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)

Monday, March 10, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 7, Number 8

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

MONDAY, MARCH 10, 2014

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[1005]

Speaker's Statement

COMMONWEALTH DAY

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, today we celebrate Commonwealth Day, and to commemorate the event, I will read Her Majesty's Commonwealth Day message, the theme of which is "Team Commonwealth."

"In July this year the opening of the 20th Commonwealth Games will be marked by the arrival in Glasgow of the baton that started its journey from Buckingham Palace five months ago.

"Many of us are following closely the news of the baton relay as it passes through the 70 countries and territories whose teams will gather for the games. The images bring vividly to life what we mean by the Commonwealth family. It is wonderful to see the warmth, shared endeavour and goodwill as the baton is passed through the hands of many thousands of people.

"Affinities of history and inheritance from the past are strong, yet we are bound together by a sense that the Commonwealth is a powerful influence of good for the future. People of all ages from different cultures are weaving a ever-growing network of links which connect us in our diversity and our common purpose. It is the unity that is expressed in this year's theme: 'Team Commonwealth.'

"While national teams will be concentrating on the competition in August, Team Commonwealth will have a larger focus, working together to achieve a more enduring success.

"Experiences of life differ widely throughout the Commonwealth, and we each make contributions from sometimes very different viewpoints. But we are committed to the same goals. Together we offer each other encouragement and draw strength from this mutual support.

"The understanding that we belong together and are able, through teamwork, to achieve far more than we could do alone has always been at the heart of our approach. For all of us, this is now captured in the Commonwealth Charter, which sets out the values and principles which guide and motivate us.

"This year more children and young people are participating in Commonwealth Day celebrations. Advances in technology enable us to reach a greater number of young people in schools, on line using the Commonwealth Class initiative and through events in local communities where the Commonwealth flag is being raised.

"I am delighted that in this, the year of 'Team Commonwealth,' we will be working to build a brighter, united future in which every one of us can play a part and share in its reward."

This concludes Her Majesty's message, the text of which has been provided to your Victoria and constituency offices. Good morning to you all.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

CELEBRATING THE SUCCESS OF
THE FILM INDUSTRY IN B.C.

J. Thornthwaite: I don't know how many of you follow tweets related to the film or the television industry, or even use social media to keep up to date with road closures or traffic slowdowns. But I thought I'd read out a tweet that occurred just a few days ago from the district of North Vancouver.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

"Heading to Deep Cove next week? Gallant Avenue access, Panorama to Banbury, will be limited March 10 to 14 due to filming." Just another day in North Van? You bet. The film and television production business is thriving in British Columbia. It's filled with success stories of artists, technicians, writers, directors, producers and all the small businesses that support their efforts. This industry is successful, and I'd like to spend my time this morning celebrating this fact.

It's a vibrant industry, and one we're proud to support and help to develop and grow. Here are just a few facts and figures to help place things into perspective.

B.C. is a key location for film and TV production in North America and a growing hub of digital animation and visual effects. The motion picture industry spends about $1.16 billion per year on production activity here in this province. That activity generates about 25,000 direct and indirect jobs.

Last year B.C. saw $1.37 billion in production spending by film and TV producers in 2013. This figure represents the shooting completion of 124 foreign productions and 234 domestic productions in B.C. The year before we saw $1.4 billion in spending by film and TV producers, and that was translated into 124 foreign productions and 180 domestic productions.

During 2012 and 2013 our government provided about $352 million in tax incentives to help film, ad and television and $26 million for interactive digital media.

This year we're expecting these production levels to remain high. I'll just give you an example of what's currently or has recently been filming here in British Columbia: Fifty Shades of Grey; Adaline; Agent X, which is a TV pilot; Arrow, Warner Bros.; Falling Skies, TNT, which is a TV series; The Flash, Warner Bros.; Formula M, Disney feature; Gracepoint, Fox TV Seasons; I, Zombie, Warner Bros; The Killing, Fox TV; Conflagration, Warner Bros. features; Night at the Museum, Fox features.

[1010]

And Once Upon a Time, ABC TV; Sea of Fire, ABC TV; Supernatural, Warner Bros. TV; Tomorrow People,
[ Page 1996 ]
Warner Bros. TV; and Wayward Pines, Fox TV. These are just a few of the productions currently going on that I got from a friend of mine in the industry.

Like many successful business partnerships, our government meets on a regular basis with people in the film and television production industry. Some time ago they advised our government that what they really wanted was a single go-to place for film, digital media and the creative industries — a single entry point to access what we have to offer here in British Columbia.

That's why we launched Creative B.C. in April 2013. It's a non-profit society that serves as a one-stop shop for B.C.'s growing film, television and digital media sectors. Creative B.C. is also responsible for developing the province's wider creative sector, including magazine and book publishing and the music industry.

Our government provides $2.3 million annually so Creative B.C. can offer a broad range of service and production support for the film industry, opportunities for international marketing and long-term planning for B.C.'s sector as a whole. The industry is very appreciative that the government delivered on their request for a one-stop shop.

In addition to that single entry point via Creative B.C., our government has continued its commitment to a strong economy through a balanced budget and responsible spending. We are in this for the long haul. Our government has remained vigilant and ensured that the industry would remain strong through sustainable government support over the long term. Unlike other jurisdictions that have not been as fiscally responsible as ours — their film supports have been reduced, offering instability and unpredictability for their industries — our economy is strong, and our film industry is strong.

I'll just give a brief example of the tax credit issue. On the domestic side, Film Incentive B.C., our film and video tax credit, is a labour-based tax incentive that provides refundable tax credits to Canadian-controlled production companies based on eligible B.C. labour costs. We also have a foreign tax credit. Our production services tax credit is a labour-based tax incentive that provides refundable tax credits to international or Canadian film and television production corporations that have incurred costs in B.C.

In 2010 our government added a tax credit for digital media production. This is a refundable tax credit covering eligible salary and wages for eligible companies who develop interactive digital media products.

Finally, in our balanced budget 2014 last month there was more good news, this time for the capital regional district. Our government amended the film and television production regulation to include the CRD for the purposes of the distant-location tax credit. This means that all new film productions in the capital region will be eligible for a 6 percent tax credit.

The Vancouver Island South Film and Media Commission says this will double the spending by film companies in the CRD. Their office was flooded with calls from producers about making movies in Victoria. To give you an idea what this means in dollars and cents, last year companies spent $7 million in the CRD. This year it will be $18 million in spending by the end of the year.

We've kept our commitments, and we're happy to see such positive and immediate results, not just for the film industry but for retail, the parking business, security, food business, hotels, construction, small craft businesses and all of the businesses in British Columbia to support the economy here in British Columbia as well as a sustainable film industry.

G. Heyman: I would like to join the member for North Vancouver–Seymour in celebrating the successes as well as the potential of B.C.'s film industry. I think this is good news in the last little while, the increases in the production, and it makes up for the fact that there was actually quite a lull and drop-off in production a little over a year ago. It's good to see this industry come back.

Just to give some sense of what the potential of this industry is for British Columbia, some time ago a company called Nordicity did some market research on behalf of the Canadian Media Production Association and found that in Canada, B.C. accounts for about 27 percent of Canadian production overall.

[1015]

In one year alone the sector supported 262,700 direct and indirect jobs and generated $20.4 billion in GDP for Canada; 27 percent of that is substantial. B.C. Stats has found that $1 million in spending in the information and cultural industries increases GDP by $1.8 million. It creates 13 jobs, and it raises total taxes — federal, provincial and municipal — by $140,000.

Now, it's interesting to note, because these are green jobs and it's a great industry for British Columbia, that in all three of these important metrics this sector exceeds oil and gas, particularly in the case of jobs where the number of jobs created per million dollars invested is fivefold.

I do have to say that, sadly, this is the second throne speech in a row that fails to mention the important role of Creative B.C., notwithstanding the fact that the member for North Vancouver–Seymour correctly identifies the important role that Creative B.C. can play. Also, notwithstanding the fact that the distant-location tax credit was a promise the Liberals made in the election and introduced in this budget, another promise that was made, and of which there is no mention, was the promise to include post-production tax credits for digital animation or visual effects, despite the fact that the Committee on Finance and Government Services recommended that this be implemented in November.

Let me talk for a moment about Creative B.C. It's a good organization. It's welcomed by the industry. It has great potential, but the B.C. government's investment
[ Page 1997 ]
in Creative B.C. is less than 10 percent of Ontario's. We know that in the creative sector Ontario, while bigger than B.C., certainly isn't ten times as large. The Ontario Media Development Corporation in 2012 received $23 million from the provincial government. This money was earmarked for research and development, market research and export marketing as well as seed funding for domestic productions.

The B.C. film industry made the relatively modest request of the B.C. government for $600,000 to $800,000 for a feature film seed fund. By comparison, Ontario has $4.3 million in a feature film seed fund. The purpose of the seed fund is to lever more investment. The B.C. government said no.

A little over 25 percent of B.C. production spend is domestic production. Ontario, however, currently dominates domestic production in Canada. Last year Ontario managed to weather the ebb and flow of film and TV production cycles by continuing to rely less on Hollywood shoots compared to years past, focusing more on domestic TV production. Domestic TV production contributed 56 percent of Ontario's total production activity. This helped stabilize the industry and grow a skilled workforce in Ontario. It could do so in B.C. with a little bit more investment.

The B.C. industry hopes to grow its share to stabilize employment and a homegrown industry here in B.C. They think, and I agree, that investing in B.C.-owned companies across the creative sector ensures that there are opportunities for skilled British Columbians to find green, family-supporting employment at home. By giving Creative B.C. the tools to help seed investment and market our products, we will stabilize locally based production activity.

J. Thornthwaite: Thank you to the member for the eloquent example of the benefits of Creative B.C.

Just to briefly mention your comments about Ontario, I must say that the fact that we do have a balanced budget, the second of only two provinces in the country, indicates a message to the industry that we are in it for the long haul and that our support for the industry is sustainable.

I've just recently found out that places like Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and Connecticut are cutting their film subsidies because their economy isn't doing as well, at least in the United States, as they might have liked. We want to make sure that we maintain our support, and that's why we're in it for the long haul.

I just want to give you a real success story here. Nerd Corps, which is a B.C.-based IP creator and animation studio, is a great example of the benefits that our policies in British Columbia have brought forward, including Advantage B.C.

[1020]

In 2004 Nerd Corps CEO and creative lead, Asaph Fipke, developed an outstanding series concept of his own called Storm Hawks. Nerd Corps' three principals were able to secure a 52-episode order from Cartoon Network and produce Nerd Corps' first original series, which aired around the globe and led to substantial revenue from related toy and merchandising and licensing activities.

This success was a result of the broad international distribution of Storm Hawks and allowed Nerd Corps to register in the international business activity program and join Advantage B.C. Since then Nerd Corps has made top-quality kids' animated content for the global marketplace and worked as a service producer for the top names in the industry: Nickelodeon, Disney, DreamWorks and Mattel.

Nerd Corps is a made-in-B.C. success story for a host of reasons, including an outstanding team, top-notch talent, solid planning for growth and, indeed, an amount of luck. But they had a little bit of a subsidy from the provincial government in Advantage B.C., and they blew from a ten-person workforce to a 400-person workforce.

We congratulate them as a success story. They're an example of how the B.C. jobs plan here in British Columbia is working.

STRENGTHENING COMMUNITIES

S. Robinson: I rise in the House today to speak to the importance and the value of strengthening communities so that they can be the best they can be. Yes, we live in a province, and we sit in this Legislature as provincial representatives. But let's be clear. We all live in smaller enclaves that impact us every day.

We live in villages, towns and cities. These organizational structures provide us with the capacity to live in peace, to raise our families and to have a good life. Our villages, towns and cities provide us with plans that dictate where we will work, live, learn and play. Our villages, towns and cities provide us with the opportunity to share in the cost of bringing clean drinking water to every home and every business. Our villages, towns and cities also provide us with the opportunity to share in the cost of taking our dirty, poopy water away from our houses and our businesses.

These enclaves, these communal living arrangements, are the very backbone that makes our province so great. Our communities make sure that we have decent living conditions, and decent living conditions permit us, our families and our businesses to flourish.

This begs the question of what happens when our communities are stretched beyond capacity. What happens when there is a large influx of new residents to our communities? What happens when this large influx, flush with financial resources, looks for a place to live and takes up all the available housing? Furthermore, what happens when, as a result of this influx, the cost of housing doubles or even triples to the point where the locals
[ Page 1998 ]
who have been paying taxes to these communities for years, even generations, can no longer afford to live in these communities?

Say this were to happen in Prince Rupert. What are we to do? What happens when the bridge — like in Kitimat — that connects the residential part to the industrial part of the community is falling apart, has lived its life and needs to be retired and replaced? Those workers keep coming and need to get to the jobsite, which is located on the other side of the bridge, but there's no money to rebuild any of this infrastructure. What's the community to do about it?

What happens when we have this large influx of new people to our community, but we have limited resources for welcoming these new residents? What happens to the infrastructure that taxpayers have been supporting for years but new members of the community have made no investments in and they start taking up all the room in your recreation facility, your library, your swimming pool? How do you find the capacity to welcome these newcomers without being resentful? How are these communities supposed to adapt to these changes?

These are just a few examples of communities under the crunch of explosive expansion. These communities do not have the wherewithal to accommodate and address the needed infrastructure improvements to absorb these changes and maintain a quality of life for their residents, who are grateful for the job opportunities but are having to sacrifice a quality of life that makes it difficult for them to stay.

This government needs to recognize the value that local governments bring to building and strengthening our communities and, hence, our province. I'd like to remind this House that while we reside in British Columbia, we live in our communities. If our communities are crumbling under the weight and the speed of rapid expansion, our lives and our communities will pay the ultimate price.

[1025]

This government is presuming LNG development, and it is forcing our towns and cities to absorb the costs that come with this expansion. This is the ultimate in downloading. We know that local governments have few tools for generating revenue that would help these communities replace their aging infrastructure and adapt to the growth that comes with this government's singular agenda of LNG development. This is an example of silo thinking at its worst. This government is demonstrating complete mismanagement of how to do this growth. This is what happens when you have a singular focus without consideration of the full implications of how this will affect these communities.

This government does not have all of its ducks in a row, and local governments are going to be stuck with the mess. We're already starting to see it. Kitimat's LNG boom is a bust for the city's poor. The Kitimat mayor, Joanne Monaghan, says she's losing sleep over it, and she says: "We call it renovictions. People might be paying $400 or $500 for rent; entrepreneurs are fixing up housing and then charging $1,200 or $1,400." Rio Tinto is in the midst of a $2.7 billion aluminum smelter upgrade, and they've taken the unusual step of bringing in a cruise ship to house the 10,000 workers that they're expecting.

Less than an hour down the road, in Terrace things aren't better. "Both cities are literally bursting at the seams," said Stacey Tyers, a city councillor. "We have people leaving town because they can't afford the rent. One of our schools lost 20 students because their families had to leave town."

This government is failing these communities. The Premier, when she introduced the new minister back in June, said that the minister "has championed communities and businesses and local government in the Cariboo, and now she can make sure that communities are ready for the impact of LNG, making sure they benefit from a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity."

I think bringing jobs to these communities is fabulous, but there was nothing in the throne speech or the budget that says this government is helping these communities get ready for the impact of LNG. There was nothing in the throne speech or budget that recognizes the roles that these communities play in growing the economy. They're being left out in the cold. These communities need a champion now. They need to know there is support from this Liberal government to address housing infrastructure. They need to know there is support to repair and replace bridges and roads that can accommodate the increased traffic and employment activity.

These communities need to know they can replace their aging sewer systems and can provide clean drinking water to their residents. This B.C. Liberal government needs to back up their promises and provide a revenue model that will let local governments know they have a true partner in growing the economy.

L. Reimer: In rising to respond to the debate this morning, I'd like to thank the member for Coquitlam-Maillardville for bringing this topic into the House. The topic we are speaking to this morning is one that is deeply ingrained into every policy that this government employs. Our government truly believes that when you have a thriving private sector that creates well-paying family-supporting jobs, parents are able to raise strong families, which in turn create strong communities.

I had the pleasure this past weekend of attending two fundraisers, the SUCCESS annual gala reception and the Imagine for SHARE gala, both of which were heavily supported by business. When business does well, our community groups do well, and our communities benefit. To support the growth of the private sector, our government has made it a top priority to invest in all areas that can affect growth — like our citizens, our local governments and our infrastructure, to name only a few.
[ Page 1999 ]

Since 2001 we have provided $3 billion in new funding to local governments, and $3.6 billion since 2001 has been invested to provide affordable housing for low-income individuals, seniors and families in communities across the province. We've also made significant investments in local water, sewer and community infrastructure, including $267 million in the Canada-B.C. infrastructure program and $75 million in the municipal rural infrastructure fund and $80 million into the B.C. community water improvement program.

In addition, in Coquitlam our government has invested over $7.3 million to provide subsidized housing and rent supplements for more than 2,100 households in Coquitlam. This includes providing support for over 950 senior households and more than 1,000 family households. The province remains committed to helping local governments meet the infrastructure and job creation needs of their communities.

[1030]

The Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development is working closely with UBCM, the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and the federal government to secure ongoing infrastructure funding for local governments.

Funding continues to grow for local government. Including payments to be made this fiscal year, government will have returned more than $657 million in traffic fine revenues to communities since 2001. Small community and regional district grants have doubled since 2004. This includes payments to be made in 2014-15, another $504 million provided to local governments.

Since 2009 the strategic community investment fund has provided $696 million to help support B.C. communities, enabling them to invest money in projects that are identified at the local level as a priority. We've committed $30 million for 98 community recreation program projects throughout the province that aim to make communities healthier and more active places in which to live.

We've also created and funded the $40 million LocalMotion program for projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the accessibility of communities. From 2007 to 2009, 122 projects were funded through the program. Between 2007 and '11 we invested close to $70 million to fund 201 Towns for Tomorrow projects, a program providing up to 80 percent of infrastructure costs for projects.

Since 2001 we have added close to 21,000 new units of affordable housing throughout the province, and more than 19,000 of these are complete. We have partnerships with eight B.C. communities committing $520 million to build more than 2,100 new supportive housing units for people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. About 1,500 of these are in Vancouver.

While we wish that we could provide everything to everyone, our government has made a keen commitment to supporting communities, to supporting local government and to supporting affordable housing. We will continue to do that for the next four years.

S. Robinson: I, too, was actually at one of those fundraisers. If the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam was paying close attention, she would find out that the numbers being served by this social service agency keep growing and have been growing by leaps and bounds under the tyranny of this government.

What I want to point out is that the B.C. Liberals keep saying that they are growing the economy and that somehow it is only their doing that makes this a reality. We all know on this side of the House that growing the economy requires partnerships — true partnerships — and local governments are key players and important partners in making our communities livable and viable for business.

This government is moving full steam ahead and has yet to commit to local governments a strategy for revenue-sharing that will assist them in delivering the services needed to maintain and accommodate their existing residents and their anticipated growth.

The member opposite made a list of all of the different ways in which this government is providing support to local governments, but I want to draw attention to the fact that the minister's accountability statement on the website says: "Our focus is on preparing communities for the economic opportunities that lie ahead, especially in the liquefied natural gas sector."

There's another quote. "To accomplish our goals, the ministry relies on strong relationships with communities, stakeholders and other partners. Together we will continue to pursue our common goals and support vibrant and healthy communities in British Columbia." I don't know what "together" looks like, but I certainly haven't seen it just yet.

The minister's mandate letter from the Premier states:

"Your ministry will be essential to the ability of communities in our province to prepare and benefit from our incredible LNG opportunity. We have implemented revenue-sharing agreements with communities in northeast B.C. to help them manage growth challenges arising from natural gas extractions. We have committed to benefit-sharing agreements, as well, with communities of B.C.'s northwest, which will be facing huge opportunities and tremendous change from these massive investments."

I have to ask: where are these agreements? Yet again the Liberal government says one thing and does another. This government's perseveration on LNG as the elixir that will take care of everything that we could possibly need is poorly thought out. These communities cannot wait the ten to 20 years before there's any financial benefit coming their way. They need a plan, something that is sorely missing, and our local communities will certainly pay the price.

[1035]

I have a number of articles here, where Bruce Bidgood, the chair of the Kitimat-Stikine regional district, has asked the province whose job is it to make sure that these
[ Page 2000 ]
work camps that are popping up follow the rules. The answer, he says, was underwhelming. He says that it's kind of a dangerous situation because one branch of this government has no other idea of what's going on.

I expect this government to act and to support these local communities under all the weight and the pressure that they are currently bearing.

RESPONSIBLE CAPITAL INVESTMENT

N. Letnick: Today I would like to take a few moments to talk about something that is, for me, a true indication of what we all believe in. I'd like to talk about our government's commitment to our communities in real, tangible, identifiable and yet sustainable ways.

All governments, especially ours, believe in investing in our communities through the development and building of highways, schools, hospitals, libraries and other projects — that we have a significant and lasting impact in our communities to a level we can afford, not only for this generation but for the generations to come.

When British Columbians go into debt for a new home, they are building equity. Similarly, when government invests in our communities, this is an investment that pays off. The government is able to deliver these projects, working through a variety of agencies and institutions, including school districts, health authorities, post-secondary institutions, Crown agencies and ministries.

Like all great things in British Columbia, the best things happen when we all work together as partners. Capital funding is no different. The government of British Columbia has numerous partners when it comes to capital funding, including the federal government, local governments and other third parties, which may include corporate donors or private donors.

In the areas of health care, education, infrastructure and highways, this government has delivered. We have promised to continue delivering through a balanced budget and to continue delivering in a stronger British Columbia.

In February the Minister of Finance delivered a sound plan for B.C. to grow our economy. The result is a $1 billion surplus projected over the next three years. As a result, British Columbia will be investing $11 billion in capital projects in that time.

Over the next three years that $11 billion will find itself across British Columbia in ridings on both sides of the House — $1½ billion to expand and replace schools, $2.3 billion for post-secondary institutions, $2.6 billion on the health care sector and infrastructure, and $3.4 billion for transportation improvements all over British Columbia.

We promise to invest in advanced education. Currently we are investing in the expansion and upgrade of many facilities around B.C., including right at home in the Central Okanagan, in the Okanagan College trades training facilities, nearly doubling the size of that facility. It is expected that this $28 million project will be completed by the spring of 2016.

This government promised to care for the education of British Columbians from the time they start school to high school and, in fact, throughout their lives. So it doesn't end there. The $13.5 million Mar Jok elementary school in West Kelowna is a new K-to-6 school with space for 460 students. It's due for completion in September 2014.

As well, Okanagan Mission Secondary School is benefiting from a $15 million addition, which provides the school with an additional 300 spaces.

We can all agree that student safety is absolutely paramount, and we are working to ensure that B.C. public schools can withstand a major earthquake. Not really a big threat where I come from, but obviously, in the Lower Mainland it is.

Through our award-winning seismic mitigation program, we have spent or committed more than $2.2 billion to upgrade or replace 213 high-risk schools since 2001, and the work is continuing. Since the program started, 133 projects have been completed at an estimated cost of $1 billion.

As of January 2014, 14 projects are under construction, seven projects are proceeding to construction, and 60 projects have been supported. That leaves just over 100 high-risk schools that will be addressed in the coming years. When completed, our seismic mitigation program will have significantly minimized the life-safety risk to approximately 150,000 B.C. students at about 320 high schools all across this province.

I think that everyone in this House can agree that adequate and timely health care is something that all British Columbians should have access to. To that end, this government is investing in capital projects in health, including a new Interior heart and surgical centre at home, at Kelowna General Hospital.

[1040]

This just-under-$300 million-investment will provide two new operating rooms, six in-patient operating theatres, space for an additional seven future operating rooms and a new post-anaesthetic recovery room. Also, Kelowna General Hospital is getting a new $2.8 million CT scanner.

This is in addition to the millions of dollars that have been invested already in Kelowna General Hospital as one of the two main tertiary-care hospitals in Interior Health's area. I don't live too far away from Kelowna General Hospital. Because of that, I occasionally hear the helicopter that flies overhead and lands on the new heliport on top of the hospital, saving another life from somewhere else in the Interior region, and I fully support the investment.

This province is built on a strong and vibrant transportation system. This government has promised to continue in strengthening this asset, investing in highways
[ Page 2001 ]
and transit systems as a key component to this commitment. Currently, in Kelowna again, we have the rapid bus in its phase 2, $50 million. Phase 3, coming up, will extend service to West Kelowna, joining West Kelowna to UBC Okanagan.

Highway 33 is receiving just over $11 million in upgrades, just south of Big White. I'm sure that many of the listeners have taken the road between Kelowna and Big White and know it needs to have some investment, especially in passing lanes, and that's going to continue.

Then, shortly after that, we'll see a $50 million improvement in Highway 97 between the centre of Kelowna towards Edwards Road. This will be a six-laning of Highway 97. Along the way we'll also see major intersection improvements, including the one at Sexsmith.

These just some of the projects that are currently underway in the Okanagan and all throughout B.C. It barely scratches the surface, of course. But I want to take the opportunity to remind the House of the consistent, unwavering commitment that this government has made to the Okanagan and the people in British Columbia. In fact, since 2001 this government has invested five times — that's 500 percent — the amount of money in the Central Okanagan as was invested in the ten years that the members opposite's party was in government.

I'll stop there and wait for the rebuttal.

M. Farnworth: The member says he wants to wait for the rebuttal. Well, I'm happy to provide a rebuttal because there's quite a lot to rebut there. Everybody is in favour of infrastructure, and I'd like to remind the hon. member that it's very easy to say, "We're spending more than you did 15 years ago," because guess what. It's called inflation. There's no trick to it.

Look, we're all in favour of infrastructure, as I said, but here's what we'd like to see. As the member said, let's scratch beneath the surface. Let's scratch beneath the surface and look at how the government is making its decisions and how, in fact, in many cases they are being extremely inefficient. A lot of what their infrastructure spending has done is geared on the concept of the pre-election cycle and has nothing to do with the reality in terms of how these decisions should and do need to be made.

The member talked about the infrastructure in hospitals. Well, guess what. Prior to the election: "St. Paul's — we've got hundreds of millions of dollars." Hundreds of millions of dollars announced for St. Paul's. Is it in this budget? No. Is it in next year's budget? No. Is it in the budget the year after that? No. So what was that? It was called…. It was just an announcement.

Let's look at transportation. The Massey Tunnel. Worthwhile project? Absolutely. But is it the number one project in Metro Vancouver? Actually, we really don't know, because what's missing is a real transportation plan that works with local government.

As the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam said, the government should be working with local government. When the local economy at Metro depends on a well-organized transportation system and transit system, one would think that a government, before it went out and made announcements about what we're going to do, would work with the local government on what the key priorities are that will move people efficiently, goods efficiently, and will get the biggest bang for the dollar.

Instead, no. The Premier shows up one day, as she famously does, with a hardhat and a camera in tow and goes: "Guess what. This is our next priority." That's not how these decisions should be made.

There should be a comprehensive plan that's made in conjunction with local government when it comes to transit and transportation. That's especially crucial in Metro, for example, in the area that I represent.

[1045]

More importantly, it's how these things should be done provincewide. Not on an ad hoc basis, as is what we're seeing right now. Not on the basis of because: "Oh, guess what. We need a photo op this week, so let's get the Premier with a hardhat and somebody out there to take the picture, and then we'll make the decision, and then the local community knows what issue is going to be addressed."

Penticton Hospital. Oh, absolutely. Don't you worry. Is there a line item in the budget for it? No, there is not. What we have is a government that is making these capital decisions on an ad hoc basis.

The final point I'd like to make is on schools. Six hundred acres up for sale in the Tri-Cities. School sites identified by the city council of Coquitlam, which is doing the work of planning, which they should do. Does this government listen to where the school sites need to be? No. Their answer is: "Don't worry. We'll buy it back."

So how does it make good economic sense for someone to pick up 40 acres for $2 million — school site potential that the government's going to have to buy back for, let's say, $3 million, maybe $5 million. Hey, great investment for the person buying the 40 acres, because you know you're going to get your money back from having sold the school site back to the province at a higher rate than what it was bought for in the first place, and then you've still got 35, 37 acres to develop. It's another example of where this government is not working with local communities.

I know the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam, who served on the council in Coquitlam, had she still been there, would have voted with that council when they wrote a letter expressing their great concern at the way this government was going about making capital decisions in school construction in the Tri-Cities. Just wrong.

I am happy to close with a comment about my record in the '90s when it came to school construction in the Tri-Cities. In my riding at that time, which was Port
[ Page 2002 ]
Coquitlam and now Coquitlam–Burke Mountain, we constructed — last count I remember — 21 schools. I think that's a record that any other riding in this chamber would be hard-pressed to match — 21 schools and Douglas College. We know a thing or two about building capital projects. But how we did it, and the way you do it, is by working with local government to get the best bang for the dollar.

N. Letnick: Thank you for the impassioned speech from the member opposite, who knows a lot about building capital projects, like fast ferries, for example.

The member opposite aspires to be the Premier of this province by leading his party, probably, into an election in three years. I would imagine that the member opposite will be the first one to don a hardhat at an announcement in an area that requires the hardhat and at an announcement in an area that has the potential for a wonderful capital project.

I'd like to remind the hon. member that it's extremely important that the leader of our province, our Premier, continues to make these announcements, because these announcements mean that we have the ability to afford the growth all throughout British Columbia — the growth in capital projects that is afforded to us because we have balanced budgets year after year after year.

As far as capital plans go, one just needs to just look at the list of capital projects that have occurred on Vancouver Island, for example, a stronghold, apparently, for the opposition but not for long. We're coming in three years.

On Vancouver Island: North Island hospitals. We have Highway 1 improvements. We have Camosun College improvements. We have schools in Sooke. We have wonderful investments all throughout British Columbia.

In the Lower Mainland we have schools in the Downtown Eastside. We have hospitals — the Children's and Women's Hospital, Surrey Memorial Hospital investment. Emily Carr University. And the list goes on and on.

This is only because we continue to hold the line on our debt-to-GDP ratio, which compares very well with the rest of the country.

If you look at the rest of the country…. We are projecting in 2013-2014 an 18.5 percent debt-to-GDP ratio. That compares to 37 percent in Ontario, 55 percent in Quebec — and nationally, 33 percent. And compare it to the United States — 73 percent.

[1050]

I would say in conclusion that it's extremely important that we continue to balance the budget. Balanced budgets mean that we have the flexibility to invest all across B.C. in all the priority areas — regardless of who is in power, regardless who the MLA is in the local area.

We have the ability to make sure that our Premier can continue to work hard along with cabinet so that we have the money to invest along with our partners in school districts, hospital districts and others. We have to continue to make sure that we have that intergenerational equity, where we can build projects for today that not only last for today but also last for generations to come. Those hospitals we build today and pay for today and those schools and those roads will continue to serve all British Columbians all across B.C. in all ridings.

KEEPING WOMEN SAFE

J. Rice: In this year's throne speech the government committed to move towards a violence-free B.C. and ensure that women, including aboriginal and vulnerable women, have the supports they need to help prevent violence, to escape from violent situations and to recover if they have been victims of crime.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

Contrary to their rhetoric, the B.C. Liberal government has failed to act to create safe transportation options for vulnerable women along Highway 16, the Highway of Tears, despite repeated promises. For example, this was recommended by the Highway of Tears Symposium in 2006. The government has failed to follow up on the recommendation. In December 2012 the missing-women commissioner, Wally Oppal, called on the government to immediately commit to establish safe transportation options along Highway 16.

The government said that it was "developing a targeted consultation plan" and that the process would be complete by the summer of 2013. The government hasn't followed through on this commitment.

When asked in July, the Justice Minister said: we are "working to identify considerations and solutions." Four months later it was clear that no further progress has been made. The Missing Women Inquiry update report noted only that government "is planning targeted consultations."

In 2006 the Highway of Tears Symposium recommended the creation of a shuttle bus system to be established along Highway 16 to protect vulnerable women. Six years later, in September 2012, the Highway of Tears safety resolution passed at UBCM in Vancouver. It reads:

"Whereas a number of young women, mostly aboriginal, have been murdered or have gone missing along a stretch of Highway 16 in northern British Columbia now referred to as the 'Highway of Tears'; and whereas many of these missing women are believed to have been hitchhiking between communities where there is a lack of public transit: therefore be it resolved that UBCM petition the British Columbia government to implement the recommendation of the Highway of Tears Symposium by establishing and funding a shuttle bus service between northern communities."

In December of 2012, in his report, Commissioner Oppal reiterated the recommendation from the symposium, calling the government to "immediately commit" to developing such a system. Again in December, the former Justice Minister said that following initial discussions, in
[ Page 2003 ]
the new year broader consultations would follow, with the process to be completed by the summer of 2013.

In December 2012 the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure said work on the public transit recommendation would get underway after the holidays. "In the new year we will start targeted consultation" — at first, involving stakeholders. "We're hopeful to have the initial phase concluded by the summer of 2013…. The good news is that a lot of work has already been done along the corridor and studying it."

July 2013. The B.C. Passenger Transportation Board approved changes that saw the number of weekly Greyhound trips between Prince George and Prince Rupert reduced from 22 to 14. So we're increasing the lack of transportation options.

In July when I asked about this issue in the House, the Justice Minister stated: "The Transportation Ministry is working to identify considerations and solutions to enhance safety for travellers along Highway 16, because there are many women missing on that highway and unaccounted for. That's a terrible, terrible situation."

In November the government released an update report on the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry. It stated: "The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure has assessed the transportation options currently available for communities along the Highway 16 corridor and is planning targeted consultations."

[1055]

In November in an interview with the Globe and Mail former Commissioner Oppal stated about the lack of transportation options on Highway 16: "We have to fix that. There is no one around for miles along that highway. You can't even get cell phone reception in places, and women continue to hitchhike to towns along the route to get groceries, for heaven's sake."

In 2006 the Highway of Tears Symposium convened by northern communities, First Nations and service organizations in northern B.C. recommended that a shuttle bus transportation system be established between each town and city located along the entire length of Highway 16 defined as the Highway of Tears. "Pick up and drop off young female passengers at all First Nations communities, towns and cities located along the entire length of the highway between Prince George and Prince Rupert."

In December 2012 Commissioner Oppal's recommendations included to develop and implement an enhanced public transit system to provide a safer travel option connecting northern communities, particularly along Highway 16. Oppal called on the provincial government to immediately commit to such a system.

The government will boast that they are now enacting missing-persons legislation, as recommended by Commissioner Oppal. However, they have done next to nothing to bring in the other recommendations called for by Commissioner Oppal in 2012.

The update report released in November on the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry could identify only two completed actions tied to the recommendations, and even these are incomplete. The update report claimed that recommendations 12.1 and 12.2 in Oppal's report were completed by the appointment of Steven Point in December 2012. However, Point resigned more than — I don't know — nine or ten months ago and hasn't been replaced.

Mavis Erickson is the former Highway of Tears coordinator and former tribal chief of the Carrier-Sekani Tribal Council. She's worked with families of some of those women who've gone missing along Highway 16. Her response to the update is:

"I think it's fallen fairly short of all recommendations and also the recommendations from the Highway of Tears Symposium that has family of the missing and murdered women in the north. The things that are currently being done, mostly, are to do with the women in the Downtown Eastside and support for vulnerable women, and nothing's really been done in the north to address safety and security of First Nations women. Women are still hitchhiking in the north."

It's clearly evident that we can do a lot more to keep women safe along the Highway of Tears.

J. Tegart: I'd like to thank the hon. member for North Coast for raising this motion, "Keeping Women Safe," today.

My own riding of Fraser-Nicola is similar to North Coast in the sense that many of our communities are set far apart, and people need safe and reliable transportation. People need to connect with family and friends, need to travel for work, need to see a doctor or perhaps some other medical professional, and one that may not be located in their own community.

In a place as large as British Columbia, providing safe, reliable and affordable transportation between great distances is a formidable challenge in this province. It is one thing to set up a transit system within a single community or district, but it is even more challenging to connect our hundreds of towns and cities and regions with transportation options that run far enough, frequently enough and cheaply enough to be attractive to the average rider.

That requires a high level of cooperation between local government and the province to develop transit solutions that suit the needs of individual communities. I'd like to share with the member opposite a challenge that I experienced in my community around transit systems.

In Ashcroft we had identified transportation as a priority about ten years ago. We wanted transportation between three small communities in a rural area which included regional districts and First Nations bands. The challenges about getting provincial funding; getting contributions from communities, rural areas and First Nations bands; deciding who would administer the funds and take the lead; and scheduling were among many of the challenges faced.

[1100]

It took a committed group, a focused group, and a local community solution to finally get the transit that we now have between Clinton and Ashcroft. The challenges in the north along Highway 16 are much larger than the 30-kilometre challenge we were facing. To say that it's running smoothly would…. I can't say it hasn't had its bumps.

When we talk about safety for women and we talk about a shuttle bus, I think that the work in community and in partnership is work that everyone needs to be committed to. As a province, we've looked at the recommendations, and as has been said in this House, there is a commitment to look at how to partner with communities.

I can assure the hon. member that the government of British Columbia remains committed to working with local governments to identify that safe transportation option along Highway 16. All of us in this House want to ensure the safety of women, no matter where they live in this province.

Recently I took part in a one-billion-voices-rising event in Spences Bridge. For those of you who haven't been to Spences Bridge, it's a beautiful little community along the Thompson River. A small group of women committed to talking about safety for women. Better transportation is one of the things we talked about, and certainly, a shuttle bus would be lovely, but how do we afford that as small rural communities?

The Oppal Commission of Inquiry listed a broad range of recommendations, and the government of B.C. is committed to acting on them. In this session we introduced the Missing Persons Act to give police the tools they need to act, which were previously out of their reach. I'm not boasting about that. I truly believe that it will help in determining how we help keep women safe in this province.

We're also taking steps to prevent violence against women in other ways. We are working hand in hand with anti-violence groups from across the province. Last month the government announced a new three-year, $5.5 million domestic violence plan to make B.C. a safer place for women, children and anyone who has been affected by abuse. So $1 million will be used to start up additional specialized domestic violence units, which will provide direct services to high-risk families, and $2 million is allocated to develop and deliver programs specifically for aboriginal men, women and children affected by domestic violence.

J. Rice: Recently I was listening to and watching the debate on Bill 3, the missing-persons legislation. A few members opposite commented on the shuttle bus for the Highway of Tears. It was noted that perhaps this was not a good recommendation.

I guess my question would be: is this the direction that the government is taking? I've asked three times in question period — a yes or no, a straightforward answer — whether or not we're going to see a shuttle bus in the north. I would just hope the government would be forthright in its answer and be clear with yes or no — if this is what we are going to see or not see. I think it would just be extremely respectful to the women in the north, to the families in the north, and it would also allow us to move on. Perhaps we can push for other recommendations. There are many. There are 63.

I wanted to comment on the fact that I was recently, over the summer, along the Highway of Tears. I pulled over on the side of the road and took my dog out to go for a bathroom break, and I accidentally locked my keys in the truck. There I was at this pullout at the Exstew crossing on the Highway of Tears, locked out of my vehicle, alone in the woods, along the river with nothing but trees and rocks and river. I was really frightened. My cell phone didn't work.

[1105]

There were some interesting people that pulled into the carport and helped try to find coat hangers and things to jig my lock to try and get my keys. But eventually I relied on a friendly person who called CAA or BCAA for me.

I just think that this is such a simple and easy thing, an easy tool that we can use to make it safer for women and their children in the north. Alternatively, I think the next best thing would be to have cell service — continuous cell service — between Prince Rupert and Prince George, because I did have a cell phone. Had there been cell service, I could have called for help.

I think I'll conclude. I'll leave it at that for now.

Hon. T. Stone: I call private member's Motion 7.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 7 without disturbing the priorities of other motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members' Motions

MOTION 7 — FREE TRADE
AGREEMENTS WITH ASIA

R. Lee: I am pleased to rise to move the following resolution:

[Be it resolved that this House encourage the Federal Government to secure free trade agreements in our priority markets in Asia.]

British Columbia is Canada's gateway to the Asia-Pacific. Trading with Asia is an integral part of our economy. A strong economy will protect and create jobs so British Columbians can have a secure tomorrow. That's why strengthening trade relationships and opening up new markets for B.C. businesses should be our top priority.

Our province's geographic location, business environment, human resources and quality of life make us an
[ Page 2005 ]
ideal place to do business. We are confident that with these competitive advantages and a level playing field we can compete and thrive in our priority markets in Asia — Japan, Korea, China and India. The B.C. government is committed to these priority markets. That's why we operate nine trade and investment offices in this region, and that's why the Premier has led trade missions there in the last three years.

Export data confirms that our exports to the Asia-Pacific, excluding the Americas, has more than doubled from 2001 to 2013, from $6.9 billion to $14.6 billion. However, Canada is currently the only G7 nation that does not have a free trade agreement in Asia, which has put British Columbia at a significant disadvantage to our major trade competitors such as the European Union, Australia and the United States.

For example, we have operated a trade and investment representative office in Seoul since 2008, with on-the-ground experts focused on advancing trade and investment opportunities between B.C. and South Korea. Our efforts have paid off, with our exports increased from $1.7 billion in 2009 to $2.7 billion in 2011. However, South Korea signed free trade agreements with the European Union in 2011, with the United States in 2012 and with Australia in 2013. B.C.'s exports to South Korea have since dropped to $1.8 billion, a decline of over 30 percent.

If Canada fails to conclude an agreement with South Korea, B.C. could lose further market share to our competitors.

Currently B.C. represents 50 percent of Canada's trade with South Korea. In addition to relatively large exports of raw materials such as coal, copper and aluminum, B.C. has export interests in softwood lumber, agricultural products and further opportunities such as LNG, fuel cells, wood pellets, video games, mobile platforms and other knowledge-based products and services.

[1110]

It's critical that our local producers and businesses have access to the Korean market on the same terms as our competitors. A free trade agreement with South Korea would be Canada's first international trade agreement with an Asian trading partner and would demonstrate how free trade between Canada and Asian countries could look like. In fact, B.C. has long pressed the federal government to accelerate efforts to achieve enhanced trade relationships with high-growth Asian markets.

B.C. currently supports the federal government's efforts to conclude trade agreements with South Korea, Japan and India. We were also an early advocate for Canada's participation in Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. The Trans-Pacific Partnership market represents more than 792 million people and a combined GDP of $28.1 trillion — nearly 40 percent of the world's economy.

In 2013 B.C.'s domestic export of goods to the other members of the TPP were $20.7 billion, or roughly 62 percent of our exports. A successful TPP agreement would fuel growth in these numbers and help to further build a growing economy.

We have heard that our Prime Minister is in Seoul today, and the Canada–South Korea free trade agreement is being finalized. Let's encourage the federal government to secure free trade agreements in our priority markets in Asia, in general.

B. Ralston: I was rather surprised when I read the wording of this motion, because it speaks of a federal jurisdiction — trade agreements. It was only last summer that the Minister of International Trade said in the House: "It's the federal government's decision to enter into any trade negotiations with any country in the world."

Just three weeks ago, on February 17, when we spoke of my motion of abolishing the Senate, the objection from the other side — and wrong, of course — was that the Senate was entirely within federal jurisdiction and, therefore, shouldn't be touched.

It seems that there are two rival factions in the public affairs bureau: one writing speeches saying motions can intrude upon federal jurisdictions; another one saying they can't. Maybe they should call Vince Ready in to the public affairs bureau and sort that difference out. But I digress, obviously.

What's important here is that we support growing trade with Asia-Pacific countries. As the government member has noted, the member for Burnaby North, trade with Asia is growing. The members opposite typically speak of diversification, in the sense that trade has grown, but it has grown in the traditional areas of strength of the British Columbia economy.

You can illustrate that just by looking at the top five B.C.-origin exports to mainland China just last year. They are lumber, chemical wood pulp, coal, copper ores and concentrates, and wood in the rough — in other words, raw logs. That was $6.6 billion — the value of those five exports.

While it's important and those are B.C. strengths and they bring jobs to British Columbia, it's also important to not only geographically diversify but look to diversification across the economy — exports of tradable services such as engineering services, architecture, planning and education. There's a range of opportunities. Our high-tech industry, also, is anxious to seek out new markets. It's not clear that we have been entirely successful there.

We look at the major destinations of B.C. exports in the Asia-Pacific — whether it's Japan, Korea or Taiwan — and the same profile of exports is almost repeated verbatim in each of the summaries of the B.C. statistics that is provided.

So it's a challenge. One of the ways of tackling that is trade agreements. The member mentions Canada-
[ Page 2006 ]
Korea. Apparently, there's an expectation that there will be an announcement later today. I understand the Prime Minister is in Seoul at the present time. Briefings are scheduled later today.

[1115]

Certainly, when the United States signed the Canada-Korea trade agreement, Canadian trade with Korea fell very dramatically. So there's an opportunity there. We will support a good trade agreement with South Korea. But as with every trade agreement, the devil is in the details, and we would have to look at the details of that agreement. Certainly, the prospects there look exceptionally good.

Canada-Japan is another agreement where the federal government has not concluded a deal, although at a speech that I attended last fall, the Japanese Ambassador to Canada spoke to the Canada-Japan Society in Vancouver and said that for Japan, concluding a Canada-Japan trade agreement was a high priority.

I also met with His Excellency the Canadian Ambassador in Tokyo in the late fall. He similarly, on behalf of Canada, said that a Canada-Japan agreement was a high priority as well.

Certainly, there are structural elements of the Canadian economy that match very well with the Japanese economy. A deal there would be a big step forward. There are joint democratic structures, as there are in South Korea. Those two countries would be a high priority for a trade arrangement.

What is also clear is that in other areas of the Asia-Pacific, whether it's Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore, there's much work to be done. Volumes of B.C. exports to those countries are at a very low level. There's very little bilateral trade. There's an opportunity for growth there as well.

J. Martin: It's great to be here today. I'm pleased to rise today on behalf of the constituents of Chilliwack and speak to the following motion: "Be it resolved that this House encourage the Federal Government to secure free trade agreements in our priority markets in Asia."

British Columbia has many advantages that allow us to prosper in the global marketplace. We have a competitive business environment. We have a skilled workforce that makes our province an ideal place to do business. We also have many family, cultural and economic connections to Asia. This provides a competitive advantage to strengthen our trade relations and attract further investment.

British Columbia is, in fact, the Pacific gateway for all goods and services flowing to Asia. British Columbia and the government of Canada remain committed to expanding the Pacific gateway strategy to secure jobs and a prosperous future.

However, Canada is the only G7 nation that does not currently have a free trade agreement in Asia. Today we are welcoming news that the Prime Minister is visiting South Korea this week and will likely sign a free trade agreement.

Canada has been suffering a disadvantage for the last few years since South Korea concluded free trade agreements with our largest competitors, the United States and the European Union. Since 2011 it is estimated that our agricultural sector alone has lost $1.5 billion worth of market share. A Canada-Korea free trade agreement will level the playing field and help restore market share with British Columbia's fourth-largest trading partner.

South Korea is the world's second-largest importer of liquefied natural gas. A free trade agreement will provide an inroad for future exports of LNG and help propel this province as a number one clean energy exporter. This is the reason why British Columbia continues to support the federal government's efforts in a number of ways.

Our Premier has visited South Korea several times on trade missions. Together with business representatives, labour representatives, First Nations and others, B.C. has presented a united front and conveyed ourselves as a stable and predictable business environment.

Since 2008 British Columbia has operated a trade and investment office in Seoul. In fact, we operate a total of nine trade offices in Asia. Their mission is to promote B.C. as a stable and attractive destination for investment. British Columbia is the number one exporter to China, of all provinces in Canada. In fact, B.C. exports accounted for 28 percent of Canadian exports to China in 2012.

[1120]

Closer and formalized ties to Asia-Pacific markets are needed to capitalize on increased growth. Trade agreements would secure Canada's place as a leading destination for business, for investment and for growing and diversifying our exports.

When the expanded trans-Canada partnership negotiations began in 2007, British Columbia consistently encouraged the federal government to seek entry into negotiations and sign trade agreements with key Asian markets.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a free trade agreement currently under negotiation by 12 countries. A successful signing of the Trans-Pacific Partnership would enable B.C. to access an expanded market and boost British Columbia business on the world stage.

We face stiff competition around the world, and we need to act now to secure our economic prosperity. It is critical that we establish clear, predictable and secure trade access to ensure that local producers and B.C. businesses can compete on an even, level playing field in markets such as South Korea.

Canada's first free trade agreement in the region will serve as a launching pad for business to expand into other parts of Asia. I can assure you that B.C. will diligently support the federal government's efforts to secure trade agreements in priority Asian markets. That is why I am supporting this motion.
[ Page 2007 ]

J. Shin: Thanks to all the members for their response to the motion for this House to "encourage the federal government to secure free trade agreements in our priority markets in Asia." As a British Columbian of Korean heritage and as a member representing a community with over a quarter of our residents from Asian countries like Taiwan and China, I appreciate this opportunity to respond.

As we are all aware, British Columbia is a trading province with a wealth of agricultural goods, natural resources and professional services from all regions for export. Our province is inherently positioned to be Canada's Pacific gateway. So yes, free trade deals with high-growth, fast-emerging markets in Asia, have, indeed, been a long time coming.

South Korea, for example, is our third-largest trading partner that imports more than half of all the Canadian goods from B.C. With the E.U., as mentioned, in 2011 and the U.S. in 2012 and with Australia in 2013 each securing deals with South Korea, we did see our exports to the country plummet by 30 percent, or $1.5 billion, last year.

The years of feet-dragging have put us behind our competitors and consequently have hurt our businesses. So yes, a comprehensive trade agreement with Asia-Pacific is, therefore, one of the key ways that we can pursue to really strengthen our economy.

The latest federal advancements, as we just talked about, with South Korea…. If it is successful, we'll get our foot in the door to propel some of the negotiations with other Asian countries like Japan, and we'll finally put our businesses on a level playing field to compete with Europe and America.

Of course I support this motion. There's no disagreement that this must be an obvious priority for both of our governments, provincially and federally. But what's actually more relevant and critical here is, I believe, not just encouraging the federal government to shake hands on any agreement. We do have to recognize that Canada exports mostly unprocessed, low-value-added and carbon-intensive resources, the prices of which actually decreased by 27 percent in the last few years.

On the other hand, we import mostly manufactured electrical and technological goods at higher-value-added prices. If these FTDs play out as politics-driven for some photo ops, with a lack of transparency and in the absence of proper consultation, especially with our auto sector, these deals can end up widening our trade deficit and putting certain industries into further disadvantage.

I ask members opposite to hold our federal counterpart to seeing that their FTDs are built on good policies with pertinent details that would reflect the best interests of our local businesses and jobs, again, not just in some sectors but in every industry and region in our province that can potentially benefit from this.

Additionally, it's imperative for us to remember that an international trade relationship is more than just its FTD. A dizzying array of rapidly executed changes in the immigration policies, for example, resulted in disturbing trends in not just the decreased number of immigrants but also in the number of international students and tourists from the very countries that we are wanting to strike up an FTD with.

[1125]

For example, we went from 7,000 to 4,500 new immigrants per year from South Korea since 2008. That's a 40 percent decline in just five years. South Koreans used to make up the second-largest population of our international students, 30,000 at its peak in 2007, but the number did slip to 22,000 in 2011, another decline that's 30 percent. You can say the same, as far as a similar downward spiral is concerned, for Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan as well.

Our province's tourism sector also has not kept pace with the rest of the economy either. More than a third of our GDP in accommodation, food services and transportation is generated by tourist spending, and one in 15 British Columbians depend on jobs in this industry.

We must also urge the federal government to be sensitive to the small ethnic businesses right here on our soil whose very livelihood depends on steady and growing international traffic as well as a healthy trade relationship.

Thank you for the motion, and I support this.

S. Hamilton: I'm proud to support this motion. I really am.

I'd like to start by saying that trade, of course, is the lifeblood of any economy. Let's think about that for a second. If we lack the ability to sell our manufactured products, our natural resources, our intellectual property and our services, we'll not be able to create jobs and grow our economy.

If a country is unable to export our products and services, the country will struggle to provide for its citizens. A country cannot simply trade within its own borders. It has to export in order to survive. If a country fails to do this, its economy will die.

Luckily, we live in a country where the global demand for what we have to offer is strong, especially in the growing economies in Asia. How important is Asia to B.C.'s economy? Let's quickly look at some numbers.

In 2001, B.C. exported approximately $5.6 billion worth of goods to Asia, and last year, nearly $14.5 billion. That's an increase of 158 percent — nearly $9 billion in just a dozen years. Asia is where our economic future lies.

My community of Delta is home to the largest container terminal in Canada, Deltaport. It handles approximately 45 percent of the containerized cargo that moves through Canada's west coast. Would Delta and Deltaport benefit from free trade agreements with countries in Asia? You bet it would.

Every day we see ships docked at Deltaport flying
[ Page 2008 ]
the flags of Asian countries, including China's COSCO, South Korea's Hanjin Shipping and Japan's NYK. More container traffic that comes through Deltaport translates directly into more jobs and economic activity — more jobs in the port, more jobs in the transportation and warehouse sectors, more jobs for the food and accommodations sectors, more good supporting jobs for B.C. families.

This is why our government has been investing in important infrastructure programs such as the South Fraser Perimeter Road. Why are we doing this? The answer is: to generate more economic activity and jobs. This translates into more revenues for our government so that we can pay for health care, education, infrastructure and other public services.

That's the way it should be done. We earn the money before we spend it. It's kind of a novel concept, but it's something this government has committed to and that we've proven with two balanced budgets in a row.

How important is it that Canada signs free trade agreements with markets in Asia? I and many others think it's vital. A week ago in the Vancouver Sun John Winter, the president and CEO of the B.C. Chamber of Commerce, penned an op-ed about securing a free trade agreement with South Korea.

In this op-ed he stressed the need to quickly secure a free trade agreement with our fourth-largest export market. The reason this is so important? Well, it's because our competitors, specifically the U.S. and the European Union, recently completed trade agreements with South Korea. Because of these deals, companies from the U.S. and the EU can undercut B.C. and Canadian companies due to lower duties charged on their products.

As Mr. Winter mentioned, this has resulted in a decrease in our exports to South Korea. In B.C.'s case, we've experienced a drop, from a record 2.7 billion in 2011 to just over 1.8 billion last year. We can't afford to lose market share to these key market partners. It's costing B.C. money and jobs, so we must move now.

Canada is the only country in the G7 that does not currently have a free trade agreement with any Asian country. This puts us at a potentially damaging disadvantage.

[1130]

Compared with the rest of North America, our ports are closer by up to two days, saving time and money. The Port of Prince Rupert is directly connected to the northwest transportation corridor, the modern rail and road network. The CN Rail line gives shippers fast, direct access and reaches into North America very deeply very quickly — again, saving time and money.

There's no doubt that British Columbia has much to gain from Canada securing free trade agreements with other Asian countries.

So I ask everyone in the House to join me in encouraging Ottawa to secure a free trade agreement with those priority markets — agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership with countries including Japan, our third-largest export market, and emerging countries Malaysia and Singapore; a free trade agreement with India, a country with whom so many British Columbians can relate and were born; and with South Korea, a country where there is so much potential and need for liquefied natural gas exports.

British Columbia's success has always been dependent on our ability to export our goods and services. Exports have been, are and will be the lifeblood of B.C.'s economy. Let's make sure our economy is robust and its blood pumps freely and strongly.

R. Austin: I'm also taking my opportunity here to speak on this motion, and I thank the member from Burnaby for bringing this forward. I think that we are hearing a certain degree of consensus around this motion this morning.

I live in northwest B.C., about an hour-and-a-half drive away from the Port of Prince Rupert, and of course, I represent Kitimat — I believe, the largest private port on the west coast of North America.

It's a port that has been exporting processed aluminum for the last 52 years, one of our most highly valued products, where we bring in raw ingredients from other parts of the world, add huge value to it in Kitimat — create a huge amount of jobs and employment — and then export that to other parts of the world. That is certainly a success story.

I think, as we take part in this debate, we need to recognize that the most important thing in trade is to figure out ways in which we can add value to our products. As has been mentioned here by members on both sides of the House, currently a lot of our trade that takes place is in the old things that Canada has been made famous for: metals, mines, energy. A lot of this goes out simply as raw products.

I think what we need to look at, as we look at taking advantage of any of these trade agreements that be made, is that we find ways in which we can look at adding value to some of these raw products.

Obviously, with the several proponents that are seeking interests in northwest B.C., looking at liquefied natural gas, I think that is an example of how we can take a product that we have been selling largely to the United States and to other provinces in Eastern Canada as a raw product and add a huge amount of value to it by liquefying it here in British Columbia.

Not only will there be jobs that will come about as a result of building that plant, but the important thing is that we are taking advantage of a price differential and, as I say, adding a huge amount of value to a product that has a much lower value here in North America.

I'd like to take a couple of minutes just to mention some of the statistics that other people have also been talking about here. The value of our trade between British
[ Page 2009 ]
Columbia and Korea has, as people have noted, taken a very substantial dip in the last year. I believe it went from $1.7 billion in 2009 up to $2.7 billion by 2011 and then in 2012 came down almost $1 billion to $1.8 billion.

Clearly, I think, what that demonstrates is the fact that South Korea has been able to create free trade agreements with other parts of the world — namely, the United States and Europe. Obviously, in a world where we're all interconnected, we need to make sure that our companies here can compete on a level playing field.

So I think it's fair to say that the agreement that I believe the federal government is going to be signing later today should create a lot of advantages for those of us who live in British Columbia, particularly as I note that Korean companies are part and parcel of some of the LNG proponents that are potentially going to make large investments here in northwest British Columbia.

I think it's always important, when we look at trade agreements, to make sure that those areas of our economy that may suffer are not allowed to simply wither and waste.

[1135]

I think that while we don't have a huge amount of manufacturing industry for the automobile industry here in British Columbia, we need to certainly take into consideration that we do have large manufacturing facilities in other parts of Canada. I note, in particular with regards to Korea, that unlike Japan, they don't, to my knowledge, manufacture their automobiles here in Canada but rather manufacture them in Korea and then import them.

I hope that if there is a free trade agreement signed today, it's one that recognizes and encourages North Korea to continue to invest…. Sorry, South Korea. Yeah, we can all hope that North Korea will one day join the free trade agreement. Anyway, we hope that South Korea does, indeed, invest here in Canada and start to produce their vehicles.

I know there are many, many people who enjoy and like to drive vehicles made in South Korea. So I think it'll be great if this free trade agreement that's signed later on today actually encourages the companies in South Korea to come here and open up manufacturing facilities here in Canada, first and foremost — even before the United States — so that we can actually take advantage of that and create a lot of jobs.

I'm going to take my place now and cede the floor to those who want to make other comments on this.

S. Gibson: I'm pleased to rise today on behalf of my constituents of the beautiful Abbotsford-Mission riding to speak to the following motion: "Be it resolved that this House encourage the Federal Government to secure free trade agreements in our priority markets in Asia."

When I teach university business students, I ask them three things. "Would you like to wonder what's happening? Would you like to watch what's happening? Or would you like to make what's happening?" Some of you have heard that creed.

That applies to our government and how powerful this motion is. I want to acknowledge and thank the member for Burnaby North for bringing it forward — a very good initiative.

The landscape of our trading relationships in the world is changing quite dramatically and is less reliant on the U.S., as we've heard earlier today in some of the presentations. In 2001 almost 70 percent of B.C. exports went to the U.S. Now it's just 45 percent.

So you can see the trend there — significant because with the U.S. economy having its downturns, diversification is very good for our economy and adds to our security. It also enables us to take advantage of rapidly growing markets such as China and India.

Interestingly, in just a few weeks my wife and I are going to go on a trip to China, sponsored by the Abbotsford Chamber of Commerce. I'm looking forward to that. It'll be our first trip there. I'm sure it'll be very edifying and help me to do a better job as an MLA in understanding the markets that we serve.

Canada is the only G7 nation that does not currently have a free trade agreement in Asia, which really puts us at a disadvantage against the European Union, Australia and, of course, the United States. This is why B.C. has long pressed the federal government to accelerate efforts to enhance trade relationships in those high-growth developing Asian markets.

We were an early advocate for Canada's participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. This free trade agreement, currently under negotiation by 12 countries, would help represent nearly 40 percent of the world's economy. It would add to that.

British Columbia has consistently encouraged the federal government to seek entry into negotiations and sign free trade agreements, as we heard earlier, with key Asian markets. Canada joined these negotiations in 2012, and we're hoping to include them — that's the plan — by the end of this year.

Being part of this process, this system, will enable B.C. and Canada to strengthen partnerships in the Asia-Pacific region. That's why we are encouraging our counterparts in the federal government to build those new trading relationships.

Of course, we have heard in the news, fresh off the presses — and welcome the news — that the Prime Minister is travelling to South Korea to sign a possible free trade agreement. Very exciting.

This is significant because Canada is the seventh-largest trading partner with South Korea, and British Columbia is fourth largest. However, our market share with South Korea has been declining somewhat, largely due to the fact that the free trade agreements have already been concluded with our largest competitors, including the U.S. and the European Economic Community.
[ Page 2010 ]

A Canada-Korea free trade agreement will help even the playing field and will actually expand opportunities with countries that have ties throughout Asia. B.C. is making our own style of effort as well. As we heard, the Premier has led two trade missions to Korea, and we have operated a trade and investment office in Seoul since 2008. Currently B.C. operates six trade and investment offices in Asia.

[1140]

Building relationships with Asian economies is a cornerstone of our plan to diversify the economy. We have that competitive advantage. As we've heard here a number of times in this Legislature, the Port of Prince Rupert is nearly two days closer to Asia than any one of our competitors. It's very important because, as we know, time indeed is money. That's the reason why we adopted the Pacific gateway strategy to harness all of our competitive advantages. That's a partnership between government and the private sector to improve our efficiency at transporting goods to those very important burgeoning markets.

In fact, the Pacific gateway strategy often involves partnership agreements between all levels of government. That's the beautiful thing about it. Everybody comes together for the good of the economic growth of our province.

By aligning our priorities and building the infrastructure we need, from highways to bridges to even better transit, we improve the way goods are moved to market. There are many spinoffs. For example, the trade will grow. It will give us, for example, the two new patrol vessels which are required to keep the port facilities safe and secure. These vessels are being built right here in B.C. by local firms on Vancouver Island, and they also use parts from a number of local suppliers.

Great initiative. I want to honour and thank the hon. member for Burnaby North for raising the issue. We're all working together in collaboration with the federal government, and that is why I'm very happy to be supporting it and speaking to it here in this House. Thank you for this opportunity.

M. Elmore: I'm pleased to rise and speak to the motion moved by the member for Burnaby North for this House to "encourage the federal government to secure free trade agreements in our priority markets in Asia."

I also think it's refreshing that the government recognizes that it's a legitimate concern for the B.C. Legislature to advocate on issues that refer to not only national jurisdiction but also international, as opposed to a debate we had just a few weeks ago when the government side was claiming that it's inappropriate to comment on national issues around the Senate. I'm pleased there's a unity of agreement in terms of the role and responsibilities of our Legislature.

It's progress, certainly, in terms of recognizing the importance of Asia. When we look at Asia, just the vast geography — South Asia, West Asia, Central, East and Southeast Asia — in terms of the population that it represents in the world, it's certainly a significant and substantial geographic region.

With regards to our relationship to Asia, even though our main trading partner is the United States, it's been referenced by many members that with that relationship we're seeing a trend in terms of a decreasing trend of the reliance of imports and exports to the United States, and we're seeing an increasing pattern of growth of exports and imports to the Asia region.

When we look at that, just in terms of painting the picture, we see that Asia as a region has a faster growth rate, certainly, than the United States, our main partner. The pattern of imports and exports, I thought, was interesting. From 2007 to 2012 the value of the nation's exports to the U.S. decreased an average of 1 percent compared to an increase of nearly 7 percent for other countries in the Pacific.

So we're seeing a decrease in terms of exports to the U.S. and an increase to Asia. That's on the export side. On the import side we're seeing an increase to the States by 1 percent but a faster growth in the Asia-Pacific region. So we really see a compounding of those patterns.

Many members referenced the competitive advantage that we have, the geographic advantage of our ports, the proximity to those Asian markets, supported by our infrastructure and transportation systems to be able to move, for B.C. to be the gateway to the Pacific from across Canada and the United States.

As well, we see that we also have the advantage. It's been referenced in terms of a high immigration from countries from Asia. That also is an intrinsic value and advantage.

[1145]

We see many of the businesses being facilitated by those relationships, and that is definitely an advantage. I think it also speaks to the opportunities that need to be pursued to actualize and really deliver on the potential that's there.

We also heard that the pattern of trade…. Primarily from British Columbia we export our raw materials, lumber, and we import finished products — electronic and other manufactured goods. But there are other opportunities in terms of tourism, in terms of export. I'd like to highlight that we have a great leading industry of consulting engineers in B.C. That's certainly a growth area.

I'd just like to highlight the Philippines. On the one hand we have, I think, opportunities for growth there. On the one hand we actually see a trade, if you will — a commodification of labour, where we have a good number of trade in workers, temporary foreign workers, coming into British Columbia — tens of thousands. That's a bit of a different dynamic in our trade relationship, but one I think the province can also advocate in terms of ensuring that those workers here are protected.
[ Page 2011 ]

Just to summarize, I think there's certainly an opportunity to advance the interests of British Columbia, to promote opportunities and to expand our markets, but it requires leadership from our government. You have the support on our side recognizing that. Also, I think we should be assertive in ensuring that interests and sectors are promoted but also protected. Part of the challenge is having the details disclosed. Many opportunities ahead.

R. Sultan: I'm pleased to support the motion recommending free trade with Asia as a national priority. The market I will address is China. The industry I will address is financial services or, more simply, banking. My proposition is that Canada, especially British Columbia and most emphatically Vancouver should seize this moment and aim to become the pre-eminent financial hub for North American dealings with China in finance.

Of course, we cannot overemphasize the strategic importance of British Columbia's trade with China in metallurgical coal and softwood lumber, but we do not pay sufficient attention to the jobs, profit and strategic alliance potential for B.C. through developing our financial services to Asia. Cementing our role as the financial gateway from Asia to North America — all of North America, not simply Canada — is a goal within our grasp.

We must acknowledge the many policy issues involved when any sovereign government grants charter to the government of another — the right to print money, the essence of banking. Such entitlement must necessarily be encumbered with rules, transparencies, accounting standards and measures of prudence, solvency and capital — all the necessary ingredients of monetary control in which Canada has an outstanding and deserved reputation for excellence.

But within that regulatory setting, I offer five reasons why reciprocal banking privileges between China and Canada can benefit both parties.

(1) Comparative advantage. We need China, and China needs us. Chinese banks operating in Canada will offer their unique knowledge of China and its networks, their unmatched financing capability and their ability to open doors abroad for Canadian business. Canadian banks operating in China can teach that vast nation something about the skills, IT and management systems required to operate a vast network of branch banks and demonstrate the culture required to steer banking through the shoals of overconfidence and speculation.

(2) Underdevelopment of the consumer sector in China. While the economy of China continues to grow at an outstanding rate, the desired shift from exports to domestic consumption is still lagging behind. Why is this so? One reason is the relative underdevelopment of the retail banking sector in China — those institutions which create the purchasing power, allowing Chinese households to purchase all of their own manufactured goods.

[1150]

In Canada we know something about that. How many credit cards does the typical member of this Legislature hold in her purse or his wallet?

(3) Offering China a soft entrance for a much larger presence on the ground in North America. Our cousins to the south become nervous when they contemplate the economic juggernaut which China has become and the strategic implications. What better way to demonstrate one's good intentions than in the marketplace, with Chinese institutions operating from a Canadian base, wearing Canadian corporate clothes?

(4) We are cost competitive. The latest KPMG survey of the cost of doing business around the world shows that, all costs combined, Canada is an inexpensive place to offer financial services when compared with the United States, at 15 percent more costly; Germany, 17 percent higher; Australia, 18 percent more costly — and so it goes. Hence, when we ask a foreign bank to put down their roots here, it makes sense for them to do so.

Finally, we are already well launched toward the goal of achieving hub status. Bruce Flexman, president of Advantage B.C. International Business Centre, pointed out to me last week that Vancouver, ranked as a centre of international finance, had jumped from a position of 33 in the world in 2007 to 15 in 2013, as measured by respected international observers.

We now rank ahead of Montreal, Calgary, Munich and Dubai, for example, and are beginning to creep a bit closer to such bastions of international finance as London, New York and Toronto, all of whom have been slipping for various reasons. Congratulations, Bruce Flexman, on a job well done.

To sum up, all five of these factors mutually support a call for what generations of warriors have shouted: l'audace, toujours l'audace.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

G. Heyman: I would like to thank the member for Burnaby North for bringing forth this motion. As a number of my colleagues on this side of the House have already stated, of course we support, as British Columbians support, enhancing trade and diversifying our trading relationships around the world. It's important.

British Columbians also want to know, as we establish these trading relationships, what the agreements are, whether they advantage us in particular areas, whether they disadvantage us, whether they're going to translate into a reinforcement of our existing jobs or, hopefully, many new jobs.

In that regard, I'd like to note the comment of the member for Abbotsford-Mission. He spoke about speaking to students about whether they wish to be observers of a process or whether they wish to actually shape the process. I would note in this regard that this initiative, the initiative to which this motion refers, is within the
[ Page 2012 ]
purview of the federal government.

I would have liked to have seen in this motion greater clarity about the kinds of terms British Columbians would like to see in any of the trade agreements in Asia, to actually go further to protect our interests, ensure that we are advantaged, ensure that the deals are fair and reciprocal, and that British Columbians' economic lives are enhanced by any agreement that's made on our behalf.

I think most of us would agree that we as legislators should be in a position of doing more than standing on the sidelines and simply boosting a particular initiative without knowing the details or, at the very least, stating the kinds of details that would underpin our satisfaction with an agreement and our full support for an agreement.

I'd like to note in this regard that if we take a look at the current state of our trading relationships with Asia, if we look at our trade profile with South Korea, where the first deal is likely to be struck…. I should note that when this deal is struck, it will very likely form a template for any other free trade agreements that are struck in Asia on our behalf and on the behalf of other Canadians.

What is the profile of our top four exports to South Korea? They are, in fact, in 2013 essentially all raw resources. But if we look at what we import from Korea, it's motor vehicles, telephone sets, electronic integrated circuits, motor vehicle parts and structures.

[1155]

Similarly, if we look at mainland China, again, B.C. is exporting raw resources and we're importing automatic data-processing machines, telephones, motor vehicle parts, wheeled toys and seats.

Finally, with Japan, to whom we've been exporting raw logs for decades, for the better part of a century, again, our top exports are raw resources. We're importing motor vehicles, motor vehicle parts, self-propelled bulldozers, printing machinery, parts of helicopters, etc.

What I would say…. The lesson I would take from this is that we want to ensure that any trade agreement we strike is fair, that it's balanced, that it provides us reciprocal access to the markets that we are striking the deals with and that we look for ways to actually enhance value-added, the intensification of employment and jobs in new industries and existing industries in British Columbia. We can do that in a number of ways.

I referenced this morning, in an earlier private member's statement, that investment in the cultural sector provides five times as many jobs as We've seen growth of high-tech in B.C., but we lag the global average. We lag the Canadian average. If we strategically promote our technology and knowledge-based industries, we will be changing our export profile to Asia and we will be enhancing jobs in British Columbia.

Those are the kinds of details I would like to hear from the side opposite. Those are the kinds of details I'd like to hear in a motion. When we get these trade deals, I hope that our province and our government, working closely with the opposition, will enhance our manufacturing in B.C., will enhance our value-added and will enhance the jobs for British Columbians.

That concludes my remarks, and noting the hour, I move adjournment of the debate.

G. Heyman moved adjournment of debate.

Interjection.

Madame Speaker: There's a motion on the floor, hon. Member.

J. Yap: I would speak to the motion, Madame Speaker.

Madame Speaker: We are out of time, hon. Member.

Motion approved.

Hon. T. Lake 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 11:57 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 © 2014: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada