, their families, their communities and themselves.

I'm extremely thrilled and proud to have the privilege to cheer them on, and I ask this House to also join me in applauding their achievements. If there are any members whose teams will be playing against the Tupper Tigers or the John Oliver Jokers who would like to enter into a friendly wager with me, we can talk later.

For the record, I'd like to introduce you to the Tupper Tigers senior boys basketball team: captain Saurav Acharya, D.J. Sugue, Chris Schneller, Brijesh Gangar, Ron Ronquillo, Santi Ubial, Sumit Gangar, Henry Pham, Ryan Ghirra, John Tait, Niko Mottus, Kwame Jampoh, Naveed Alam, Christian Aurea, Taylor Ross, Patrick Smythe.

[1020]

Also, the Jokers wrestling team: coach Chris Fuoco, Tanveer Gill, Terry Ly, Ekran Shahnawaz, Molly Fu, Luke Atienzia, Austin Bartolome, John Vincent Calma, Chantelle Wacchan, Dion Escobido, Earl Lagos, Christian Olarte, Jenina Pascua, Torrey Toribio. Go, Tigers! Go, Jokers!

ANTI-BULLYING INITIATIVES
BY CONIFEX EMPLOYEES

M. Morris: Yesterday on the steps of this Legislature our members joined students, teachers, parents and others across this great province and across Canada to show our support for anti-bullying. This show of support across our province was outstanding. People on busy street corners, in shopping malls and other public places were proudly displaying their pink attire.

Hidden from public view, the forest industry was also in the pink of things. Yesterday employees of Conifex Forest Products in Prince George, Mackenzie and Vancouver donned pink hardhats in support of anti-bullying day.

Like David Shepherd and Travis Price, Conifex employees were standing shoulder to shoulder in opposition to bullying and violence of any kind, anywhere. Conifex values their people and recognizes the right of employees to work in an environment that protects and promotes the dignity of individuals and ensures that all employees can work without fear of bullying.

Conifex sets an example for all British Columbia resource sectors in promoting a safe work environment free from bullying, intimidation and harassment. At next year's anti-bullying rally Conifex would like to see all of British Columbia's resource sectors add to the 550 bright pink hardhats that were proudly worn by their employees yesterday.

The initiative behind this was from a former member of this House, Mr. Pat Bell, who was a regular and strong supporter of Anti-Bullying Day while in the Legislature. He chose pink hardhats as pink shirts were not practical in an industrial environment requiring protective vests and other safety equipment.

Yesterday in this House the member for Vancouver–West End stated that he would wear a pink suit at next year's event. In addition to our pink shirts, I will ensure that pink hardhats are available for every member of this House to stand shoulder to shoulder with our resource sector, which contributes so much to our province.

Oral Questions

PERMITTING COSTS AND PROCESS
FOR SMALL MINING COMPANIES

S. Fraser: Yesterday this House heard that there will be $4.4 million in new taxes foisted on the people of British Columbia. Meanwhile, the Premier tells the media that her budget wasn't created by raising taxes, borrowing or stealing.

Documents buried deep within the Ministry of Mines website show that this government is quietly planning to increase taxes on the mining companies at this point. This new tax will be felt more profoundly by the smaller exploration companies, placer miners and prospectors — the backbone of the industry.

Can the Minister of Mines tell us how much mining companies are going to be hammered by this new stealth tax?

Hon. B. Bennett: The member has a strange interpretation of what is quiet and what is buried. I've actually given speeches to the mining industry. During the week of roundup I gave several speeches where I talked about the potential for charging fees under the Mines Act for the many, many permits that the mining industry requires — from the most junior exploration company to the most senior situation, where they're actually proposing to build a mine.

It's not anything unusual. In the forest industry forest companies pay for the permits they apply for. In the oil and gas industry they pay for permits that they apply for.

We're starting the discussion. We don't know where it's going to go for sure, but it will give the ministry an opportunity to bring a few more resources in to improve our performance. And our performance is improving. In fact, I'll give you one example of how our performance is improving.

Interjections.

Hon. B. Bennett: They don't want to hear this.
[ Page 1667 ]
That's why they're making so much noise. They don't want to hear this.

A notice of work is the main mining permit that a mining company would apply to us for. When they were in government it took, on average, 155 days to turn it around. Do you know how much time it takes today to turn that permit application around? Just 55 days.

[1025]

Madame Speaker: Alberni–Pacific Rim on a supplemental.

S. Fraser: This isn't us saying that these new taxes — new taxes — will hammer junior miners. It's the miners themselves.

This is what Jason Jacob, the president of the East Kootenay Chamber of Mines, in Cranbrook, and vice-president of the Placer Miners Association, said about the new taxes that the Premier says don't exist. He said it would be a death knell for grass-roots prospectors. He said the taxes would run many off their claims and out of business. No wonder the KPMG report showed junior mining firms fleeing this province in "a mass exodus."

How do these new taxes on junior miners square with the Premier's bald-faced assertions that she wasn't raising taxes in the latest budget?

Hon. B. Bennett: The premise of the member's question — I think he's my critic; it changes regularly, so I'm pretty sure he's my critic — seems to be that the NDP would do a better job if they were in charge, in terms of attracting mining investment to the province. However, the record would suggest otherwise.

Since we've been elected, since this government was elected in 2001, we've gone to 30,000 jobs in mining. We started at 14,700 in 2001. We're up to 30,000 jobs. We've opened three large new mines, and two more large mines will open in the next year.

Do you know what happened when the NDP were in government, when they had their opportunity? Talk is cheap, but when they had their opportunity, for every mine that opened during their decade of despair, two closed.

All you have to do is ask the mining industry which political party they prefer in government. Which political party actually understands the benefits of mining to real communities, to real people? Sorry, it's not you.

S. Fraser: How soon he forgets. This Liberal government cut the resource ministries to the bone. This government and this minister…. In a quote, 2010, this minister said: "I know the resource ministries are starving for resources. You can't get your work done in any of the resource ministries." That's from this minister, this minister under this government.

The only plan this government had to fix the mess that they created was to create a new huge, punitive tax, one that will most significantly hurt the junior mining companies. Now we have the president of the East Kootenay Chamber of Mines saying it will drive junior miners out of the province. The KPMG study that I cited earlier shows that 50 percent of junior mining firms could be leaving the province by the end of the year. They're calling it a massive exodus from B.C.

Madame Speaker: And your question?

S. Fraser: Why is the minister introducing a new tax that will drive even more junior mining firms and prospectors out of B.C. or out of business?

Hon. B. Bennett: Actually, the question provides me with a great personal opportunity to say that since I said that in 2010, we have a new leader. And since 2010….

Interjections.

Hon. B. Bennett: They don't want to hear this either, obviously. Obviously, hon. Speaker, they don't want to hear this.

[1030]

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members.

Minister, please proceed.

Hon. B. Bennett: We have a new leader, a leader who believes in mining and a leader who actually understands the benefits of mining.

When these folks were in government, hon. Speaker, do you know how many mining projects they would typically have in their environmental assessment process at one time? They would be lucky if they had one over the ten years. Today we have 20 major mining projects working through the environmental assessment process.

N. Macdonald: It's clear that this government doesn't care about small mining companies. At least that appears to be the opinion of one of their own members. The member for West Vancouver–Capilano wrote to the Environment Minister in December, and I have a copy of that letter through freedom of information.

In the letter the Liberal member raises concerns that the case of the rejection of a northwest mine after it appeared to have met environmental muster might have been due to the small size of the company. He says: "Comments from two senior politicians were to the effect that the company proposing the project was tiny."

To the Mines Minister, can he confirm claims of his
[ Page 1668 ]
colleague that the ministers in the Liberal government didn't care about the project because the company was too small?

Hon. B. Bennett: Having the opposition attack this government for our record on mining, I have to tell you, is truly, truly bizarre.

Let me say that as recently as last week, in the balanced budget that we introduced last week, there was a $2.9 million increase to the environmental assessment office of this province. We're pleased about that, and I am surprised that a member of the opposition would suggest that a project should be approved if it didn't pass muster, which is what I think the opposition member is suggesting.

On this side of the House, a project has actually a very challenging time working its way through the environmental assessment process and working its way through the Mines Act process. Mine projects in British Columbia do not get built and they do not get approved unless they can prove with their design that they will not be contaminating any of the surrounding environment. That has been our position since we were first elected, and that will remain our position.

N. Macdonald: These are quotes directly from one of your colleagues. I'll quote again from the letter from the member for West Vancouver–Capilano.

He continued to say: "If the fundamental reason that Pacific Booker was rejected was the fact that it was tiny, I think many of the hundreds of junior mining companies showing up for the AME Roundup conference this coming January will find that news disturbing." The member for West Vancouver–Capilano says there is an attitude in the Liberal government that completely dismisses the smaller mining firms, and this new tax structure just reinforces this point.

So again to the minister: your Premier says there are no new taxes, but the truth is very different. Why is the Liberal government adding a new tax that will drive more junior mining firms out of B.C.?

Hon. B. Bennett: This is late February. About a month ago we participated — several ministers, actually: the Minister of Environment, the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and myself — on a daily basis in a mining conference here in British Columbia called Roundup.

[1035]

That's never been done before. It was never done in the 1990s, because when they were in government in the 1990s, they actually chased mining to places like Chile and Peru and Africa. That's the truth of the matter.

The attendance by junior miners at this Roundup conference exceeded the organizers' expectations by about 2,000 delegates.

I come from the East Kootenay, and at one point there was an NDP Mines Minister who also came from the East Kootenay. At the time when they had their opportunity to stand up and be in support of mining, the then Mines Minister actually was voted the mining person of the year for Chile. That's their record. That's what they did when they had the opportunity.

This government understands the importance of mines to real people, to real communities, and we're going to continue to support mining as we have for 12 years.

J. Horgan: I'll just pose a simple question to the Minister of Mines. The person that was posing the question was in fact the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke, but it was the words of the member sitting right behind you. So would the minister stand and answer the questions in that letter from the member right behind him? Are you against small mining companies — yes or no?

Hon. B. Bennett: Well, it is kind of hard to take on a day, February 27, when the leader of the opposition is out there right now…. I don't know how often he has said this, but he said it on CBC this morning. He said that the New Prosperity project wasn't a good project — not a good project, should never happen. He actually said….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Just wait.

Order. The Chair needs to hear the answer and the question.

Minister, please proceed.

Hon. B. Bennett: The leader of the opposition, while these folks are making all this noise in here this morning, is out there actually saying to the people of the province that the New Prosperity project was a bad project. Unbelievably, he's saying that in fact we're out of touch with the facts.

So I want to describe for the people on the other side of the House exactly who is out of touch with the facts. If you go to the Cariboo region this morning and you go into somebody's kitchen and talk to the real people — not politicians but the real people sitting around their kitchen tables, having a cup of coffee…. They're talking about the missed opportunity.

I think it is disgraceful for the attitude of the opposition in terms of the people of the Cariboo and how they're feeling this morning. You ought to be a little more respectful.
[ Page 1669 ]

SAFETY OF STAFF AT MAPLES
ADOLESCENT TREATMENT CENTRE

C. James: Staff at Maples, which is a provincial adolescent treatment centre, are speaking out against unsafe working conditions, trying to get the B.C. Liberals' attention. Staff there have suffered broken arms, head injuries and post-traumatic stress from almost daily assaults.

The Minister of Children and Families says everything is being taken care of, but that's not the reality for staff facing violence every single day as they go to work. WorkSafe B.C. also disagrees with the minister. They've issued order after order to ensure staff safety, orders that have been ignored by this minister.

So to the minister responsible for WorkSafe: what will it take? How many staff have to be injured before this government will act?

[1040]

Hon. S. Bond: The member opposite is correct. The staff at Maples deal with some of the highest-risk youth in British Columbia, and they have very significant challenges. We, like the members on the other side of the House, want to ensure that safety of those staff is of utmost importance.

The member is also correct that a very thorough review was conducted by WorkSafe B.C., and I have been advised that all of the recommendations have been addressed that were in that particular report. Management plans were developed for each youth at Maples which articulate how to safely manage a particular youth, and those plans are reviewed weekly. So there is ongoing work being done by WorkSafe, as safety for those staff and employees is absolutely critical to every member in this House.

J. Darcy: Words of empathy in this House are one thing. Action to prevent serious workplace injuries is quite another.

The Minister for Children and Family Development claims that staff "have been issued panic alarms." She said it was done in 2012, but WorkSafe B.C. orders from August 2013 make it clear that there were no personal panic alarms in the facility, and staff at the facility report that they still don't have panic buttons.

That report from last August goes on, from WorkSafe B.C.: "Security cameras are not utilized in high-risk areas. On-site security personnel are not always available. The employer is ordered to eliminate the risk of violence to staff." And just last Friday there was a new report issued by WorkSafe B.C. that orders that that facility install panic buttons for staff, because they are still not in place.

Madame Speaker: Posing your question?

J. Darcy: So here we are, almost two years later. Staff are still crying out for measures to protect them from violence. They need help now. Will the Minister Responsible for Labour act immediately to comply with all WorkSafe B.C. orders at the Maples facility so people can go to work and know that their health and their safety is protected when they do some of the most dangerous work in this province?

Hon. S. Bond: WorkSafe is continuing…. Their prevention officers are working regularly and closely with the employer to ensure that all of the recommendations are carried out. As the member opposite would know, WorkSafe has the ability, under the Workers Compensation Act, to use regulatory tools, including orders as well as sanctions. That work continues to be underway.

I will assure the member opposite that I will once again contact WorkSafe to ensure that there is an ongoing follow-up. But we should point out that the staff and union leadership asked for a number of additional measures at Maples, including drafting a formal violence in the workplace prevention plan, creating a violence risk registry to flag clients and reviewing the policy regarding critical incident stress debriefing. Those and many other steps have been taken. But certainly, I will follow up with WorkSafe to ensure that the matter of the two-way radios is dealt with.

PROTECTION OF FIRST NATIONS
CHILDREN AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN
CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM

V. Huntington: The Representative for Children and Youth has revealed the complete collapse of the B.C. child welfare system in aboriginal communities. She's also reported that the government spent 12 years and $66 million on a talk-a-lot policy that failed every single child it was meant to help.

Tragic suicides of 14-year-old children are the only legacy this government has to show for its total failure to govern. How many times must the child welfare system continue to fail these children? How many interactions with government care workers, contractors, nurses, doctors, police and band council social workers does a young person require before the system moves to protect that child?

[1045]

I'd ask the Attorney General to talk to us about accountability. Who is accountable when a policy goes so wrong that frightened children choose death by their own hand, the child committing suicide because no one stepped in? Where does the accountability lie? Who is held to account?

Hon. D. McRae: The Minister of Children and Family Development is not in attendance today. She has asked
[ Page 1670 ]
me to take this question on notice.

DUTY TO REPORT CHILDREN
IN NEED OF PROTECTION IN
FIRST NATIONS COMMUNITIES

V. Huntington: I thought that was a fair question to the Attorney General.

Under the Child, Family and Community Service Act, failure to report that a child needs protection is an offence. It is illegal. Reporting children in danger is everyone's duty, but it is the professional duty of social workers, health practitioners and police — the very people we entrust with the welfare of our children.

The investigation by the representative found multiple instances when a child needed protection, but no reports were filed, and thus, no action was taken. It's obvious that voluntary compliance with this law is not working.

I know that First Nations don't want non-aboriginals to make decisions about the welfare of their children, and I understand that completely. I also understand how difficult the pressures are on government workers, given that attitude. But the fact is that if any community, aboriginal or otherwise, is unable to care for the welfare of a vulnerable child, then the province has a duty to act. The law is clear. You either change it or you enforce it.

Has the Attorney General determined how she will enforce the Child, Family and Community Service Act? Has she determined how she will follow up on the systemic failure to report that a child was in need of protection?

Hon. D. McRae: Again, to the member for Delta South, the Minister of Children and Family Development has asked me to take this question on notice.

TRANSPORTATION MINISTER ATTENDANCE
AT FERRY CONSULTATION MEETINGS

C. Trevena: I think that what we've just seen here is a disgraceful abrogation of responsibility. This government doesn't sit for 200 days and cannot answer a simple question. The people deserve better. How dare they do this to the people of B.C.? I hope that we get a bit more….

Interjections.

C. Trevena: I do have a question, but I think that the government should stop and think when they are holding themselves to account.

After announcing devastating cuts to ferry services, the minister responsible said he would be accountable. He said he would look people in the eyes and talk to them about why it's necessary.

While so-called consultations were held in ferry-dependent communities prior to the announcement of cuts, I've got to say I'm curious about the minister's own accountability. Could he tell this House how many of those meetings he attended?

Hon. T. Stone: I appreciate the question from the member for North Island. As I have said consistently in this House and outside of this House, this government was elected with a job to do. Job number one is to balance our budget, and we have just brought in our second consecutive balanced budget.

Now, as part of our efforts in balancing the budget, we have been very clear — in fact, for the last two to three years — that the coastal ferry service in British Columbia is not sustainable. And we've heard loud and clear from coastal communities and many British Columbians that the fares cannot continue to escalate as they have in the past.

[1050]

To that end, this government is prepared to make the tough decisions to get this ferry service into a place of sustainability and affordability. We're going to continue to make those tough decisions.

C. Trevena: I thought that was quite a simple question: how many meetings?

If he had gone to any of those meetings, he'd have heard from people. He'd have heard from people who run businesses, like Heron Wier who runs the Moresby Explorers, who depends on B.C. Ferries, who could go out of business because of this government's reckless actions. Mr. Wier has written: "We expect at least a $100,000 impact to our revenue. It might be enough to shut us down."

There was no economic impact assessment before the cuts and no meaningful consultation. Paying consultants to look someone in the eye is not being accountable. To the minister, why didn't he look Mr. Wier and the thousands of others around this province in the eye and tell them why their businesses are going to go under?

Hon. T. Stone: During this last election we also heard loud and clear from the taxpayers of British Columbia that they expect their government to balance its budget.

Now, over the last nine months I have been all over the province. I have met with countless mayors, with regional district chairs. I've met with small business owners, a chamber of commerce individual. I've met with tourism operators. We will continue to do that as we move forward with these tough decisions to get ferries into a place of sustainability and affordability.

I think it's important to reiterate the difference between members on the other side of the House and government. Surely, the member for North Island, surely, the opposition does not believe that it's sustainable to have a sailing from Earls Cove to Saltery Bay on a Wednesday evening, 11:25 — a ship that has a capacity for 462 people. On that sailing there are, on average, 13 people on a ship
[ Page 1671 ]
that carries 462 people. That's four cars, on average, on a ship that holds 125 vehicles.

The hon. member opposite and the opposition might think that's sustainable. The government certainly does not.

[End of question period.]

Point of Order

J. Horgan: Hon. Speaker, I'm just curious if the Chair could advise. The Minister of Social Development took a question on notice for a minister, suggesting, I think, that that minister wasn't able to do that herself, which would imply that she's not here. I'm wondering if that's within the bounds of the orders of this place.

Madame Speaker: Members are aware that they should not comment on the absence or presence of members in this chamber.

J. Horgan: Thank you, hon. Speaker, for that ruling. Consequently, it strikes me that the language that the minister used suggested that a minister wasn't available herself to make that assertion that the question was on notice.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Member, ministerial prerogative allows for members of cabinet to act collectively.

J. Horgan: I seek leave to table a petition.

Petitions

J. Horgan: I have a petition signed by 191 residents of the Mill Hill area of my constituency of Juan de Fuca, calling on the government to gift Provincial Capital Commission lands that are currently for sale to the city of Langford, so that those areas that are currently not being used for anything other than recreation can continue to be available to the people of Langford in perpetuity. They do so in this petition.

Tabling Documents

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present two Auditor General reports: Summary Report: Winter 2014, and the report University Board Governance Examinations.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I rise to table the 2012-2013 Annual Report on the Administration of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

[1055]

Orders of the Day

Hon. T. Stone: I call continuing debate on the budget.

Budget Debate

(continued)

S. Simpson: I'm pleased to have an opportunity to continue with debate on the budget. I'm happy to be back.

Just to recap my comments a little bit. I was speaking about the 2014 budget — or the budget that I like to say costs more and delivers less. You'll recall that we talked about the costs. We know that the Premier said, when referencing the budget: "We did not do it by raising taxes, borrowing or stealing." That's what she said in the Okanagan on February 22.

Yet what do we know? Just to remind people: hydro rate hikes, almost $2 billion over the next three years; MSP hikes, $649 million over the next three years; ICBC, $145 million; ferry hikes, $162 million; tuition, $181 million over three years.

Then, of course, we did have some tax increases that total about $1.2 billion over the next three years, and that doesn't include the new mining taxes that were talked about today. As a total, that's $4.4 billion more that this government will take out of the pockets of taxpayers over the next three years to pay for mismanagement and inept financial controls.

We also know, of course, that there was no money to deal with the critical issues that would build an economy like skills training. Flatline skills training — in fact, cut the budget for advanced education.

We know the claims around the jobs plan. This was the claim that the government has been advertising and promoting for a long period of time. But what do we know about the jobs plan?

[D. Horne in the chair.]

Of course, we know that we have the worst record on job growth in all of Canada from September 2011 to January 2014. That would be the time the Premier has been in office. We have had the worst record on private sector job growth in the country. We lost 8,500 private sector jobs in the month of January. We have lost over 21,000 jobs since the last time the Legislature sat in July. So that's the job rate.

That, of course, compounds things like child poverty. This is the government that says a job is the best poverty reduction plan. But when you're losing tens of thousands of jobs, it's pretty hard to make the case that you have much of a plan.

So that's where we sit today. But what we know, of course, is that that isn't the only area where there are significant challenges around this government's financial and economic performance.
[ Page 1672 ]

A large part of what has driven this government has been capital projects. We all know capital projects are important. We all know that things have to be built. We know that every government of every political stripe invests in capital projects. Every government of every stripe invests in developing capital projects.

Here in this province there's no doubt about that, because what do we have here? We have a government that has record debt. We're going to hit $70 billion by 2016 by the government's own account. Are we building important things? That's good. The question, though, comes when you start to spend and mismanage the projects that you're building.

[1100]

That's the problem we have with this government. It has grossly mismanaged those capital projects. Let me give you a bit of an example.

The northwest transmission line, an important project. Well, that project was set to cost $746 million. That, in fact, was $342 million or 85 percent higher than the cost estimate of $404 million that was put out in 2011. The South Fraser Perimeter Road had a price tag of $800 million in 2006. It ended up costing $1.26 billion — $464 million over budget.

The Port Mann project was $1.5 billion when the report was released in 2006. It cost $3.3 billion — $1.8 billion over, more than a 100 percent cost overrun on the Port Mann. The convention centre. In December of 2003 it was projected to cost $495 million. The final cost: $836 million, a cost overrun of $341 million. B.C. Place — originally $365 million, in 2009. All of a sudden it's $514 million, a $149 million cost overrun or 41 percent.

Significant project after significant project — dramatic cost overruns. So $3.1 billion. These five projects were determined to cost…. In total they cost $6.6 billion to build. However, that's $3.1 billion more than the original projected costs on those projects. What does that mean? Well, what it means is that the carrying costs on $3.1 billion, based on the government's own budget and projected carrying cost for debt, would be about $122 million a year, which comes out of operating, to carry the costs to finance that cost overrun of $3.1 billion.

What would $122 million have done for British Columbians? It would have paid for over 1,200 new nurses. It would have paid for 1,600 teachers. Or it would have opened 10,000 skills-training spots to provide those skilled workers that everybody knows we need and we're not getting because this government has flatlined the budget for skills training. Or it would have put almost 2,000 new care aides in place.

That's what $122 million a year would have done. It could have accomplished any one of those or some combination of them. Those would have been important services for British Columbians. None of those services are going to be provided.

If that $3.1 billion was there and the decision of government was that we're going to invest that in other capital projects, you could have built Surrey LRT, a light rail line. You could have put some of the UBC options in place for the UBC SkyTrain line. Those options would have been there. You could have invested in St. Paul's Hospital and improved St. Paul's. You could have invested in other projects.

That's what the $3.1 billion that this government wasted through mismanagement would have paid for. That's not going to happen because this government just frittered it away.

We have a situation where the government has put in place a budget…. And what have they told us? The claim they have is around this budget being balanced. Let's talk about that balance. Let's talk about that balanced budget.

It's balanced on the backs of taxpayers. Now, if the government would have been honest with people and said, "We're going to whack you all with additional fees and taxes to balance this budget," that would have been one thing. But the government refuses to be forthright and tell people the truth. The truth really is that that's what has occurred. What do we know?

Let's take the biggest fallacy, which is B.C. Hydro. We know the accounting tricks — or, as the member from Cowichan would have said, the jiggery-pokery of what goes on there. We know that Hydro has about $4.8 billion stashed away in debt in at least 18 deferral accounts. That debt is stashed away.

[1105]

Instead, you get this government that's going to tell us that they are taking $1.2 billion or so in dividends out of Hydro over the next three years to balance this budget. That's what they're doing it with. Well, taking a dividend from a Crown corporation that actually is making money is one thing. Taking a dividend from Crown corporations that are losing money is something entirely different.

As the Auditor General said in his report, "the appearance of profitability where none actually exists." That was what the Auditor General said about the situation at B.C. Hydro, his criticism of these deferral accounts and the shell game being played with finances at B.C. Hydro.

You have this government that in fact is in a place where they're claiming balanced budgets by taking money from Crowns and from other sources to pay for that. This is the government that said they would not increase MSP premiums over the increase in spending on health care. Well, health care spending is going up about 2.4 percent. Premiums are going up 4 percent. That additional money is going exactly to this place.

If the government had kept its promise here, we would have MSP increases that were significantly less than they are. But that's not the case, because the government says one thing and does another. It's the only thing we can count on the government to do: say one thing and do another. That's the one thing we can count on with B.C. Liberals.
[ Page 1673 ]

We have a situation where for 200 days we didn't sit. We expected the government to come back with a thoughtful plan, some kind of vision for the future. They come back with nothing. In fact, they come back with a plan that is shortsighted and in fact ends up costing British Columbians more out of their pockets, delivers less in terms of essential services and also delivers less in terms of meeting the kinds of needs we need to build this economy — skills training, other kinds of R and D and those kinds of things. None of that's here. So we have that problem.

We're doing nothing around poverty. We continue a decade of having the worst record on poverty in this country, and the government continues to turn a blind eye to it. When they do get forced to talk about it, they talk about jobs when we know jobs are disappearing by the tens of thousands today in this province. We have heard nothing from this government in the last while that says how they'd turn that situation around.

Matter of fact, it's interesting. We don't hear much about the jobs plan anymore. That seems to have gone by the wayside. The only thing we do hear about is LNG, and of course, we all know that we're hearing the concerns from industry about the time it's taking, about how whether in fact this is evolving, about the challenges.

Industry is telling us, as I know they're telling the government, that there are problems around the timeline. We know that we have a Premier who said we're going to create eight, nine, ten…. I don't know what the last number was, in terms of numbers of these.

We have an industry that says maybe we get a couple of these plants built. We all hope we get a couple of these plants built. That's one thing. That would be a good thing, but it is not the panacea that this government has tried to make it — the panacea, this government has said, to solve all problems. Most companies are now saying we'll be lucky to see something by 2019, 2020. That's what British Gas says to us, BG. That's the reality.

Interjection.

S. Simpson: Well, here's the thing. I will tell this minister here…. I will guarantee you, Minister, this plant…. There won't be a plant on the ground before we go back to the polls in 2017.

Interjection.

S. Simpson: Well, the minister prattles on — empty talk from the minister.

We have this facade around this panacea of LNG. Good initiative. We want to see some progress, but there's a facade that it's all things to all people, and it simply isn't.

We have a government that couldn't manage its way out of a paper bag. Billions and billions of dollars wasted on capital projects. Billions of dollars wasted.

[1110]

This is the government that wastes billions of dollars and then isn't honest enough to tell the truth about things like B.C. Hydro. They won't tell the truth.

Deputy Speaker: I caution the member. I caution the member on his language.

S. Simpson: Oh, it's the government, not the minister. It's the government that won't tell us, around Hydro, about why they think it's okay to take $1 billion plus of dividend from a company that isn't making any money in order to cover off their own mismanagement on the budget.

I see that my time is just about up.

It's a budget that's built on frail thought. It's a budget that's built without vision. It's a budget that reflects the Liberals — not much substance, a lot of rhetoric and not much truth in terms of the assertions that are made by the government as a whole.

That's a problem. That's what's wrong with this budget. That's what's wrong with this government. That's why we have to vote no to this budget.

J. Thornthwaite: Before I make my remarks about the budget, I just wanted to give some thanks to a lot of people that help me out in my job. I think I already thanked, pretty well, my family and my constituency assistants and my legislative assistants in my throne speech, but I wanted to mention a few people that don't often get mentioned here in the building.

We do have research officers and we do have communication officers that really help us out a lot. Stephanie and Marc need recognition. Behind the scenes with the communication there are also Jordan and Tracy. They do an excellent job of our little filming of our events around here. They're very, very professional the way that they do that.

I'd also like to make a special thank-you to the caucus team — Lauren, Melissa, Christy and Primrose — and our brand-new assistant legislative assistant, Anthony.

Then the biggest thanks goes to Greg Dunn, because he's the one that makes everything work in our caucus with all the technology. I've been seeing him a lot lately because I'm so technologically challenged.

So thank you to those folks, because I know they don't often get the thanks.

I feel very privileged to be able to stand up and talk positively about the budget, and I will be supporting it.

There are three main priorities that I think are really important for growth in the province: job growth, skills training and education, helping families build for the future and providing additional resources for those folks and families in need. Those are the three main issues that this budget is all about. We promised that during the election campaign, and we're delivering.
[ Page 1674 ]

We've got a balanced budget, apparently one of two nationwide, and it's the second successive balanced budget. So here we are again, promising a balanced budget and delivering.

The big news about that…. A lot of people don't understand what that means. If we have a triple-A credit rating, which we do…. And I believe that we are the only one, actually, in the nation that does have a triple-A credit rating.

People ask me. They don't understand what that means and how it affects them personally in their lives. Well, the fact that the credit rating is higher means that we have more money to spend on programs and capital expenditures, as opposed to interest in paying off.

The example that was used in the budget, which I thought was very good, was that Ontario has to pay 9.3 cents out of every dollar of revenue on their interest. This is more than double what B.C. pays, at four cents a dollar. If we had Ontario's debt-servicing obligations, our debt-servicing costs would be about $2.2 billion. That's $2.2 billion no longer available for public services in the province.

To put that into perspective, the number one long-term capital transportation project that I'm working on, the No. 1 Highway interchange project by the Fern Street overpass in my riding, right by the Second Narrows Bridge — the Iron Workers Memorial — is projected in today's dollars to be about $150 million. How many of those major projects is Ontario not getting because they've got the debt to pay?

I really appreciate the balanced budget that we have and that we've proposed. For folks in my riding, to put that into perspective, it allows to us spend more on highways, on schools, on other education facilities, on post-secondary, as well as on hospitals.

[1115]

The other thing that I think is very important about this budget is…. We, British Columbia, have — because of the important work that our Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources has done as far as reaching out to other markets, particularly Asia — reduced our dependence on the U.S. We're developing new markets and attracting international investments.

Our exports to China have risen up past 600 percent in the last ten years. We're really going out and trying to improve relationships with Asian countries.

In fact, our Premier has been very successful. There have been four trade missions to Asia, including China, South Korea, Japan, Philippines, as well as India. This is important because we need to develop and maintain relationships with these countries if we're going to successfully trade our resources with them. I think right now we're doing an excellent job.

What else is going on with regards to this budget that is very positive? We have the lowest overall tax burden in Canada. In fact, if you combine income tax, consumption tax, MSP premiums and a payroll tax, our taxes are the lowest.

Our Premier actually mentioned this the other day, and I've got some examples that can explain why our taxes are so low. For a two-income family — and it doesn't matter what the income, $90,000 income or $60,000 income — British Columbia is the third-lowest province, taking all taxes combined. For a single individual working, $80,000, we are the lowest. For a senior couple, we are the second-lowest, next only to Alberta.

This proves that our tax burden on the citizens and the families of British Columbia is very, very low. We want to keep it that way.

I'd like to talk just briefly about LNG. Everybody seems to be talking about LNG. I know everybody was skeptical. It was an issue — a promise, actually — that was discussed quite prominently in the election.

I would just like to mention to the folks in my riding, who perhaps do not understand the connection between what LNG and that investment can do for them, that we have a program called the LNG Buy B.C. program. I'd like to just make a comment about it.

What we're trying to do is connect individual businesses in every riding across the province with the available procurements that will become available with this huge resource that we're developing. Our goal is to work very hard to connect small, medium and large businesses to this opportunity.

An example that was brought up to me earlier by our member from Peace River was printing services. Obviously, North Vancouver–Seymour is a bedroom community. It doesn't really have the big industries that the resource areas have or the rural areas have. But our small businesses, medium businesses and large businesses do get to benefit from the resource development that is happening — just by, say, a printing shop.

I think you're going to be hearing more about this as we roll out the program, but I just wanted to mention it for the particular people in my riding — to know that they, too, can benefit from the growth and the emphasis on LNG.

I think I passed over that two LNG projects have already entered into an agreement with the province to pursue Crown land tenure for a proposed development. It is suspected that one plant only would provide $1.4 billion of revenue for the province, paying off the debt through the proposed prosperity fund. And diverting the projected fossil fuels out of the environment because of the push to a cleaner gas source is a huge advantage, not only for British Columbians but globally for decreasing greenhouse gases.

[1120]

First Nations also are a huge part of the budget. We recognize that they're part of this growth. I wanted to focus on one particular issue, because I've had visits from my First Nation, the Tsleil-Waututh Nation, in my office.

We talk about the five conditions — the very, very
[ Page 1675 ]
intense five conditions that will help protect British Columbia's interests. I'm going to go over them for you right now, just for the record.

B.C.'s five conditions apply to any new or expanded heavy-oil pipeline. The five conditions are clearly stated, consistent and give business certainty of what is required to build in B.C. The five conditions articulate how we do business in British Columbia and support economic development that is fair to British Columbians and that protects our environment and respects our First Nations.

What are they? Successful completion of the formal environmental review process; world-leading marine oil spill response prevention and recovery assistance for British Columbia; world-leading practices for land spill prevention, response and recovery systems for B.C.; legal requirements regarding aboriginal and treaty rights must be addressed and First Nations be provided with the opportunities to benefit from these projects; lastly, that British Columbia receive a fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits of proposed heavy-oil projects that reflects the risk borne by the province.

There are many people in my riding who are very, very appreciative of these conditions, because they understand that the provincial government is looking out for our interests.

I wanted to briefly talk about health care. We have the highest and the most progressive health care outcomes that lead the country. Life expectancy in British Columbia is 82 years old, the highest in North America, topping all other provinces and states. When compared to other countries, only Japan has a higher life expectancy.

British Columbia also has the best survival rate for heart disease in Canada, the lowest incidence of cancer and, among those who do get cancer, the very best survival rates. We have the lowest heart attack rate in Canada. We're a world leader in AIDS research. Funding started last year — $19.9 million to roll out the STOP HIV/AIDS initiative throughout British Columbia.

We announced in this budget a cancer research and prevention plan. This will provide funding to a number of agencies involved in the area of cancer research, prevention and awareness. These include the Canadian Cancer Society, the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation, the B.C. Lung Association, Terry Fox Research Institute, the Michael Cuccione Foundation, Vancouver Prostate Centre, Centre for Drug, Research and Development, Ovarian Cancer, Genome B.C. and the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research.

You're probably aware that I've got a background of 22 years as a dietitian. In fact, I was a keynote speaker at their conference last Friday morning. We spoke about our common goals in focusing on preventative health and disease prevention. We talked about how we can work together and how we can continue to work together in the programs that already have been delivered by the province.

For instance, the HealthLink program — dial 811 and you can get free nutrition advice Monday to Friday. The fruit and veggie program in schools, which we've now extended into milk. Our push to support farmers markets. We work very, very well with dietitians, and we're going to continue to do so. The informed dining for consumers. Did you know a chicken Caesar salad menu can contain as much as 1,100 calories and 1,500 milligrams of sodium? Uh-oh. That's a salad. Watch what we're eating.

Before I leave health, I'd like to mention Lions Gate Hospital. We in North Vancouver and, actually, the entire North Shore are anxiously waiting for the grand opening of the Greta and Robert Ho Centre for Psychiatry and Education at Lions Gate Hospital, with a new ambulance station to boot — a $62.2-million acute mental health facility. I think that the opening is booked in my calendar for this spring.

In my riding we have a lot of families in a lot of single-family homes, and the early-years strategy that was also announced in the budget is very important to the people in my riding. This includes new child care spaces, higher-quality services and a new early-years office to coordinate and provide better access to early childhood development services.

I was very pleased that the budget confirmed the new childhood tax benefit — $1,200-per-child RESP for each child born after 2007.

[1125]

Also, given the fact that I am very, very interested in the issues to do with special needs children, extra funding is going towards the Ministry of Children and Family for those with special needs, an additional $50 million. This is in addition to the CLBC extra funding, $243 million, to support those with disabilities.

I was very pleased to attend two white paper consultations with the Minister of Social Development, in Prince George as well as on the North Shore in West Vancouver a couple of weeks ago. There were a lot of people there contributing their ideas on how we can help to make British Columbia the best province for those with disabilities.

Yesterday was Pink Shirt Day. I have a real interest in trying to stamp out bullying. It's a huge task, but our government has done a tremendous job working on the ERASE — Expect Respect And a Safe Education — Bullying strategy. It's a ten-point, comprehensive prevention and intervention strategy designed to address bullying and harmful behaviours in schools. It's linked strategically with the B.C. education plan, and it focuses on personalized supports and intervention for students. It's an entire education program for educators as well as students. It's sought after nationwide, and many provinces are trying to copy what we're doing.

I've got a special interest in the issue of cyberbullying. I'm working on a project with my colleagues in caucus as well as the Ministry of Education on trying to help edu-
[ Page 1676 ]
cate parents on what's going on there, on line, because they may not be familiar with it, but also to educate students to become good digital citizens.

In honour of Pink Shirt Day…. People can take a look at my two-minute statement yesterday — as well as my colleague from Parksville-Qualicum. She did an excellent statement on Monday on the exact same topic. Then stay tuned for the project that's coming up with my video.

With regards to education, as you know, my background as a school trustee and a university professor at UBC in dietetics gives me a pretty good idea of what is needed in the education system and how our education system fares in comparison to other jurisdictions. I was the chair of the North Vancouver board of education before I ran as an MLA. Throughout my years as a trustee I had an excellent relationship with the B.C. School Trustees Association.

I was very pleased to join my colleagues and the Minister of Education in a meeting that we had with the executive of the B.C. School Trustees Association last week. We have common goals, because we all want to improve student achievement. We all want to work together in our role of co-governance.

School trustees are unique in that they are elected from the municipal, local level to work on behalf of students in their particular area. They're valuable partners in education, and I always encourage people when they talk to me about education issues to go introduce themselves to their trustees and attend school board meetings, because that's really where all of the decisions are made locally.

We are very, very successful in our results with regards to international success. I mentioned this when I spoke on February 24, when the member for Victoria–Swan Lake was talking about literacy. In the international PIRLS test of the reading ability of grade 4 students, B.C. was recognized as one of the top seven jurisdictions in the world. The 2012 PISA test results show that 15-year-old B.C. students are in the range above other high-performing jurisdictions such as Finland, Germany and Australia. Compared to other provinces, B.C. students were top ranked in reading and science and second only to Quebec in math.

In addition, our learning improvement fund that we instigated last year is continuing. In the October 2013 board meeting of the North Vancouver school district, the superintendent, John Lewis, talked about where the learning improvement funds to the North Vancouver school district were going.

Again, I think it's a really good idea, and I would strongly recommend that parents watching or reading this today go to their school board meetings, because this is where these decisions are being made.

[1130]

The superintendent of schools in North Vancouver said, when the learning improvement fund was announced for all of the districts but, in particular, North Van: "The learning improvement spending plan is developed through consultation processes that occur at both the school and district level. In addition to the consultations with CUPE, school-based consultation took place in May and June last year with principals and vice-principals discussing the classroom needs with staff, school-based resource teams and chief staff representatives."

So the decision-making powers of the learning improvement funds that are given to the school districts from the province are actually made at the school board level. I encourage everybody to go visit their school, their classroom teacher, their principal, their school trustees and their superintendent to learn more about how this process is delivered on behalf of their children.

I got a list, actually, from that board meeting as to where exactly and in which schools the learning improvement funds are going. They go to learning assistance teachers, they go to different schools, and they go to psychology services and speech language pathology services. They go to all sorts of different services within each school designed to that school's individual requirements.

Before I leave education, I wanted to just briefly mention the investments that are made not just in the classroom with regards to the individual student plans but also from the ministry perspective. The superintendents of learning, the ERASE Bullying, safe schools, the skills and career pathways, graduation, aboriginal achievement and reading and numeracy prove the immense contribution that our province is giving to education and our students.

Recent capital expenditures, since I've been elected, include brand-new schools at Lynn Valley, Queen Mary, Ridgeway, Carson, Highlands, Westview and a brand-new artificial turf and bubble at Windsor secondary. Next one on the list is Argyle, and we'll be hearing more of that in the near future, because that's going to be a partnership project with the municipality.

Moving on, I'd like to mention a little brief thing about skills training and the big businesses that are in North Van. Our government negotiated a deal with Seaspan to assist in securing a federal contract, and we are committed to seeing this agreement benefit the entire shipbuilding industry in British Columbia. A training tax credit that aligns with our government skills-training objectives, outlined in B.C.'s jobs plan, was designed to help Seaspan secure $8 billion in shipbuilding contracts, which could create hundreds of jobs in British Columbia.

We are working with Seaspan to coordinate additional investments in British Columbia's greater marine industry, to supplement Seaspan's federally required value proposition investments. The province is committed to supporting human resources, technology development and industrial development of the marine industry. To date this has included providing funding to the Industrial Marine Training and Applied Research Centre and the
[ Page 1677 ]
Shipbuilding and Repair Workforce Table and board.

One of the things that kind of got missed, although my colleague in North Vancouver–Lonsdale…. I was happy that she mentioned it in her statements the other day — the ports property tax. Ever since being elected in 2009, all of the North Shore MLAs had been visited to speak with the port industries in the North Shore including Western Stevedoring and Neptune Terminals, prominent job creators on the North Shore.

I'm happy to report — and they are certainly happy to receive — that the port property tax…. The sunset clause has now been removed. In this budget we have removed the sunset clause so that the industry now has confidence and the certainty to continue growing and providing even more jobs.

I understand that since we announced the port property tax, over $1 billion of private sector investment has occurred in British Columbia, and this will continue to do so. I'm very, very pleased to be able to have that inserted into the budget as well.

Before I leave transportation, I have to obviously mention the Highway 1 interchange, as I mentioned briefly in my opening remarks. But we are working on this. It is in the ten-year capital plan, and my constituents must be very, very happy to see that this is working.

My last comments are obviously going to be on film. Again, film was also prominently featured in the budget with the capital region film tax credit. Government recognizes the importance of the film and television industry and digital animation.

[1135]

Of course, we've given huge investments to Capilano University, the Nat and Flora Bosa Centre for Film and Animation. We've got the kids there ready to go, in the post-secondary. But now we've got, at least in Victoria right now, extending the distant-location tax credit to the capital region for any production with principal photography beginning immediately. This is a huge step on our commitments for the film industry. Promises were made in the election platform, and we are contributing right now and delivering to these commitments.

I just want to read a small article that came in one of the local newspapers about how the benefit of this tax credit is going to be for the Victoria area. This was in the Times Colonist on February 25: "One week after the B.C. government announced the capital region would get a new film tax credit, Victoria film commissioner Kathleen Gilbert is still busy with a flood of phone calls about making movies and TV shows here."

Canadian producer Lisa Richardson said:

"It has definitely made a difference." Richardson, a partner in Vancouver-based Reunion Pictures — Continuum, Eve of Destruction — said: "Tax credits are very important for financing. If it hadn't been for the distant-location credit, we may have been looking at an all-spend jurisdiction" — elsewhere. "The distant-location bonus makes a potential shoot in Victoria more viable. With the advent of this increased credit, there will be a rush on Victoria now."

So congratulations to Victoria, and there's more news coming on that front later.

In summary, as I spoke on the throne speech, it's all about connections. The budget is about connections — connecting our education system, our K-to-12 system to post-secondary, skills training to the jobs that will become available, now and in our immediate future, because of our strong push for resource development.

Environmentally responsible resource development leads to provincial wealth for all British Columbians so that our health, our education and social services continue to be one of the best in the world.

Our balanced budget focuses on prosperity, and I'm very, very, pleased to be able to support this budget.

N. Simons: It's my privilege to stand and respond to the Budget 2014 that was presented not that long ago. But as is tradition here in the House, I'll start by acknowledging some people back in the constituency who have helped me stay on track. As much as many on the other side might think they failed, they did a great job.

My constituency is a large constituency, separated by ferries and mountain passes that require everyone to leave and arrive by plane or by boat. I just want to start by acknowledging the volunteers in my office who keep the office open and accessible to the public.

I think public service is the key goal of my office, to ensure that everybody in my communities can come to the office, whatever their political stripe, whatever their concern. They won't leave my office without at least an idea of where to go next. I know that every MLA in this House likely strives to do the same thing, and we do it in our own way, and we do it depending on the particular needs of our communities.

In addition to thanking my constituency assistants, Kim Tournat and Maggie Hathaway, and our legislative assistant, Elizabeth Parkinson, I'd like to acknowledge the volunteers who have been in my Davis Bay office and my Powell River office for a long time and who have done so, as volunteers, with the reward that they are serving the public of this province. To do so is an honour, I'm sure.

I'd like to thank in particular Sharon Sawyer, Owen Roberts, Julie Burden, Serena Debolt, Donna French, Anne Gibson, Margaret Harrington, Kathy Archibald, Judy Minchinton, Doug Davis and Marilyn Smith.

[1140]

I'd like to just also do my best to thank Carol Roberts, who served in my office since I was first elected in 2005, who went through a number of health issues without a word of complaint. Unfortunately, we lost her last month, two weeks after her last shift in my office. I know that everybody in the Powell River region knew Carol Roberts and appreciated her contribution, not just to the space that I worked in but to the entire commun-
[ Page 1678 ]
ity. Condolences to Owen. Thanks to Carol and to those who were so supportive to each other in a difficult time last month.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to indulge in thanking people who work for no financial reward to ensure that people in our communities have a voice.

Let me also start, actually, by expressing my thanks for every service that's provided to the public in this province and is paid for by the public in this province. I'm thankful for the funding that goes into the programs that we as a society pay for, and I acknowledge the capital investments that are made on our behalf. I have appreciation for public servants in all the ministries and all the Crown corporations, and I appreciate and recognize every company and contractor that we as a province employ in order to make our government work in the best interests of the people.

A while back the Lieutenant-Governor outlined the government's plan for this session in the Legislature in the throne speech, and then a week later we heard the government's blueprint for acting on those plans.

Now, I'm not going to be critical just for the sake of it, and I'm not going to make any personal accusations about the motivation behind the decisions made by this government — acknowledging that there are some things in this budget that are, in all likelihood, very supportable. My responsibility in this House is to, perhaps, point out where other priorities could have been put higher on the list. Sometimes my words are not always as precise as I'd like them to be, but I would hope that I express the concerns I have about this budget adequately.

The throne speech, in my view, lacked a vision that I think many British Columbians were hoping would be there. But we're not here to talk about the throne speech. We're talking about the budget, which was supposed to put that vision into force.

Let's say that if I were a film critic, I would give the budget a thumbs-down. I have two thumbs, and I'd use both of them. If I were a music critic, I would have possibly walked out. If I were a sports commentator, I might have changed the channel. Not everything is for everybody's taste, but I think in this particular case there are many people who, like me, would have maybe wondered if there was another game on.

In fact, I think even the government side of the House anticipated some of the criticism that they heard coming done the track toward them. Almost as if anticipating those criticisms, the Finance Minister decided to call it boring — perhaps, maybe, reflecting the mood of his colleagues — while we were, on this side, rolling our eyes and wondering if it was an exercise in learning platitudes and clichés. I think the silence from the other side spoke clearly to the lack of excitement.

The Finance Minister actually wanted to make it sound as if it wasn't just boring but that it had to be boring in these days of restraint, and I think there was even an effort almost to say: "Don't blame me. This is just the way it has to be." Of course, some pundits decided that boring was what it was and boring was okay.

[1145]

But to me, boring is a long, unnecessary car ride. Boring to me, as a critic of music, is an aria that's sung without any expression, or it's a dancer that's flatfooted. Boring is kind of like a waste of time. Boring is, you know, "I won't get this time back" boring.

I hope none of you are feeling that right now. You're very kind. You're very kind not to jump in at an opportunity that I would have likely taken.

You can walk out on a dancer.

Interjections.

N. Simons: You are all on duty.

You can change the channel. You can turn off the singer. But I take issue with the characterization of a budget as boring. Unlike those things where you can change the channel or leave or do something else, British Columbians have to live with this budget. We have to now go forward and hope that somehow those who don't characterize a budget as boring are not going to be forgotten.

Asking a ten-year-old child whether this budget is boring is not the point. For that child's life, this budget was hugely important. For aboriginal children, off reserve or on reserve, this budget was incredibly important. For seniors in this province, for health care workers, for teachers, this budget was not boring.

It might have been disappointing, it might have been underwhelming, it might have been vacuous, but it was not boring. The consequences of a budget are going to be good or bad, but most people can't afford to characterize a budget as entertaining or not. We're not here to entertain.

We're here to provide good stewardship for the finances of this province, to benefit the people and the resources and the geography — everything about this province. We're not in it for ratings.

Granted, every four years we go in for that great big Nielsen rating. I have to say how disappointed I was in May when we got a silver and we were hoping for the gold. We have to put up with that fact.

I'm not disappointed, even for myself. And I'm not disappointed on behalf of my colleagues, who are perhaps not going to have the levers of authority that we would have liked. But I'm sorry for the people who were hoping that our province could have gone onto another tack where the interests of people would have been higher on the list of priorities and the kind of image promotion would have been perhaps less important. Maybe that's a lesson for us.

For here and for now we're dealing with a budget that has a tremendous impact on all of us. For that reason, I
[ Page 1679 ]
think that to characterize it as boring is inappropriate.

Prof. Michael Prince — who is very well respected in British Columbia as a commentator on social policy and a professor of social policy, the Lansdowne Professor — said: "The upshot of this budgetary boredom is an apparent lack of concern, more disinterested than uninteresting." I find that quote actually quite precise. "More disinterested than uninteresting."

It's like if the dancer just wanted to get through their routine and the singer just wanted to get through her aria or the hockey player playing a neutral-zone trap just wanted to get off the ice. I think the audience in all of those situations should have expected and were due something better.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

The audience in this case is the people of British Columbia, and the producer of the show is the B.C. government.

[1150]

But the public, the audience, has paid a significant amount of money, and they expected more, not because all of the investments are in the wrong place — they're not all in the wrong place — and not because the government's priorities are misplaced. Not all of them are. It's not just our job to oppose on behalf of everyone who's been left out, but it's our responsibility to make sure that the government doesn't think that boredom and disinterest is an appropriate replacement for substance.

When I think about how this budget has been characterized as boring…. I think it may have been boring to those of us who can afford to characterize an important budget in terms of its entertainment value. I think that, really, what we need to focus on when looking at this budget is not so much to respond to the allegations that what we wanted to do was spend more or that everything on this side of the House is about spending money….

Interjection.

N. Simons: An unnamed member who sometimes thinks of things himself just said: "Of course it is." That's the kind of thing that, you know, does lessen this kind of debate. We're talking about a budget that impacts the people of this province, and all that member who is chirping from the back bench says is: "Yeah, that's what it's about." It reminds me of a school I never went to where kids were just mean all the time and thought themselves above other people by using words to put them down.

Interjection.

Madame Speaker: Member, you will come to order.

Please continue.

N. Simons: I'm just saying that I understand that the criticism of government, when we point out their failures or their lack of attention, is that "you would do worse" or "you would spend more" or "you would do everything to make the problems worse." As if….

It's the simplest of arguments. Sometimes we all engage in the simplest of arguments. But it's not about spending more. It's about figuring out where the priorities for spending should be.

I think it would be fair for the members in government to recognize that they have wasted a lot of money. The government has wasted a lot of money. I'm saying that that money, had there been better management, would have been well served and well used by agencies and programs that need it.

Madame Speaker, I'm going to note the time, reserve my right and move adjournment of debate.

N. Simons moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. B. Bennett moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: This House, at its rising, stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:53 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 © 2014: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada