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, April 28, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 11, Number 1

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

MONDAY, APRIL 28, 2014

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

D. Eby: With us today in the chamber are a number of students and faculty from Camosun's English-as-a-second-language program: students Paul Yu Wei, Vivian Qiao Rui Lin, Cici Qi Huang, Mai Yufen Wu, Maria Lai, Jin Hong, Harman Lehal, Juan Camilo Badillo, Daniela Torres, Samah El Salkawy, Natalia Potokina, Shayli Robinson and Evgeny Popelnitskiy.

L. Krog: I'm delighted to join my friend from Vancouver–Point Grey in welcoming, as well, some of the staff. Mercifully, for their — how shall I say? — dignity, the list of names I have is somewhat more easily pronounceable. If I make any mistakes, they will forgive me.

I want to welcome staff members Ann Brix, Aleah Gustafson, Bev Horsman, Judith Hunt, Lynnea Jackson, Diana Kohl, Bruce McCormack, Sian Prytherch, Lisa Robertson, Tony Vernon and Bev Robson. Would the House please join me in welcoming them to the chamber.

[1005]

R. Austin: I'd like to join my colleague from Nanaimo and also introduce a few staff members visiting the House today. They are Robynne Mills, Amanda Frayling, Trish Hanigan, Mark Limacher, Patrick McGuire, Leigh Sunderland, Renee Layberry and Michael Glover. Will the House please join me in welcoming them.

G. Holman: I'd also like to join my colleagues in welcoming the Camosun students' Political Science Club here today visiting us: Wesley Boyd, Arielle Houghton, Barrie Nicholls, Josh Lindner, Megan Gould, Jane Coburn, Jacqueline Dupuis, Anda Shkodra, Rachel Sovka and Joel Toorenburgh. Would the House please make them welcome.

Tabling Documents

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present a report of the Representative for Children and Youth, On Their Own: Examining the Needs of B.C. Youth as They Leave Government Care; Ombudsman's report, public report No. 50, Striking a Balance: The Challenges of Using a Professional Reliance Model in Environmental Protection — British Columbia's Riparian Areas Regulation; the Office of the Registrar of Lobbyists for British Columbia, Investigation Report 14-02: Lobbyist: Muneesh Sharma, and Investigation Report 14-04: Lobbyist: Colin Griffith.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

WORKING TOWARDS LNG IN B.C.

M. Morris: Since launching our LNG strategy two years ago, the province has made tremendous progress. Today I'm confident our fundamentals are in place.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

We have put in place a competitive policy regime, including a new revenue framework which will formally come into law this fall. We've worked directly with industry to ensure they fully understand the LNG policy package. Together we've created a package which will enable industry to remain globally competitive while ensuring British Columbians receive a fair share of the proceeds.

Our efforts position us to retire our debt over time through the creation of the B.C. prosperity fund. As much as $100 billion in profits will flow into this fund over the next 30 years. Communities, First Nations and proponents are actively involved in discussions as we build the business relationships required to establish this new industry. Our First Nations Limited Partnership on the Pacific Trail pipeline is a good example of this.

We're also working with industry to ensure B.C.'s LNG facilities are the cleanest in the world so Asia is in a position to avoid using higher-greenhouse-gas-producing fuels such as coal. Amendments to our Clean Energy Act were done to ensure B.C. could host a viable LNG industry and have the means to power new facilities. Today over 100 concrete LNG proposals have come forward and are at various stages of development. Although it's too early to finalize, preliminary estimates indicate more than $30 billion will be spent during construction.

One needs to look no further than industry's action to find another concrete example of progress. Collectively, they have applied to the National Energy Board for a total of nine export licences. Seven applications have received approval so far. If just five LNG plants are built, the cumulative gross domestic product benefits to British Columbia is expected to add up to $1 trillion over 30 years.

Two recent LNG proposals have come forward as a result of the direct action by government — Aurora LNG and another proposal by Woodside Energy — signed agreements with us to pursue development on Crown land in the Grassy Point area. There are other LNG proposals that are further along in the development cycle,
[ Page 3138 ]
including Kitimat LNG. This proposal recently awarded a contract to JGC Fluor to lead all engineering, procurement and construction services.

In December, Pacific Northwest LNG's community office opened in Prince Rupert. This office has information about future employment and provides residents with details about the proposal. LNG Canada has a growing working team in the Lower Mainland and in Kitimat. Up to 70 contractors are studying the proposed sites right now, before engineering assessments are done. These proposals continue to hit new milestones, along with every other LNG project in B.C.

Our goal to see three LNG facilities built by 2020 is very much on track. Surpassing this goal is very possible. If five facilities are built, it would translate into over 100,000 jobs — 75,000 permanent skilled workers once LNG projects are fully operational. And 60,000 workers will be needed during construction

[1010]

On February 3, 2012, the government of B.C. released its LNG strategy alongside a plan for the province's natural gas sector. These sector strategies were built on the foundation of B.C.'s jobs plan, which outlined government's plan to strengthen the export potential of the province's natural resources with a commitment to have three facilities built in B.C. by 2020. The LNG strategy detailed British Columbia's commitment to LNG exports and outlined the principles that would guide the delivery of this new industry: remain competitive in the global LNG industry, maintain leadership on climate change and clean energy, and keep energy rates affordable.

A one-year update was released on February 8, 2013, showcasing the progress made since the release of the LNG strategy. Highlights of the one-year strategy include details about new LNG projects, project plans by industry, government plans for a workforce strategy focusing on skills training, progress on power supply discussions with LNG proponents, and actions to keep electricity rates low to protect ratepayers and to ensure industry can be competitive so that B.C. cost structure remains attractive for industry.

B.C.'s first-ever international conference, "Fuelling the future: global opportunities for LNG in B.C.," was held at the Vancouver Convention Centre on February 25 and 26, 2013. The 2014 event will be called "Powering a strong economy: British Columbia's LNG in the global market." It will be larger than the 2013 conference and will incorporate high-profile speakers and include a trade show.

The B.C. Natural Gas Workforce Strategy and Action Plan was released on July 23, 2013, detailing the expected number of jobs in the natural gas sector, moving forward. British Columbia will need more than 75,000 permanent skilled workers once liquefied natural gas projects are fully operational in B.C. In addition, 60,000 workers will be needed during peak construction in 2016 and 2017. Four LNG proposals were announced during the 2013 calendar year.

R. Austin: Thanks to the member for Prince George–Mackenzie for bringing up this topic of LNG development. He started off his comments by saying that all the fundamentals are in place and he's very proud that his government has done that.

Unfortunately, the fundamentals are not in place, considering the amount of enthusiasm that the government has put into this LNG development. It was the government who set a date of last November for putting forward, at least into the public sphere, their ideas on what the tax regime should be. That didn't come about. Then they said that it would be in place by last year, December 31. That still didn't come about.

Then, of course, we came back to the House here in February, after 200 days of the House not sitting, and we kind of all assumed on this side of the House that now, with a spring session coming and a budget being discussed, finally we would see the fiscal framework being brought into the Legislature here to be debated and to be passed. But that, again, has not happened.

We now await until the fall, apparently, to see what the fiscal framework will be. I think it's fair to say that most of the companies — and I happen to represent Kitimat, a place that has seen huge development and huge amounts of dollars being spent by the proponents — were also expecting this to have been dealt with by now in order for them to move forward and make decisions, huge decisions. Certainly, this has not been done.

When you consider that the government has constantly been telling us that this is a very short window, that we've got to rush this thing through and we've got to get it done as quickly as possible, it seems very odd to me that they haven't been able to negotiate this and bring this into the Legislature. I would say, certainly at this point, the fundamentals are not in place.

It's also a little ironic to be discussing this topic just ten days after the government, I think, mishandled this file in a dramatic way. As we know, there was a First Nations LNG conference taking place in Fort Nelson just ten days ago. The day before that conference was due to have its main discussions, the government decided that they would pass an order-in-council exempting new sweet gas wells, which of course is 99 percent of all gas plants, from the EA process.

[1015]

Now, the member for Prince George–Mackenzie pointed out a good example of where First Nations are going to benefit from any potential LNG development. But for the government to then try and remove any kind of production facility from the environmental process does, I think, a great deal of damage and actually has hurt the relationship between the government of British Columbia and First Nations, who are critical in this discussion. After all, it is in unceded territory that most of
[ Page 3139 ]
these proponents are planning on doing their development. I think including First Nations and treating them with respect is of utmost importance.

I would also say this. While we are constantly talking about exporting our gas…. On this side of the House we certainly agree that it is important for us to find new export markets for our gas, because the United States and eastern Canada now are awash with their own gas. In eastern Canada they can get it much cheaper from the United States than we can from western Canada.

Of course, the United States has now found so much shale gas of its own it doesn't need to buy our own. So we understand the importance of our natural gas industry and in finding new export markets. But I would say that as we look forward to LNG development, we also think about ways in which we can use our own gas domestically by increasing our domestic consumption of gas.

Frankly, we only use about 4 to 5 percent of our gas, and yet we are constantly going to the gas stations to fill our trucks, our cars. We should be thinking about ways in which we can improve domestic consumption.

When I moved to Terrace 20 years ago, there were stations there that were selling natural gas. In fact, every taxi 20 years ago was using natural gas where I lived in the north. We somehow lost our way in that regard and went back to just using petroleum engines. We need to think about ways in which we can increase our domestic production so we don't have to simply rely on LNG development — although, of course, we are looking forward to some investment decisions being made after the government actually gets all of its fundamentals in place.

M. Morris: The member opposite makes some very valid points, but this province has been building the foundation for natural gas development now for quite some time. We've put a lot of effort into it. It has been our strategic priority now for a considerable time, and we've made some significant inroads into this.

The member opposite refers to 20 years ago when he first went to Terrace and the taxis and other vehicles were on LNG. LNG at that particular time — and I'm familiar with the use of it in government vehicles during that period of time — didn't prove to be efficient. It was cost-prohibitive to get involved in that fuel at that particular time. But times have changed.

We are reaching to new technologies today, not only in British Columbia but across the world with the use of LNG technology and fuel opportunities that we have. We have major proponents that are investing billions of dollars into this. They wouldn't be investing billions of dollars into this unless they were assured of some secure markets, not only overseas but right around the world.

We don't know what the downstream effects of LNG technology are going to be in British Columbia. It's going to spur all kinds of research and development into new methods and new ways to use LNG so that the entire province and, quite frankly, the entire world is going to benefit from LNG in lowering greenhouse gas emissions and providing a more efficient way of doing business and operating our industry right across Canada.

HIGH-QUALITY TRAINING FOR
BRITISH COLUMBIANS

D. Eby: We've had the opportunity to introduce a number of people in the gallery here today, people who have come from all over the world to B.C. to contribute their skills and their efforts to our province. These people came to Canada and to British Columbia because they believed in our strong education system, in our democratic system that would provide them with a fair chance to succeed, but we are letting them down.

The federal government has cut funding for English language training at B.C. colleges and universities. Decades of excellence and experience in English language training are under threat. The consequences for students — current and future — have been as overwhelming as this government's response has been underwhelming.

The note on Kwantlen Polytechnic University's website concerning English-as-a-second-language training — a school where the Minister of Advanced Education himself served on the board — tells the entire story. "If you are a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident…we are not accepting applications."

[1020]

That outcome is not unique to Kwantlen but is being implemented across the province, following this absurd decision.

What has our provincial government done in response? Have they flown to Ottawa with distinguished graduates of B.C. English language training to demand that funding be preserved? Have they held press conferences with students and teachers in B.C. to insist that Ottawa not abandon them? Has the Minister of Advanced Education even gone to a single rally of students and teachers trying to save their programs? I am sorry to say that the answer to all of these questions is no.

It's not as if this government doesn't have a position on this issue. If you'd like to know their true position, you need only ask the federal government. On December 12 the federal minister responsible for immigration said they were grateful for the support of the provincial government in cutting these very successful programs out of colleges and universities in B.C. "We've actually done it with the agreement of the provincial government. I've been working very closely with the member for Prince George–Valemount on this transition. She supports it. The Premier supports it. The government supports it."

The Premier supports it, and the government endorses it. Have you ever heard anything so bizarre? A government that purports to represent the interests of tens
[ Page 3140 ]
of thousands of British Columbians who are first- or second-generation immigrants to B.C. supports and endorses the elimination of free and low-cost English language training in B.C. colleges and universities.

I have brought to this House real stories of real students whose dreams have been or would be made real by the same programs whose end this government supports and endorses.

Armando, who's in his early 30s, served for eight years in the Philippines with the armed forces. He came to B.C. to make a better life.

"I finished the ESL program at Camosun, and I'm now in the plumbing department, and I'm doing well because of the ESL. They trained me how to speak, how to communicate, how to absorb the culture in this country. In a month I'll be done, and I'll do the job. I'll do the work that I like, and I'm happy. I can imagine installing the sewer, storm drainage, those sprinklers and water heaters for the comfort of people for this community, and I'm so happy and blessed to do that."

Sharon was brought here by her parents from China.

"I finished my English grade 12, but it wasn't good enough for the university and the college studies. If you cancel this program, I have nowhere to go. I cannot go back to my high school, I cannot go back to China, and I cannot take my program because my English is not good enough. So it's just like nowhere to go."

Natalia from the Ukraine:

"I have been living here for over five years. Maybe you know that right now in Ukraine it is not a good political situation. I have a degree in economics, and I worked as an economist — statistics in the government. I would like to continue to work with my professional skills, but I understand I need to improve my academic English.

"I have been living here over five years, but I couldn't study here because I didn't have permanent residence. I only had a working visa. Every day I was thinking about 'when can I come and take professional academic English classes?' Right now, starting since January, I took these classes, but I heard this bad news about the funding cut, and I feel so disappointed because this news cut my dream."

How can this government endorse a plan that throws away decades of teaching experience in this area, decades of success for new Canadians and the dreams of new British Columbians who rely on these programs? How can making high-quality English language training at B.C. universities and colleges available and affordable to new Canadians be a partisan issue? And if it's not a partisan issue, why is this government not working to defend these programs? I look forward to hearing how this government justifies its silence on this issue.

J. Martin: On behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack, I'm pleased to rise in response to the private member's statement regarding high-quality training for British Columbians. As a lifelong educator, this is a subject that I'm extremely passionate about. I've had the privilege over the last quarter century to have been teaching at the University of the Fraser Valley, at Douglas College and at the Vancouver Native Education Centre.

Simultaneously, I have a passion for the educational experience in this province. My entire education took place in British Columbia at Fraser Valley College, Simon Fraser University and Capilano College. There are few issues that are closer to my heart than this one.

[1025]

I guess the reality is that in a previous era it wasn't really necessary for a young person to seek out post-secondary education. There was a time when someone with grade 12, or maybe not even grade 12, could find work in one of the traditional industries — forestry, mining, the mills, fisheries and such — and a young person could make a very good living and start a family on that type of income. But we all know that has changed. We're not going to unring that bell at any point in time.

British Columbia has diversified its economy, and as a consequence, our economy is much more stable than in previous times. In fact, one of the main reasons why we emerged from the 2008 global meltdown economic storm better than most any other jurisdiction anywhere is that this government had taken the steps to diversify its economy. We recognize that the road to prosperity runs through this diversified economy, and that means high-quality education for British Columbians.

Young people realize this too. They know that a rewarding job requires skills and training that can only be acquired through quality post-secondary education. That is precisely the reason why this government is making significant investments in skills training to ensure that British Columbians are first in line for the jobs of tomorrow. We therefore require a post-secondary education system that is adaptable, that is nimble, that is flexible enough that we can align it with the needs of employers and the province's future.

For example, to speak to a couple of specifics, we are making investments of over $500 million annually for labour market and training programs. We provide $100 million annually to support skilled-trades and technical training through the Industry Training Authority, and we've done our part to keep education affordable by capping tuition increases at 2 percent over the last nine years. Consequently, right now B.C. has the fourth-lowest tuition rate.

Now, I know that for the opposition, this isn't enough; any increase is too much. "Maybe we shouldn't have any tuition whatsoever" seems to be the mantra, given the economic netherworld that the opposition resides in.

Let's not forget that it was an NDP government in the '90s that brought in the ill-advised and ill-fated tuition freeze of the 1990s. That failed policy had the brutal impact of starving post-secondary institutions of a much-needed resource of income and inflicted long-term damage that took years and years to recover from.

I was on the front line when that happened. I was teaching first- and second-year students when we didn't have the resources to deliver the quality of education that we were responsible for. When the NDP put that tuition freeze in place, there was no corresponding funding source to undo the damage caused by it. We went through, literally, a generation where we lacked the abil-
[ Page 3141 ]
ity to deliver what British Columbians expected.

It was a cheap political ploy. It was very crass. It ignored the economic realities of the day. It was contrary to what every single administrator in university and college management thought would be prudent. Instead of benefiting students, it deprived them of the opportunity to attend an institution with adequate resources to provide the high-quality education they're entitled to.

It was ill-conceived policies like that blanket tuition freeze that would have prevented strategic investments such as the recent opening of the Agriculture Centre of Excellence at the University of the Fraser Valley. I had the opportunity to tour this wonderful, magnificent facility with our Premier and my friend and colleague the right hon. member for Chilliwack-Hope. One could not be more impressed with the state-of-the-art facilities that will give our students the edge they need to succeed in the economy of tomorrow.

I highly recommend the members opposite attend this facility and see what happens when a government puts education and training first, ahead of cheap, crass politics — attend such a facility and see this magnificent structure.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Martin: This is a facility that never, ever would have been created…

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member.

J. Martin: …under an NDP government.

Deputy Speaker: It's nice that the members have all had two weeks off in their ridings, but for Monday morning I'd like both sides of the House to remember that we could tone down the partisan rhetoric and keep to the issues at hand. I think we've seen, in both the statement and the response, a departure from that, and I'd caution both sides of the House that as we continue, we keep it to the issues at hand and keep the partisan rhetoric to a minimum.

[1030]

D. Eby: It's clear that the member understands time limits about as well as he understands this issue. It's clear, based on the response, that the member and this government have no idea what is happening in this province. We've got a gallery full of people who are here to hear about English-as-a-second-language programming, and I didn't even hear the member use those words in his entire response. It's shocking.

To illustrate that these are real people with real issues and real concerns — it's not the 1990s today here in British Columbia — two more quotes in my final two minutes. Hossam from Egypt:

"I have my degree in mechanical engineering, a specialist in HVAC air-conditioning systems. I'm the father for three daughters and one son. I have a lot of experience from my ex-job, and I want to transfer it here to my community to belong.

"I found the first difficulty I faced was my language. Therefore, I decided to obtain the courses I need to improve my skills in language — the first step to be in the community. It's not just language, but also, they teach us how to behave in the new country and the culture for the Canadians."

And Linda from the Philippines:

"I've been in Canada for five years now. Right now I am doing elderly care, caring for an 86-year-old woman. I work 12 hours a day, 3½ days a week, and I'm studying English right now. My goal is to be an LPN. I'd really like to be an LPN so I can continue my work as a medical professional. Now that makes me worry because I have to still do three English levels before I can do that."

These new British Columbians came here bringing unique connections to trading partners the world over. They came with high levels of skill.

These students — the students with whom the Minister of Advanced Education in this province refuses to meet, the students whose programs' elimination this government supports and endorses — consistently say the same thing. They came here because of the opportunities available in education, because they believe that B.C. is a place that values education as a priority, as a major economic advantage.

I call on this government to prove them right, to show that this government cares about their opportunities and their promise, to take up their cause with Ottawa and to demand the continuation of these programs.

The end of these programs will prove to be a source of continuing embarrassment, a disincentive for talented immigrants interested in our province and, ultimately, a cost for everyone in our province that will be paid for generations to come.

AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION
IN THE FRASER VALLEY

L. Throness: On behalf of my constituents of Chilliwack-Hope, it gives me great pleasure to present the following private member's motion before the House, namely, that the government of B.C. pursue agricultural innovation in the Fraser Valley. It just gives me an opportunity to brag about my riding a little bit. I love to talk about my riding.

There are about 939 farms in the Chilliwack area. Half of them are dairy farms, including the largest dairy farm in Canada in my riding. Agriculture generates about $700 million in economic activity and about 4,000 jobs in the area. So it's a very important industry, and it's one that I want to talk about.

It's this government's plan to increase the revenue of the industry from $10 billion to $14 billion through to 2017. How do we do that? We do that by increasing innovation. Today innovation is the name of the game, not only in other industries but also in agriculture and in food processing, because we face competition on a
[ Page 3142 ]
global scale.

Successful enterprises are the ones that remain flexible and nimble, ready to adapt to changes in the marketplace, able to keep down input costs. One way they do this is through the more intensive use of technology. I want to give you some examples — very practical examples from my riding about some of these innovations.

Every year we have an agricultural tour in Chilliwack — I attended the latest one — where a group of people travels around the area. A group of us visited Sandel Foods, which produces fruit fillings for bakeries all across Canada. It's a big plant. It's automated. It's brand-new. It's state of the art. It employs 50 people. It's the kind of industry we want and need in Chilliwack.

We toured Country Golden Yolks, which is a farm, with 15,000 laying hens, that combines traditional ways with new ways. The hens are free-range hens. They're allowed to leave the barn and wander around the barnyard as they like. They're fed top-quality feed.

I thought it was interesting that there are a few thousand layers outside wandering around, but most of them were in the barn, as if they preferred it there.

It's all automated too, and it's a beauty to behold. The eggs come to the producer, sitting on a stool in a conveyor belt. It maximizes quality and food safety as well.

[1035]

Another egg producer in our riding that I visited had an even more complicated set of delicate machinery to sort and group and stack eggs, even to the point of rejecting any that aren't of the highest quality or are the wrong size, even without breaking an egg — I found it quite amazing to watch — and all attended by just one employee.

I recently visited a robotic milking parlour in my riding and was much impressed with its cleanliness and with the information it generates about every specific cow and the way it eases the lives of farmers, and cows too. The milking machines are self-guided, by lasers, onto the cow without any human intervention, so it helps to reduce labour.

Cows like it too, if you can believe that. Traditionally, cows are milked twice a day, but with an automatic milker, cows can direct themselves and come as often as they'd like to be milked. Cows will come up to six times a day to an automatic milker. Happier cows mean more milk. And because the machines replace mundane and dirty jobs that people don't like, we also have happier humans.

I also visited a large dairy farm that takes its waste from cattle — in other words, manure — and puts it in a very large drum that rotates. It rotates the material for several days. It puts it under heat, it removes the water from it, and what comes out is a soft fibre that doesn't smell at all. They use it for bedding for cows in their stalls so that the cows can lie on it. The cows like it more because it's not prickly like sawdust, which is what they usually use.

Then they recycle it after the bedding is done. It gets put into the drum again. It's just a very good system. It shows the height of innovation here in my riding.

I recently visited two local greenhouses and found there the latest in automation as well — automatic watering machines, LED lighting, introduction of carbon dioxide into the air of the greenhouse to help the plants grow more quickly, and machines that automatically pot thousands of plants. It's all about growing more product of higher quality more quickly and cheaply. That's what our producers have to do in order to meet global competition.

Most importantly, as my hon. colleague just talked about, on April 4 we had the official opening of the Agriculture Centre of Excellence on the campus of the University of the Fraser Valley, and what a great day that was. It's a first-rate facility made possible with a grant of $1 million from the province of B.C. The Premier was there. The Minister of Advanced Education was there. He was able to check off one of the most important items, in my view, on his mandate letter: the opening of that facility.

At the opening students shared what the centre will mean to them and to their careers. We appreciate that, because the average age of a B.C. farmer is 56 years old. We need to attract more youth into the industry, and this centre will be a hub of research that will attract young people, not only from all over Canada but perhaps from other countries as well. Our long-term desire is to have an educational facility that will rival the University of Guelph and Olds, Alberta. This is an important step in that direction.

Here's what student Terisha Mitchell said. "It's the possibility for us to be part of the mounting push for change in the world of agriculture, the push to provide Canadian farmers with the tools they need to thrive and compete in the global market."

Here's what Amir Maan, another student, said. "UFV is on its way to becoming the leading institution, where not only the agricultural department but every department in every faculty collaborates to support the industry that feeds us all." These young people are the future of the industry.

We saw a brand-new demonstration barn. We saw a research greenhouse which is intriguing. It's covered by polycarbonate sheeting, invented in Israel, that diffuses the light inside the greenhouse. There are no shadows. The light is equally distributed throughout. It's the tallest greenhouse in North America at 11.5 metres. They'll be able to grow at different levels hydroponically there. It's going to make food production cheaper, faster and of higher quality.

We're driving innovation in the Fraser Valley. I could go on and on. Our government is at the forefront of pursuing innovation in the Fraser Valley. I would look forward to hearing the ideas of the opposition that will help
[ Page 3143 ]
to drive innovation, help to make our farms cleaner and more productive and competitive in the Fraser Valley.

Deputy Speaker: For clarity to the House, I believe the member made a statement and not a motion, just so that we're all clear on where we're at.

N. Simons: It's my pleasure to stand and respond to the statement from the member for Chilliwack-Hope. If this were a motion and if the motion were to say, "We hereby support and encourage and congratulate the University of the Fraser Valley on their innovative new programs," I would support it wholeheartedly — as would all colleagues on both sides of the House, I am sure.

You know, when we hear about free-wandering hens and self-milking cows and greenhouses that are taller than any other greenhouse, how can you help but think that this is going to be better than Guelph? Absolutely. Now their football team has to be as good and all the rest.

[1040]

This is sort of interesting because this statement comes at a time when the whole discussion around the future of farming is before us all in this Legislature. At one time we have this big shiny new facility, and meanwhile in another part of the forest we have someone trying to dig away at the agricultural land we've protected so marvellously for 40 years.

You have a slightly somewhat suspect contradiction, shall I say, between what the member has said about the importance of farming and what maybe half of the Liberal caucus is saying about the need to destroy the protections we put in place 40 years ago. I'm not sure where we're going to find that common ground.

This is the same member, I should point out, that pointed out that maybe the farms in the north don't make as much money, so we don't want to really worry about them; we don't want to manage decline. That was the statement of this member: we shouldn't really consider the farm viability in the north as an important thing to preserve because, really, the farm-gate receipts mostly come from the south — without thinking about the fact that we have rangeland, we have grassland, we grow wheat, we grow grain, and we have a lot of important farming activities that take place in the north.

That has been dismissed by this government — not necessarily by that member today, but if you look at the Hansard transcripts, you'll see quite clearly that this government has been saying they're not interested in managing the economy of decline. They are referring to northern agriculture. Agriculture that is not taking place in the Okanagan, on Vancouver Island or on the south coast to this government is secondary. It's less important. It's not worth protecting. Meanwhile we have more than 50 percent of the good agricultural land in the north.

We can extol the virtues of a program that supports farmers, that gives them the most important new technologies, but if we lose the farmland, they're not going to have anywhere to do this.

I would suggest quite humbly that the statement made by the member previous is a little bit of a contradiction to the actions of his own government. That's what I think is a problem, because the people of this province are getting a mixed message. Maybe the cabinet is getting a mixed message as well. I don't want to go into that right now.

This is a government, by the way, that has for many, many years tried to weaken the protections that we put in place on agricultural land. At one point their service plan indicated the possibility of removing 1 percent of the agricultural land reserve every three years. We would lose agricultural land at a percentage that would be unsustainable for our future generations.

I am a great supporter of innovation in farming. I'm a great supporter of the farming community in Chilliwack and in the Fraser Valley in general. I think education in farming is necessary. We are a unique province. We grow more commodities than any other province. We have a potential for export that is unparalleled, being here on the west coast. But I don't think that this government is necessarily considering the importance of making sure that farmers on their land are served.

The educational component is important, but I think we need to recognize that if we don't have land for farmers, we don't really have much of a future. I'd say that my priority…. As well as promoting innovation and as well as promoting unique and new practices, setting the stage and providing good education to our up-and-coming people in the agricultural sector, we also have to redouble our efforts to ensure that the land we have protected for 40 years remains in protection, that the rules around removing it for other uses are strengthened.

Quite frankly, we've seen that even in the area that the member refers to — in the Okanagan and in the south coast and on the Island — we've lost 35,000 hectares of agricultural land already. We have a system that weighs the pros and cons, an independent provincial system that adjudicates requests, mostly from non-farmers, for the removal or for a use of land that isn't within the Agricultural Land Commission Act ability.

I think the minister would be…. It would be appropriate for the member…. He was referred to as "Right Honourable" earlier, and I just called him a minister. He's being demoted as we speak. Well, the member for Chilliwack-Hope could possibly talk about the need to protect farmland.

Deputy Speaker: Obviously, we're skating very close to other legislation before the House, which of course would not be appropriate this morning. I thank the member for skating very close to the line but not over it.

L. Throness: When I said that we are not interested in managing decline, that is true. Our government is not
[ Page 3144 ]
going to be satisfied until agriculture is on the incline, on the increase everywhere in this province. That accords with our policy. Our policy is to innovate in order to increase revenues from $10 billion to $14 billion by 2017, and we're going to do that.

[1045]

I would remind the member opposite that we have a new minister. That minister is open to suggestions and ideas, and he's consulting around the province about this piece of legislation that the member so inappropriately referred to in this House.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

L. Throness: I want, though, to move on to that, to talk about a couple of resources that my government supports that deal with innovation. One of them is something that I had the opportunity, as chief of staff to the federal Minister of Agriculture, to deal with, which is Growing Forward, which is a provincial-federal plan. Growing Forward 1 was from 2008 to 2013, and Growing Forward 2 was introduced by this government last year. It has an innovation component.

Let me just read from a paragraph here. "Innovation programs are designed to increase profitability by encouraging the agrifoods industry in B.C. to focus on the innovation continuum, from research and development and pilot programming through to the commercialization and adoption of new products, processes and practices."

There's a suite of programs under that designed to accelerate the pace of innovation in B.C.'s agrifood industry. There's a program guide. There's an application form. There are market development programs. There are competitiveness programs that are available. I would encourage my constituents, certainly, to call my office if they're interested in finding out more about these programs.

I also want to point out that we have a B.C. agrifoods innovation strategy. It's a 21-page document. It's a comprehensive strategy. It talks about how we're going to increase innovation in B.C. agriculture. It has different goals.

Goal No. 1 is to support the B.C. agrifood sector to become more competitive by focusing investment in plant, animal and food science and technology, energy and waste management, new product development and commercialization. A second goal is to ensure that the sector continues to improve and maintain its productive capacity to be sustainable by focusing investment in soil, water and air quality and climate change adaptation.

I just want to remind the House, the members opposite and also my constituents that we are at the forefront of pursuing innovation in the Fraser Valley in agriculture. We're going to continue to drive innovation as the government which supports agriculture in this province.

SUPPORT FOR INJURED WORKERS

S. Fraser: On this day of mourning it is important that we reflect on those workers killed in the workplace in this province and those injured while trying to bring home a paycheque. Last year 17,160 workers suffered serious injuries or died on the job. There were 128 work-related fatalities in this province. We need to make things better.

Back in 2008 this government provided $1 million to fund a new disability management excellence initiative to improve disability management and return-to-work programs in accordance with the international best practices standards. I'll give credit where credit is due; I applaud that decision.

The National Institute of Disability Management and Research, or NIDMAR, located here in B.C. — actually, in my constituency, in Port Alberni — developed a forensic audit tool to be used to assess the workplace to determine how to make it safer, how to ensure that those workers injured in the workplace were treated with respect and provided with the supports that they need to return to work as soon as possible, as opposed to being potentially marginalized in society and relegated to poverty.

NIDMAR developed a world-class disability management tool which has been adopted all over the country, all over the world, but not here in B.C.

The Conference Board of Canada, involving more than 11,000 organizations and 250,000 individuals across Canada, formally adopted NIDMAR's disability management assessment tool.

The International Social Security Association — the UN, if you will — in Geneva has adopted this audit tool and professional certification, made it a part of the UN best practices guidelines and return-to-work strategy and professional certification now being rolled out around the world.

The International Disability Management Standards Council has also fully embraced NIDMAR's great work in disability management and return-to-work strategy.

Workers compensation boards in other provinces, Ontario and Newfoundland, and other countries — Germany, Ireland, Scotland, Australia, Malaysia, Namibia; too many to mention here — have all been moving forward using the tools developed right here in British Columbia.

[1050]

But here is the kicker. Our workers compensation board, WorkSafe B.C., seems to have other priorities. Early in their mandate this government reconfigured and seemingly shifted the priorities of workers compensation in this province.

Rather than moving forward with the rest of the country, with the rest of the world, with strategies developed here in B.C. and paid for by B.C. taxpayers, we have actually seen in this province a reduction in safety
[ Page 3145 ]
regulations and enforcement and a massive reduction in benefits and pensions, relegating many permanently injured workers in B.C. to poverty, with all of the associated negative impacts of poverty like family breakups, like bankruptcies.

Half a billion dollars per year has been stripped from injured workers, and those savings, if you will, passed on to their employers, giving them the lowest premiums in 30 years, all paid for by B.C. workers injured in those same workplaces.

Workers in B.C. are not getting the benefits of disability management and back-to-work strategies developed here in B.C. Instead, they are too often being victimized by the very system that should be there to help. What does that look like — to be victimized by the system that's supposed to help?

Since the reconfiguring of the Workers Compensation Board in B.C. by this government, there has been a tenfold increase in risks of suicide, as injured workers learn of the inadequate supports and a complete lack of return-to-work opportunities and strategies in this province. Suicide rates for people with disabilities out of work are 40 times higher than the rest of the population. It's not hard to fathom: chronic pain, no job and then being relegated to the margins of society by the very system mandated to help.

B.C. is one of two provinces that has no legislated return-to-work strategies or requirements for employers. It is very frustrating for me that the original initiative of this government to develop a disability management excellence initiative has led to benefits to employees across the world, but WorkSafe B.C. has actually opposed adoption. Why are we not rolling this out in B.C., across the province, so that all employees and the economy can benefit?

The impacts and benefit are scientifically proven. Where we contributed to the world economy, with B.C. taxpayers investing $1 million, we are the jurisdiction not receiving the benefits that Canada and the rest of the world are embracing. The UN has created three best-practices guidelines: health and safety, health promotion and return to work.

As MLA for Alberni–Pacific Rim, I co-sponsored the creation of the Pacific Coast University for Workplace Health Sciences here in this Legislature. That university signed a formal agreement with ISSA at the UN, supporting the global rollout of the return-to-work guidelines; with the University of Dresden in Germany supporting the rollout of occupational health and safety; and with the University of Turin in Italy, supporting the rollout of health and promotion guidelines in the world.

Clearly, what we have done here in B.C. meets standards of best practices for the global community. They have adopted them. Why are we not using our own resource paid for by British Columbians? Why are workers in the rest of the country and the rest of the world benefiting while British Columbia workers are being denied rights and standards adopted by the global community?

On this Day of Mourning the tragic explosions at Babine and Lakeland remain fresh in our minds. There were two fatalities in each, and their loss is felt by all of us. There are more than 50 workers and their families facing hardship and challenges of injury from those explosions. It does not make it easier for those injured and their families and the families of those workers who lost their lives to be denied the highest standards of disability management or denied the benefits that should be a fundamental right to all workers.

I look forward to hearing the response from the government member and hope that we find some agreement on this important issue. I would remind all members of this place that both sides of the House supported the creation of the Pacific Coast University for Workplace Health Sciences, so it is possible to lay politics aside and make this province better for workers, safer for workers, fairer for workers.

[1055]

E. Foster: I thank the member for Alberni–Pacific Rim.

On this International Day of Mourning for workers who have lost their lives and been injured, we all share the member's concern, as members of this House and certainly as individuals, for safety in the workplace.

WorkSafe B.C. has comprehensive programs that have been developed over many years to assist workers to get back to work.

One of the comments that the member made was that the rates have gone down to employers. Rates go down to employers when the cost to the system is reduced. The cost to the system is reduced because of fewer injuries. It's fairly simple math.

Just a few numbers here. Overall, in B.C. the injury rate is the lowest it's been in 30 years, close to a historic low, down from 152,000 in 2002 to 144,000 in '12. Worker fatalities are down from 219 in '04 to 183. Well, 183 in 2012 is 183 too many. There's no question about that.

We work hard in the workplace. WorkSafe B.C. works at reducing injuries and reducing dangers in the workplace.

Between 2004 and '13 the number of orders written by WorkSafe B.C. prevention officers increased by 200 percent, from 21,620 in 2004 to 68,213. During the same period, the number of inspection reports written by WorkSafe B.C. prevention officers increased by 150 percent. The number of WorkSafe accidents decreased, and they decreased because the workplace is a safer place to work today.

WorkSafe B.C. offers a range of rehabilitation programs and services for injured workers, programs including activity-related soft tissue, amputee, multidisciplinary programs, community brain injury supports…. There are three pages. I'm not going to go through them all, but suf-
[ Page 3146 ]
fice to say that those programs are in place.

One of the things…. This is one of the ones that you don't stand up and brag about. I was in a serious situation a few years prior to coming here in 2005. I spent five days in ICU and two weeks in the hospital as a result of a workplace injury. That workplace injury was my fault. It wasn't anybody else's fault. If you take shortcuts in the business that I was in…. I was in the logging business. Shortcuts result in what happened to me.

WorkSafe B.C. were extremely supportive. They were there right from the start. As a matter of fact, I received my first benefit cheque the same day that I would have received my paycheque had I been still at work, so they were on top of it right away.

They worked with me all through the time that I was injured. I went to rehab, and the people at WorkSafe B.C. made a great effort to make sure that I got all of the services that were available and that I got back to work. I was back to work in three months. So my experience with WorkSafe B.C., my personal experience, was certainly very positive.

The big issue…. The member brought up Lakeland and Babine — terrible tragedies, absolutely terrible, as any serious injury or death in the workplace is. The government has put Mr. Dyble in charge of doing an investigation. That investigation and those reports will come out. They also appointed a longtime bureaucrat from the province to develop some plans so that we don't see this ever happening again.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

The big deal with this is to look after both the folks that were injured and the families of those who perished and, at the same time, make sure that we never, ever see this happen again.

The inspections are being done in the workplace continually. The mills that aren't getting up to standard as they should are being brought up to standard. So like I say, we will never see this happen in British Columbia or anywhere else again, hopefully. The information that these studies are presenting to us will be used in other jurisdictions so that we don't see a tragedy like this again.

S. Fraser: I appreciate the comments made by the member for Vernon-Monashee. I, too, have been hurt in the workplace and have been off work with broken ribs.

[1100]

I do not share his assessment of WorkSafe B.C. or workers compensation in this province, and it's not shared by the workers that face a tenfold increase in suicide risks because of dealing with that agency.

The fact is that the president and CEO of that organization was fired last week, 2½ months before he was due to retire. Obviously, things are not all well with WorkSafe B.C. WorkSafe B.C. could not even manage to do two investigations of the tragic explosions at both Babine and Lakeland without compromising those investigations so that no one was held accountable.

I don't know if the member is familiar, but workers compensation boards in this country — not just this province but this country — have been following what is called the Meredith principles for 100 years, and 1913 was when Justice Meredith came up with the Meredith principles. One of the first principles was to make sure that workers received the proper compensation and help and rehabilitation necessary to make their lives useful and productive and healthy for them. I would argue that….

The compromise was that workers would no longer have the ability to litigate to get that compensation, that it was a basic human right to have that level of compensation. But the integrity of that historic compromise, where workers gave up the right not to sue their employees for damages and losses in exchange for no-fault compensation benefits and rehabilitation to restore them to safe, productive employment, has been significantly eroded by legislation introduced in B.C. by this government 12 years ago — and the policies of the board that have implemented that legislation. In law, workers compensation is an entitlement system based on that historic compromise.

The role of WorkSafe B.C. seems to be to minimize any benefits to workers hurt in the workplace. That is contrary to the basic premises of Meredith. This province has steered a workers compensation system into a system that is in contravention, in my opinion, of the very principles of workers compensation boards adopted by this country.

There has been a concerted move in the last two decades to transform workers compensation into an insurance system. But Justice Tysoe, who conducted the 1965 Commission of Inquiry Workmen's Compensation Act articulated the foundation principle of entitlement. This is a right according to Justice Tysoe. This is not an insurance scheme. It's a right of workers. We need to know that, remember that and fix that in this province on this Day of Mourning.

Hon. T. Lake: I now call for private members' motions.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 16 without disturbing the priorities of the preceding motions on the order paper.

Leave granted.
[ Page 3147 ]

Private Members' Motions

MOTION 16 — SUCCESS OF
HIGH-TECH SECTOR IN B.C.

G. Kyllo: I'm pleased to rise in the assembly today and move the following:

[Be it resolved that this House recognizes the continued success of B.C.'s high-tech sector.]

British Columbia's high-tech sector is one of the largest contributors to the provincial economy, which holds incredible growth opportunity for the industry, technology investors and job seekers in our province. There are over 9,000 established high-tech businesses that employ over 84,000 British Columbians in contributing $23.2 billion per year for our provincial GDP, our third-largest economic contributor.

While the major high-tech players such as Sierra Wireless; Telus; and MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates employ thousands of employees in this sector across B.C., the vast majority of employment in this sector is in small to medium-sized businesses which have been founded and operated by entrepreneurs. They all started with an idea, and they made it happen.

I want to see more of these success stories happen right here in our province, and our government feels the same way. The Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services and all members of this government are working hard to support the technology industry by assisting them to attract and retain talent and encourage investment to help develop a strong tech sector.

[1105]

Through collaborating with industry partners, high-tech incubators, university and post-secondary partners, we are achieving our goal of having a thriving and prosperous high-tech sector. B.C. is benefiting from new tech business start-ups and an increasing number of tech businesses moving to B.C., thanks to our competitive tax regime, our educated and talented workforce, a healthy investment climate and strong government incentives and supports, including funding of innovation councils, investments, and training programs that are proving to benefit businesses in the high-tech industry.

Moving forward, it is important to take full advantage of the momentum and seize the opportunity for growth and prosperity that comes from having a diverse economy, with a balance between the natural resource sector and our knowledge-based economy. Our government is making this happen, starting with education.

In balanced budget 2014 we outlined $750 million in capital spending over the next three years at institutions such as Kwantlen Polytechnic University of new design, the Okanagan College trades renewal project, and $113 million for the Emily Carr University of Art and Design redevelopment. Graduates from these programs are sought after around the world because of the world-class education they receive here and because graduates are ready and able to work upon graduation.

British Columbia's competitive taxation regime and efficient government provide the perfect environment to encourage both domestic and foreign capital to invest in new start-ups and to commercialize new technologies that are developed right here in British Columbia. Keeping both talent and investment here in our province is why we are providing support for entrepreneurs and start-ups through initiatives such as the B.C. Innovation Council and the venture acceleration program.

With ten regional partnerships across B.C., the venture program facilitates and encourages the development of technology business through collaborative business-to-business networking events, consulting services and support services for entrepreneurs. Our government is taking these steps, among others, to make B.C. the destination for the tech sector in North America and globally.

Finally, one of the main reasons why I wholeheartedly support the high-tech sector is the jobs that will be created in this sector in B.C. The B.C. jobs plan is fundamental to help grow this sector by expanding the B.C. tax training credit to include co-ops and small tech firms, working with the B.C. Tech Industry Association to encourage federal adoption of the small-business venture tax program, working with the clean Energy sector to ensure significant renewable energy opportunities, working with post-secondary institutions to ensure that innovative ideas created on campus become successful commercial ventures, and working closely with the B.C. Innovation Council, among others.

We are incredibly fortunate in British Columbia. We have some of the most breathtaking natural landscapes found anywhere else in the world, vast natural resources in every corner of our province and an educated workforce that is ready and able to work in the high-tech sector. This is the envy of other provinces and countries.

I am looking forward to listening to the ideas of fellow members on this motion.

G. Heyman: It's a pleasure and an honour to stand up today to recognize B.C.'s high-tech sector.

Last week, along with the member for Surrey-Whalley, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizen Services, I had the opportunity to attend LifeSciences B.C.'s awards. Part of the award ceremony was featuring a number of B.C. students who entered the biotechnology competition. At the end of the evening, as we were filing out, I went over to look at some of the displays these students put up. I was looking at one in particular by a student named Lasya Vankayala that studied the effect of UVA rays on wound-healing dynamics.

Once I got past the title and started to look through what she'd actually done to do this study, I was impressed. She raced over, filled with pride about the work that she
[ Page 3148 ]
was doing as a young student with a bright future in the high-technology sector. After talking to her for a while, I said: "Are you attending Simon Fraser University?" Her answer to me was: "No, no. I'm in grade 10." I have to confess that I felt a little inadequate, thinking about what I was engaged in, in grade 10 as opposed to the tremendous inquisitive academic enterprise that this young student was engaged in.

That leads me to a question. Are we doing enough in B.C. to support our high-tech sector? There's a new report produced by B.C. Stats called the Profile of the British Columbia High Technology Sector: 2013 Edition. It says that B.C. imports substantially more high-technology goods than it exports, and as a result, we ran a trade deficit in these commodities in 2012.

[1110]

The trade gap narrowed slightly in 2012 as exports grew faster, but the deficit was still $3.9 billion, or nearly four times the total value of B.C.'s high-tech exports.

The report also described B.C.'s tech sector as relatively small and shows that B.C. was one of two provinces, along with Manitoba, that lost jobs in the tech sector from 2011 to 2012. In the same period of time Alberta grew by 7.7 percent and Ontario grew by 3.5 percent. B.C. lags behind, and we are proportionally smaller than Quebec, Alberta and Ontario. As well, we lag the global average.

The B.C. Technology Industry Association says that we're on a trend to reach 111,000 jobs by 2020. But if we devoted the resources for research and development, for marketing, for supporting through venture capital and in education, that could be 142,000 jobs, and we could double the percent of GDP from 8 to 16 percent. That, in fact — despite the tremendous gains in growth in this industry and how proud we are of it — would be a substantial improvement over B.C.'s record to date.

The Business Council of B.C. says that the B.C. tech sector warrants greater attention from policy-makers, that we suffer from too few anchor firms, large firms around which successful clusters can be built and which will draw in investment. We don't spend as much on research and development as Ontario. Our Innovation Council is vastly underfunded on a per-capita basis compared to other provinces.

We need more bright, talented B.C. youth in the tech sector. Yet we have 25 percent fewer undergrads than Ontario and Quebec, we produce only half the Canadian average of engineers, and we trail other provinces in science and technology degrees. We are way behind the entire developed world in producing PhDs, and we produce fewer patents in British Columbia. We need policies to address the skills and education deficiency. They are overdue. We don't have a grant system, and we have the highest level of student debt.

Do we support the successes to date of our growing high-tech sector? Are we committed to do much more so for the tech sector so it reaches it's full potential and catches up to the rest of Canada and the world? On this side of the House, are we prepared to support young people with access to the advanced education resources they need to ensure that our tech sector talent pool is full and that young people like Lasya have a bright future? The answers are yes, yes and yes.

M. Morris: I'm pleased to rise in the House today and speak in favour of the continued success of B.C.'s high-tech sector. The B.C. Innovation Council, BCIC, was established in October 2004 as a Crown agency to support new start-ups and entrepreneurs. It was created by merging the Innovation and Science Council of B.C., a Crown agency, and the Advanced Systems Institute of B.C., a non-profit foundation. For 2013-2014 BCIC's total operating budget, including government contributions, was just over $6 million.

The British Columbia Innovation Council has launched the B.C. Acceleration Network. This network of ten regional partners facilitates the ongoing development of regional innovation networks and delivers the B.C. venture acceleration program across the province. The program has a venture acceleration in every region of the province and, to date, has engaged 202 companies across this province.

This program has helped to add 523 new full-time jobs and has attracted $39.6 million in new investment to British Columbia. The venture acceleration program is available in all regions of B.C. through its program delivery partners, who are members of the B.C. Acceleration Network.

Regional partners in the B.C. Acceleration Network are led by a dedicated executive-in-residence, encouraging a disciplined approach to a growing technology company. The venture acceleration program is especially interested in supporting companies that are developing technologies aimed at target markets and target customers aligned with the province of British Columbia's key industry sectors.

[1115]

The program provides start-up entrepreneurs with focus, resources and guidance. The cost of participating in the venture acceleration program is $200 a month. This is excellent value, considering the market value of executive-level consulting fees for comparable services is in the range of $2,000 to $3,500 per month.

In the north-central region of B.C., where I live, I have noticed the impact that technology has had on the regional economy through the Innovation Central Society, ICS, an organization that serves the region with resources and professional help to help transform ideas into prosperous business ventures. ICS collaborates and partners with regional resources — including experts, professionals, leaders, entrepreneurs and community — to establish a network of experts and mentors that pro-
[ Page 3149 ]
vide support, guidance and tools to entrepreneurs.

They offer resources to entrepreneurs in the development of innovative ideas to accelerate commercialization and promote regional economic growth. They create an environment for the development, retention and promotion of innovative entrepreneurs.

Businesses who have partnered with ICS in my region include Business2Mobile Communications Inc., which specialized in dynamic data management for industrial clients in forestry, mining, oil and gas, environmental monitoring, vegetation management, municipal government, education training, and health and safety sectors.

CanMap is another company providing highly accurate and non-competitive mapping and lighter post-processing support for mapping firms and providers around the globe.

The Carbon Offset Aggregation Cooperative is an organization dedicated to improvement of operational efficiency and environmental quality. They are focused on three major areas: truck and heavy machinery efficiency, reforestation of B.C.'s naturally disturbed forest and quantification of organizations' greenhouse gas emissions.

As I've outlined, our technology sector can dramatically assist businesses across a wide array of sectors.

In closing, technology is vital to B.C.'s overall economic growth, as it supports innovation across all key sectors. It's also a critical job generator for some of our most educated, creative and skilled people. Our government's futuristic vision fuses strategy and practicality with creativity and innovation. By continuing to enhance the technology sector, we'll continue to improve quality of life and create a better future for British Columbia.

J. Shin: Mr. Speaker, it's good to be back.

Thank you to all the members for speaking on this motion, for this House to recognize the continued success of B.C.'s high-tech sector. Burnaby is home to many of the high-tech initiatives, from the film and TV industry to the telecommunications companies, so it is my pleasure to speak in support of this motion on their behalf today.

We know that the contribution of the high-tech sector to the economy of this province is paramount. The relative share of GDP of this industry in B.C. has been increasing for the past 30 years — three decades. In the last five years its growth actually outperformed that of our province, with doubling the rate of industrial aggregate GDP.

Even back in the 1980s the share of GDP of the high-tech industry was larger than agriculture, fishing, trapping, and food and beverage industries as well. The revenues continued to climb to, I think, $23 billion now, especially with the 4 percent surge recently in the service sector. In just 2012 alone, 250-some new businesses were added to the 9,000, the existing pool of high-tech companies in B.C.

It is quite interesting that a lot of these were founded, actually, by young people. That's encouraging. I had the pleasure of congratulating some of them, some fresh out of university and already making a splash in the industry.

The overall high-tech sector employs about 5 percent of B.C.'s workforce, which is more people than the mining, oil and gas and forestry sectors combined. High-tech wages rose 7.7 percent in 2012 to almost $6.3 billion. The average weekly earnings, they say, is $1,440, which is about 168 percent higher than the B.C. average, which is at $870 per week.

These are well-paying green jobs that the industry is sowing into our B.C. economy. I can go on, as it is certainly important that we recognize and celebrate the performance of our high-tech sector in B.C.

[1120]

It is tempting to take credit for their progress and pat ourselves on the back for an hour, but I'm sure the members will agree that our 60 minutes will be better spent on this topic by looking at not just some numbers but all the numbers and trends to see if we can identify the ways that we have come short at our end and consider the ways that we can do more to foster growth in this sector.

I would like to take this opportunity to bring to your attention some of the things that I've been hearing from the stakeholders in the industry. B.C. is tied with Alberta for third place in Canada for high-tech GDP. That may sound satisfactory, but when we see that Ontario generates $44 billion, Quebec $25 billion, and we are in third place with $14 billion, then that puts our rank in perspective. We are at least $30 billion behind where we could be.

This correlates to the fact that Ontario has three times as many high-tech companies as we do in B.C. and that it has been aggressively growing the film and TV industry while we sit with this industry making up less than about 10 percent of the high-tech sector, despite the inherent advantages that we have in B.C.

It's also worth noting that while the wages have increased, the employment numbers actually fell slightly. While our neighbour just south of the border, Washington State, ranks No. 1 in North America for having the largest share of high-tech employment, B.C. doesn't make the top 25 in North America just yet.

Another point to think about is that while it is great that our high-tech export has increased over the years — which is wonderful — and so has our revenue, we still import four times as much high-tech as we export. That's another thing to consider. It is evident that we still have a relatively small high-tech sector compared to other provincial and American jurisdictions, and our potential is far from being fully realized.

There are many things that we can do. Some of the things have been the government's priorities as well as the things that we endorse and support on this side of the House. The government can cultivate priority relationships with established major technology firms, invest in
[ Page 3150 ]
some new local initiatives and of course grow the domestic market so that we can have the kind of economic scale that we need in order to compete with U.S. jurisdictions like Washington with their nationwide market access, a lot more aggressive local usage as well as export.

We also need to make sound investments with proven returns, like supporting our film and TV industry even more with their post-production and credits. Of course, while two-thirds of our high-tech businesses are located in the Lower Mainland….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Thornthwaite:

"The high-tech sector is an unsung hero in the B.C. economy. It doesn't get the same big headlines as resource-based industries do, maybe because our story is a little harder to tell. We're not digging coal out of the ground or cutting down trees; we're developing millions of lines of code that create the software and the solutions that businesses need and consumers have come to rely on, and we spend tens of millions of dollars choosing to do it right here in B.C."

That's Andrew Reid from the B.C. Technology Industry Association.

B.C. is home to some of the most successful and innovative companies in the world. Our government has created an ideal environment for businesses by offering a competitive tax climate, a culture of innovation, and incentives for its investment and training. B.C. is a world leader in science and technology, with 50 research centres, over $2 billion invested and another $1 billion attracted for research and innovation since 2001, all spurred on by national and provincial tax credits.

In recent years B.C. has enjoyed an influx of technology investment and sector growth as home to HootSuite, Ballard Power Systems and MDA, and also with high-profile, international companies like Microsoft, Twitter and Disney setting up here in operations to mark a global centre of excellence for technology and innovation. B.C.'s high-technology sector continues to employ more people than mining, oil and gas, and forestry sectors combined.

I'd like to talk a little bit about digital media. This includes interactive design, digital entertainment and games, digital film animation and special effects, mobile content and applications, and e-learning. Our digital media companies produce video games, animation and visual effects, social media, interactive marketing and e-learning products with more than 85 interactive studios employing 5,000 professionals, 14,000 jobs at 900 companies and $1.2 billion in revenue.

[1125]

With the opening of Namco Bandai games studios in Vancouver in August of 2013, B.C. continues to see progress in the mobile and on-line gaming production. Our province offers competitive tax credits and access to a highly skilled workforce, and supports post-secondary digital media education — training tomorrow's creative talent right here in our own backyard.

The government of British Columbia provides significant assistance to Namco Bandai. The province's trade and investment office in Tokyo, investment and company attraction branch in Vancouver and major investments office hosting program were instrumental in attracting Namco Bandai. "I am confident that we will be able to achieve new and amazing feats in Canada, thanks to its great talent pool, leading-edge academic and research institutions and pro-business federal and provincial governments." That's the CEO, Mr. Nakatani.

Last month I attended the opening of Industrial Light and Magic. ILM, now owned by Disney, has taken over the 20,000-square-foot Pixar studio and plans to more than triple its artists' work here. Currently staffed with about 60 artists and 20 production and facility staff, the operation is set to increase to 200 artists by the summer.

The Ministry of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services supports the technology industry to move ahead. The ministry's role is to work with the B.C. Innovation Council to help foster collaboration between the tech industry, academia and other parts of government that will enable job growth.

Lastly, we have a very competitive tax climate, as well as incentives for digital media and film production. Targeted tax credits support our thriving creative industries with the DAVE — digital animation or visual tax credit — and the interactive digital media tax credit. In fact, in 2012 and '13 the B.C. government provided about $352 million in tax credits for film and television and $26 million for interactive digital media.

There are more than 25,000 British Columbians that either work directly or indirectly within this industry, and we want to do everything we can to protect their jobs and grow the sector. Our government maintains and will continue to provide strong support for the film, TV and digital industry in B.C.

D. Eby: This government says it's in support of high-technology jobs. But if so, their actions in relation to post-secondary education are both tragic and foolish, as they've cut higher education funding by $40 million over the next three years. It's tragic and foolish because immediately it will cost thousands of good jobs — many directly in support of technology, research and development — at a time of relatively high unemployment in this province, and it will decrease economic activity in this province by as much as $400 million.

In addition to hurting our technology, research and development capacity, these cuts won't save the taxpayers any money. Because these cuts will hurt the economy and people will be making less, tax revenues will actually drop by more than the $40 million the government is pretending to save.

Any cuts in government spending impact the economy because of something economists call the multiplier effect. If the government fires 1,000 workers, the laid-off workers spend less money in local businesses, so these lo-
[ Page 3151 ]
cal businesses lay off some more workers, those workers spend less money, and the effect multiplies many times. That's why smart governments look at things like stimulus spending to hire more employees during a recession, to stimulate the economy moving.

This kind of multiplier is roughly the same no matter what the workers are doing — planting flowers, building a skating rink, running a bucket brigade. But why would you invest stimulus money in a pointless exercise like that? Because if they're building new transit lines, for example, which enhances local business activity along the transit routes, or repairing salmon spawning grounds, you get a different kind of multiplier called a dynamic multiplier.

Universities have huge dynamic multipliers, thanks to the opportunities in technology. A study of UBC showed a ten times multiplier for government money invested in that school, but $40 million in cuts to post-secondary education in B.C. will destroy as much as ten times that amount of activity in our economy — ten times.

Why is the multiplier effect in universities and colleges in B.C. so large? The new jobs of the 21st century — the good, new-technology jobs that are opening up — are not like yesterday's jobs, which can easily be automated or moved offshore. The new tech jobs in clean energy, medical and pharmaceutical research, film and video production, software design, biotechnology, communications, on-line marketing, biomedical engineering, Internet design, web design, even working in a bank — more and more these jobs require a university or college degree. Increasingly, they're going to need a graduate degree.

[1130]

As a result, university and college graduates make much higher wages over the course of their lifetime, and it's easier for them to find work. When we educate ourselves and our children, making them more capable to take on these jobs of the present and future, total wages and total employment levels go up. That's one of the reasons universities and colleges have huge dynamic multipliers, but there's so much more.

Because new work in the 21st century is so knowledge-based, a healthy population of well-educated graduates attracts technology-related investment. New businesses move here and open their doors. This new technology investment doesn't just come from outside the province; new B.C. graduates start their own tech businesses and hire locally. The spillover effect keeps multiplying our initial government investment year after year.

R and D at our universities and colleges produce yet another multiplier effect. Think of the Internet. Does this government think it was invented by a Microsoft or a Google? It was invented and designed almost entirely with government investment, and about half of that research was done at publicly funded universities in the U.S. and Canada. Think of the size of the Internet in terms of our economy. Think of the size of the multipliers. But we don't need to think abstractly.

In my constituency we have a high-tech job-creating machine in the University of British Columbia, a school that is grappling with yet another round of cuts under this government as well as a core review and massive hikes in electrical rates that limit their ability to offer student programming and do research.

In 2010-11 UBC attracted more than half a billion dollars in research funding for over 8,000 separate projects. The school has created more than 150 spinoff companies from their research located in B.C., which themselves have raised more than $2 billion in capital; 100 of these technology firms are in areas directly related to health, creating 2,500 jobs in our own biotech cluster on the Broadway corridor, the seventh-largest such cluster in North America and growing rapidly.

Investments in universities are multiplied many times over by new industries, and these new technology industries are the emerging sources of new jobs in the new economy.

The government's cuts have already led to the abandoning of a planned engineering school at UNBC and a high-tech animation program at Capilano University. This government says it's in favour of high-tech jobs, but it clearly is not. If it were, it would not be cutting funding to B.C.'s universities and colleges, the very places that generate the high-technology jobs and employees of the future. This government's words, yet again, do not meet their actions.

L. Reimer: Today I rise in the House to recognize the continued success of B.C.'s tech sector. B.C.'s technology sector is one of the top contributors to the provincial economy and represents an extraordinary opportunity for industry, investors and job seekers. British Columbia is home to some of the most successful and innovative companies in the world, such as Industrial Light and Magic, Sony Pictures, Facebook and Amazon in the near future.

In my riding we have a successful business called the Current Corp. that has utilized state-of-the-art technology. They manufacture the Night Navigator series of day- and night-vision camera systems installed worldwide on superyachts, workboats, high-speed craft, Coast Guard ships, fast patrol vessels and research vessels. In addition, Night Navigators are deployed internationally for coastal surveillance, incorporating high-resolution thermal imaging, gated-image, intensified HD night vision, high-definition day cameras and laser-gated imaging. Current Corp. also provides the Canadian law enforcement market with a variety of night-vision and surveillance equipment.

These great companies and so many more are coming to and being created in B.C. because this government has created an ideal environment for businesses by offering a competitive tax climate, a culture of innovation
[ Page 3152 ]
and incentives for investment in training. B.C.'s technology sector improves the quality of life and provides enduring value to the people of British Columbia, which is why this government is not only focused on bringing new companies to our province but also on making sure that British Columbians are armed with the training they need to compete on the global scale.

Our government also actively encourages investment with few restrictions on foreign investors. Focused on creating the best business climate in North America, our policies lower costs for business. Targeted tax credits support our thriving creative industries. British Columbia is home to the fourth-largest film and production centre in North America and is a global hub for video game development.

Last, but certainly not least, I wanted to recognize an example of how this government is supporting women in technology. The B.C. Ministry of International Trade is partnering with the B.C. Innovation Council and the Canadian consulate in New York to offer B.C. women in technology the opportunity to access the lucrative New York City market via its Canadian technology accelerators program.

[1135]

This one-day Vancouver event will target women-led or -managed B.C. companies with a technology product that may include mobile apps, e-commerce for fashion retail, analytics, cloud computing, ad technology and gaming.

B.C.'s tech industry is very important to our economy, and we encourage more women to get involved in this sector. Events like this provide information and contacts that can help entrepreneurs grow their business in markets they may not otherwise have access to.

Women working in the tech sector will have the opportunity to meet with leaders from media and branding as well as venture capital contacts in the New York City market.

Technology is vital to B.C.'s overall economic growth in that it supports innovation across all key sectors, and I'm so proud to be part of a government that supports this crucial job generator for some of our most educated, creative and skilled citizens.

M. Mungall: Well, there's no doubt that in British Columbia there are many successes in the technology sector. I only have to go a few kilometres down the road outside of Nelson to see one of the successes, and that's Pacific Insight in my constituency. They're there designing and manufacturing technology used in the automotive industry, in the agricultural industry as well as in the marine industry all across North America.

Another example, a very popular example for all age groups, is HootSuite. We all know HootSuite, especially in this House. Many of us use HootSuite to manage our varied social media accounts. They have had international success as well.

I'm also reminded of Silicon Sisters, which is the first female-owned and -operated video game studio in Canada, and it's housed right in Gastown in Vancouver. A few years ago I heard about them. I read about them in the news. I was absolutely fascinated, especially as a geek myself who enjoys video gaming. I decided to visit them. There I spoke with Brenda Bailey Gershkovitch, who is the CEO of Silicon Sisters. They make some very fascinating games for women and girls, particularly games that help young women and girls develop their self-esteem and their self-confidence.

They're doing some very cutting-edge things with gaming and really taking the lead in British Columbia as women in an industry that isn't always very favourable to women, as they'll say themselves.

There's no doubt that technology does play a vital role in B.C.'s economy. I don't think there's anyone who would suggest otherwise. That sector has certainly shown that, with its growth in potential, it has a lot to offer British Columbia and our overall economy and GDP as a whole.

The thing is that when a government says they will support that growth and potential, they need to back those words up with action. In looking at the current budget for innovation and technology, what we see is that that budget has been flatlined. Now, we know that we need to invest in this sector. That means that we need to look at: what are our strategic investments? How much can we invest? Should we be investing more than we have in previous years, especially since British Columbia is lagging behind other provinces?

Right now in this year's budget we see a flat line. We also only see $2 million to increase high-speed internet access in rural and remote areas. Many of my constituents are on dial-up still, and they could certainly benefit from that type of investment. However, $2 million does not go far.

The previous speaker, the member for Vancouver–Point Grey, has also pointed out the importance of investing in post-secondary education. We don't have to look too far in that budget to see the tremendous amount of cuts over the years to post-secondary education and how that's impacting B.C.'s future economy.

As I said, B.C. is lagging behind other provinces when it comes to developing our high-tech industries and our high-tech sector. There is so much more that we can be doing than we already are.

[1140]

I look forward to this government making those investments, because it will benefit every British Columbian. It will benefit this province, it will benefit our overall economy, and it will provide jobs — good-paying jobs — to the people who live right here.

R. Lee: I'm very pleased this morning to rise in the
[ Page 3153 ]
House to support the motion moved by the member for Shuswap: be it resolved that this House recognizes the continued success of B.C.'s high-tech sector.

As we know, B.C. is actually a recognized leader for developing and also growing our innovative technology companies and is a destination for technology investment. In fact, B.C.'s technology sector improves the quality of life in B.C. and also across the world by our technology, innovation and export.

B.C. also is moving forward by our government to work, to maximize our momentum in the industry by providing some incentives that will support growth as well as supporting job creation. We are going to ensure that B.C.'s talent pool is meeting industry demands and also supporting our innovation across all sectors of our industries.

Technology is really vital. It's vital to B.C.'s overall economic growth and development. It supports innovation across the key sectors. It's also a crucial job generator for some of our most educated, creative and skilled people.

We have many top universities in B.C. We have many growing companies in the high-tech sector, and we are actually a hub of those research centres in some of the areas in North America. We have all those clusters, technology clusters. Sometimes you need the people to get together so that they can generate discussions and also provide opportunities together in the region so that it's convenient for them in the whole supply chain, that they can work together in close distance for their growth and development. Providing commercial opportunities as well is very important for them so that they can generate revenue in their industries.

As we know, we have about 9,000 established technology companies here in B.C. — 9,000. It's a very large number. Of course, the number of people employed is close to 90,000. I think this is a great sector for us to support. Just by the GDP number, we have been among the top provincial performers in terms of growth in the high-tech revenue over the last decade. Since 2002 high-tech revenues in B.C. have significantly outpaced overall Canadian high-tech revenue growth, so we are doing very well in terms of comparing to other provinces in Canada.

One key sector, I think, is export. We are exporting quite a bit of our high-tech products. For example, goods exported — just physical goods, not including software — were close to $1 billion in 2012, just two years ago. In that year the number actually jumped by 10.5 percent. Those are good exports. They can earn money, hard cash, for this province, industry.

We also have quite a few products that I think we are very proud of — for example, aerospace products, which represent another quarter of the B.C. high-technology commodity exports in 2012. That product actually is around one-quarter of a billion dollars worth of those aerospace products to international destinations in 2012. It's about a 33 percent increase in that year.

[1145]

I think those are the bright spots of our exports. For those products, the main market is the U.S. We are proud that our products actually are more advanced than some of the U.S. manufacturers', so they are using our products over there. In that year the growth was about 83 percent. I'm very proud to support our high-tech industry in B.C.

M. Farnworth: It's a pleasure to rise to speak to the motion today in support of the high-tech sector in British Columbia, and it's been interesting to listen to the comments from the government side about how pleased they are with the high-tech sector. I think that's great. I think that's really important, because the high-tech sector is an important contributor to the economy of British Columbia, both today and in the future, and has been for the last 20 years.

Somehow, in listening to the comments, it's almost like: "Wow, aren't we great? Look what we've done. It's all because of us." The reality is that that's simply not the case. The fact is that the success of the high-tech sector in British Columbia has been due to the people in the high-tech sector. It has also been due to judicious and crucial investments that governments of all political stripes have made in this province over the last two decades.

One of the key areas that I think is important…. Actually, before I get to it, I want to make a further observation. That is that the comments I've heard today, as positive as they are, sound very much like a stand-pat approach, the kind of thing where you would say: "Well, everything's good. We've got a thriving high-tech sector, and we really don't need to be doing too much more." That's why you're seeing a flatlining of investment in research, for example, why you're seeing cuts in post-secondary education — some of the foundations and the pillars upon which the high-tech sector in this province is built.

The reality is different. The reality is that if this province is to seize the opportunities that it has, and it has many, it has to start paying attention to the challenges that we face in this province. The high-tech sector is a major contributor to our GDP. It is a major employer. But one of the challenges we face in this province is where that sector is located. Too many parts of our province don't benefit the way that they should.

The high-tech sector primarily is located in the Lower Mainland, southern Vancouver Island and parts of the Okanagan. But we are a large province of many regions, and there's no reason, given the advances in technology over the last 20 years, why we should not be seeing much better growth in the north, in the interior and the Kootenays.

I'll give you an example. Earlier this year I was in Nelson, and I met with some local business people there. One of them was engaged in the tourism industry and was talking about how they had built their business
[ Page 3154 ]
over the last few decades — a family-run business. They wanted to go that next step. The challenge was the broadband capability wouldn't allow them to do that. That's a shame, because that's something that could be changed by investment. By making that investment, you allow another region in this province to share in the opportunity that the tech sector provides. Unfortunately, that's not taken place.

I met with a small tech company that was deciding whether or not to stay in the Kootenays or move to the Lower Mainland, again because of broadband capability, an issue that they identified as a challenge for them.

We have to build on our own assets right here in this House in terms of the Ministry of Health, for example. British Columbia and Manitoba have the best health data records in all of North America. That's a tremendous opportunity in the biotech sector. We can generate the jobs and investment in that by government working with our universities far more closely than they have been doing in this area and meeting some of the challenges that need to be met in order for us to take advantage of the opportunity that the biotech sector and the life sciences sector have in this province.

I don't know how many members of this House realize just the wealth of data that we have. It is literally the envy of North America. It does not exist in the way that it does in this province south of the border in any of the 50 United States. Yet it is an opportunity that we have failed at this point to take full advantage of what it means. That's an area where government should be focusing on.

[1150]

Instead of standing up and saying: "Hey, isn't it great that we have all these firms…?" We've all got them. I have a firm in my riding that manufactures component parts that have been on the Hubble telescope — in downtown Port Coquitlam. It's on the Hubble telescope, peering into the farthest reaches of the universe. I think that's pretty special.

But to me, what's more important is to think of all the special things that we could be doing in the future. If we identify the challenges and the roadblocks from a public policy perspective, that would make things even better.

J. Yap: I'm honoured and privileged to take my place in the debate on this motion, which was put forward by the member for Shuswap. Just to refresh your memories, it is to recognize the continued success of B.C.'s high-tech sector. It has been a very interesting debate. I've listened carefully to the comments from both sides of the House, and I think there is certainly a recognition that this is an important sector and, to the motion, that we acknowledge the success of this sector.

Of course, perspectives are different from one side of the House to the other. We heard varying degrees from members on the opposition side: recognition that it's an important sector, that more needs to be done, should do more. That is a normal part of the exchange in this House.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

I do want to focus, if I may, on some of the comments of the member for Port Coquitlam, who I always enjoy listening to when he stands up to deliver some comments. As has been said by other members, it is important that we bring as much of British Columbia to the digital age…. The member knows that 93 percent of British Columbians enjoy high-speed Internet access. As it happens, just late last week there was a great announcement, which I'm sure the member for Port Coquitlam would have realized if he had checked this.

This announcement deals with a new investment of $2 million by our government for remote areas of British Columbia where wired or wireless broadband service is not currently available. They'll have more affordable access to the latest satellite Internet technology. Great news — additional investment, targeted investment to help rural communities that are right now not enjoying high-speed Internet access, which in today's world is so important, as we all know. Even with the challenging fiscal times that we're in, our government has found an opportunity, a way to make this investment happen.

We have a goal as government to ensure that within a few years, by 2021, every single British Columbian, wherever they may live in this province, will have high-speed Internet access, and we're working towards that goal. I just wanted to put that out there.

As has been said by other speakers to the motion, the high-tech sector is a very important sector of British Columbia's economy. Let's just recap quickly: 84,000 jobs for British Columbians, revenues of $23 billion a year in this sector. It's the second-fastest creator of new, well-paying jobs over the past decade. Many of B.C.'s companies are recognized as world leaders in their sectors, and some of the best brands that all of us know of are British Columbian companies. We've already heard some of the more famous names.

Before I get to some, I just wanted to touch on the importance of this sector, just to emphasize. The sector provides for well-paying jobs. Workers in the high-tech sector saw their average weekly earnings climb by almost 9 percent in 2012. That's tremendous.

[1155]

These are family-supporting, well-paying jobs that are in the tech sector, which consist of several different elements in the tech sector — whether it's in the health sector, the biomedical, whether it's clean tech, aerospace, digital, creative and software. All these are part of what we refer to as the high-tech sector.

My community, Richmond — all three Richmond ridings — is home to some of the most famous brands of B.C. high-tech companies. I'll just put on the record:
[ Page 3155 ]
MDA, MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates, which I know Madame Speaker is well familiar with; McKesson medical imaging, a leading-edge software company — 700 employees based in Richmond; Sage, a business management software company; Sierra Wireless, another example.

High-tech is a great sector, and this House affirms the success of high technology for British Columbia.

J. Yap moved adjournment of debate.

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 11:56 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