2014 Legislative Session: Third 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)

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 15, Number 2

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

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2014

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

[1005]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Point of Privilege
(Reservation of Right)

K. Corrigan: I wish to give notice of my intention to raise a question of privilege with respect to comments made by the Minister of Advanced Education on March 5 in this House. This is my first opportunity to give notice, and therefore, I wish to do that now.

Madame Speaker: So noted.

Orders of the Day

Hon. T. Stone: I call debate on the Speech from the Throne.

Throne Speech Debate

J. Sturdy: In accordance with parliamentary tradition, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Shuswap that:

[We, Her Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, in session assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for the gracious speech which Your Honour has addressed to us at the opening of the present session.]

[D. Horne in the chair.]

On behalf of my constituents in the unique, diverse and, I believe, exceptional riding of West Vancouver–Sea to Sky, it is indeed a privilege to be the first to rise in the House today and address the Speech from the Throne. In that speech, which officially opened the third session of the 40th parliament, the Lieutenant-Governor reminded us all that we can’t take our position in the world for granted — that despite being in an enviable place amongst the world’s economies, the continuing fragility of global markets means we cannot rest on our laurels.

The future prosperity of our province comes down to a single stark choice: to manage growth or endure decline. It should come as no surprise that this government’s choice is growth.

There are many steps being taken to position ourselves for our future growth: through a balanced budget and controlled public spending, by fostering new trade and investment ties with the economies of Asia and by developing the regulatory framework to supply liquefied natural gas to an energy-hungry world.

When the budget was introduced in February of this year we were one of only two jurisdictions in Canada to balance our books. Balanced budget 2014 reaffirmed our government’s commitment to control spending, to diversify and create jobs, to grow the economy and to increase our relationship with emerging economic interests.

It was a significant accomplishment — one that showed leadership and resolve — with a commitment to not living beyond our means. Spending more money than provided by taxpayers is not a sustainable way to manage an economy.

Our pledge to employ fiscal restraint while striving to grow the economy, coupled with a triple-A credit rating, means that we spend less on interest payments and servicing our debt, with the objective of increasing our ability to fund health care, education or, as we saw this past summer, in dealing with the issues such as fighting natural disasters such as forest fires.

One need only look to other economies to see the pitfalls of borrowing to pay the bills. The U.S. government spends more in interest each year than its Homeland Security Department spends to protect its American borders, and it now spends more money to service its debt than it does to educate its children.

[1010]

Choosing the responsible fiscal route is not an easy decision but ultimately is the right thing to do. Investors seek stability and economic certainty, and I believe this is exactly what our government’s balanced budget decision brings. But it is not simply an issue of controlling spending. Diversifying our economic portfolio with the objective of increasing commercial opportunities is and must be the focus of this government.

Not that long ago, the vast majority of our British Columbia products were destined for the U.S. market, which, for decades, was our largest trading partner. Ten years ago this government made a concerted effort to expand trade opportunities outside of the traditional market in a desire to attract international investment to B.C. and develop a demand for B.C. products overseas.

One of the industries we worked hard to expand into — new territories — was the forest sector. More than 58,000 families in British Columbia rely on this renewable industry for their livelihood, and as lumber exports to the U.S. slowed, we looked to the Asia-Pacific to maintain and grow markets. That focus has paid off, and in 2010 the annual sales of B.C. forest products to China exceeded sales to Japan, our traditional No. 2 customer after the United States.

Shortly thereafter, wood sales to China surpassed sales to the United States for the first time in our province’s history. Our total exports to China have grown by more than 600 percent in the last decade, and within Canada we are the province least dependent on trade with the United States. That accomplishment is a direct result of
[ Page 4520 ]
this government’s concentrated focus, working to generate growth, expand our markets and build mutually rewarding relationships with new customers worldwide.

Those efforts to expand trade and build relationships also mean some of the groundwork has been laid for the liquefied natural gas industry. As the economies of our Asian trading partners continue to grow, so too is their demand for energy and, at the same time, our opportunity to grow our B.C. economy by way of the energy sector.

The Asia-Pacific holds just 8 percent of proven global natural gas reserves, and yet it currently accounts for almost 20 percent of the world’s total natural gas consumption. The use of natural gas in many Asia-Pacific countries is growing fast, and they’re becoming more and more reliant on imports. Global LNG trade has already doubled in the last decade and is expected to rise by another 50 percent in the next short six years.

Much of that growth is expected to come from China, where new government policies to reduce greenhouse gas in particulate emissions are driving local demand for cleaner ways to sustain economic growth. China is already planning to replace large amounts of coal-generated electricity with natural gas and is even looking to natural gas–fuelled vehicles, an important step in the world’s largest auto market.

This is not just an opportunity to sell our resource into a major market. It’s also an opportunity to help the world’s largest and fastest-growing greenhouse gas emitter to reduce emissions. Clearly, this industry has the potential to pay enormous dividends for the future of British Columbia, and our government is committed to taking advantage of this opportunity.

This session will focus on laying the legislative framework that will make this industry possible. British Columbians are the owners of this important resource, and this framework will recognize that. We’re providing certainty for business and investment. We will also define how to develop this resource responsibly, protecting our environment while growing our economy and our opportunity.

There are now 18 proposed LNG export facilities in British Columbia, as well as three proposed facilities that will focus on providing fuel to the domestic transportation and heavy equipment market. More than $7 billion has already been spent by industry to acquire natural gas assets and support liquefied natural gas development, and an additional $2 billion has been spent preparing for construction of LNG infrastructure.

These expenditures demonstrate a strong commitment to B.C.’s natural gas future, and for many global energy companies it speaks to a faith in our product, our governance and our ability to meet their growing demand.

We are committed to making B.C.’s LNG facilities amongst the cleanest in the world. That means working to develop effective regulatory processes, ensuring that robust environmental assessments take place while engaging with First Nations to ensure that their concerns are addressed and to create LNG-related benefits for communities.

[1015]

Whether it’s forestry or LNG, our government understands that the key to unlocking our future economic growth is by working closely with First Nations and ensuring they are co-beneficiaries of economic development.

British Columbia was the first jurisdiction in Canada to commit to sharing revenue from the resource sector with First Nations, and I’m proud to say that we have followed through on that commitment.

In August of this year our government signed two clean energy agreements, with the Squamish and the Tsleil-Waututh Nations to share provincial revenue from the Culliton Creek run-of-river hydroelectric project. This 15-megawatt facility located between Squamish and Whistler along Highway 99 — in fact, you’ll be able to have a look at it on your way to Whistler — will produce 69 gigawatt hours of emission-free electricity, enough to power more than 6,000 homes. This is one of many such energy agreements that have been negotiated with First Nations all over B.C.

Certainly, in West Van Sea to Sky there’s a long history of government, First Nation and industry working together to supply both renewable energy to the grid and fibre to the wood market. In fact, in Whistler the community forest is comanaged with three partners: the resort municipality of Whistler, the Lil’wat and the Squamish Nations. Together they manage a sustainable 20,000 cubic metre annual allowable cut, while considering other values such as urban, wildfire, fuel management, cultural sites, biodiversity as well as recreation and tourism. By no means is the Sea to Sky unique in this approach.

In July our government reached a forest revenue agreement with the Seabird Island band. This agreement ensures that a percentage of the revenue from forestry activity on the Seabird Island band’s traditional territory flows back to their community to support social and economic development.

These are just a few of the agreements we’ve been able to reach over the past few years, and they speak to our government’s intention to meaningfully engage with our First Peoples and partner with them to create jobs, increase investment and provide economic benefits for First Nations and for all British Columbians.

This is, in many ways, a defining moment for B.C. Circumstances and opportunities emerge and fade over time, be it at a personal, regional or national level. Right here right now we have a burgeoning LNG industry. We have the opportunity to grow this industry, to increase revenues, to maintain margins so that we can support the world-class services our growing population relies on. We’ve begun to build partnerships with First Nations, and this will help create jobs and grow our economy both within the resource sector and outside of it.
[ Page 4521 ]

I saw a pin the other day at the UBCM that said: “Without natural resources, we’d all be naked.” Well, that’s a bit of a scary thought, and while it may be true, it’s not the least of it.

Without our natural resource sector, British Columbia would be less. We would have fewer jobs in food services, fewer workers in finance and legal and real estate, fewer human resource people, fewer construction and health workers, fewer contractors, tech workers, truck drivers, administrators and educators. It is because of the resource sector that British Columbia is so much more.

The framework on which this opportunity is supported is our balanced budget, the strong backbone on which future growth relies — all this while living in the most amazing place on the planet, surrounded by an incredible natural world populated by some of the most creative, hard-working citizens anywhere.

It’s not a big leap to say that I’m very optimistic about British Columbia’s future, for the future of my children and their children. It’s an honour to be part of this government, a government which is planning for tomorrow within the constraints of today. It’s an honour to represent my constituents and all British Columbians here in this assembly of rich tradition, like those that have come here before us, on both sides of this House, who work with a will on behalf of every British Columbian, not just for today but also for tomorrow.

[1020]

In that vein, I’m pleased to be the first to speak in support of the Speech From the Throne. The first person to address the speech is traditionally called the mover, and I think it’s an apt name for all of us. It’s apt because every member of this assembly is working to move our province towards a brighter future. We may disagree on the best route to get there, but we all want the same thing: a safe, thriving and prosperous future for ourselves and for our children.

I’m proud to be here with you today to do this important work on behalf of all British Columbians, and I do look forward to a productive legislative session.

Points of Privilege
(Reservation of Right)

D. Routley: I wish to give notice of my intention to raise a question of privilege with respect to comments made by the Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens’ Services on May 5 in the House. This is my first opportunity to give notice, and I wish to do that now.

Deputy Speaker: So noted. Thank you, Member.

D. Donaldson: I wish to give notice of my intention to raise a question of privilege with respect to comments made by the Minister of Children and Family Development on March 24 in the House. This is my first opportunity to give notice, and I wish to do that now.

Deputy Speaker: So noted. Thank you, Member.

Debate Continued

G. Kyllo: It is my privilege and great honour to stand in the House today and second the Speech from the Throne for this special fall sitting of the Legislature, on behalf of the people of my constituency of Shuswap. I’d like to thank my colleague from West Vancouver–Sea to Sky for moving the debate on the throne speech this morning.

The throne speech delivered yesterday reaffirms our clear direction in building a stronger economy, a stronger society and a stronger British Columbia. First, let me begin by echoing the remarks delivered yesterday in our country — that our country and our province is in an enviable position in the world.

We are ranked as having one of the highest standards of living in the world. We enjoy personal freedoms and liberties allowing us to speak out on issues that matter to us, and we live in a free, democratic society, which elected all members of this chamber to represent our constituents here in this House and on their behalf. As British Columbians, we should never take these rights for granted. The men and women who have battled in both world wars and in missions since have fought for these freedoms and for our democracy.

We’ve accomplished so much in British Columbia, but as our world continues to change, we should strive to always be better. As a province, seizing on the opportunity to grow our economy, benefit our society and ensure that the next generation of British Columbians has a wealth of opportunity ahead of them, this is an exciting time in our province’s history.

British Columbia is at the turning point, and we must choose the path to economic growth and prosperity. This is why we must be ready to seize the opportunity to grow our economy. The choice before us today is the opportunity from the development of LNG in B.C. By seizing this opportunity, our government is saying yes to growth, yes to new jobs and employment, yes to economic spinoffs in communities in northern and southern B.C. — including the communities of Shuswap — saying yes to increasing our trade relationships with Asia and yes to a better future for the next generation of British Columbians.

We’ve come a long way in making LNG a reality, and now, in this special session, we are going to take the time to ensure we get it right. Our goal at the conclusion of this session is to have in place a comprehensive legislative framework balancing the needs of industry and investors but, most importantly, ensuring all British Columbians receive their fair share of benefits as this industry is developed.

We need to work together in this House to develop this balanced framework, maximizing the economic potential of LNG. The framework is already in place, and our government has been working on these initiatives since
[ Page 4522 ]
taking office: creating new markets by strengthening our trade relationships with potential buyers of LNG, the emerging economies of Asia; and implementing the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint, which is re-engineering our education and training system, from primary to post-secondary, ensuring students have all the skill sets and qualifications to take advantage of new opportunities in the LNG industry and other sectors.

[1025]

Finally, the B.C. jobs plan, our strategic framework helping to create new opportunities for British Columbians in B.C.’s eight key sectors, including a refocused approach implemented on our three-year anniversary. The strategic focus of our LNG plan is comprehensive and follows these initiatives to help build the LNG sector from the ground up.

First off, let me say that our Premier and the Minister of International Trade and for Multiculturalism have been working diligently to build on our strong relationship with emerging economies in Asia and in Europe. B.C. has always been a key gateway for North American and Asian trade. Port Metro Vancouver alone has grown to become the largest port in Canada, trading $184 billion of goods with more than 160 economies from around the world. These values will only continue to go higher as the international market demands more goods, products and materials from Canada.

Our northern ports in Prince Rupert and the Port of Kitimat have the competitive advantage of being closer to major Asian ports than other North American ports such as Los Angeles and San Francisco. In addition, all ports in B.C. have plans underway of expanding the capacity of their facilities as trade expands with Asia, particularly in northern B.C. ports, where most LNG proposals have been concentrated.

We’re meeting the growth in trade through Canada’s Pacific Gateway program by building new markets and building the necessary infrastructure to support increased trade, including upgraded highways, new rail links and increasing capacity at terminals with our partners.

Given the growth in trade, we should not assume that it will expand on its own. Foreign investors and leaders in foreign markets need to have assurance that the government of B.C. is taking the necessary steps to foster growth and development, have positive relationships with key Asian leaders and welcome foreign investment rather than hinder it.

Our Premier and the Minister of Advanced Education will soon embark on a trade mission to India. On the mission, delegates representing B.C. businesses and industry leaders will have the opportunity to meet face to face with key decision-makers in India.

Past trade missions have provided incredible outcomes for British Columbia. The 2011 trade mission to China and India resulted in over 60 business deals and partnership agreements exceeding $1.4 billion. The trade mission in 2012 to Japan, Korea and the Philippines resulted in 25 business deals and partnerships valued at over $500 million. Earlier this year our Premier and the Minister of Natural Gas Development embarked on the LNG trade mission, meeting with proponents, investors and political leaders.

By meeting face to face with key decision-makers and industry leaders in foreign markets, we’re building a stronger relationship and coming closer to realizing final decisions by LNG proponents as they move forward with their proposals in B.C.

However, many ask: why choose B.C? Well, the reasons are simple. In a world filled with economic uncertainty and turmoil, B.C. is seen as a choice destination thanks to our competitive tax rates, supportive business climate and our stable financial position, reaffirmed by our triple-A credit rating. These distinctive advantages are what make British Columbia a great place to invest and to increase trade going forward.

When we consider the environment, B.C. is a world leader in taking action on climate change and in responsible resource development. That is why we are committed to ensure that all LNG facilities that are proposed are the cleanest in the world, adhering to our strong environmental regulations, and do not harmfully impact the communities that they operate in.

The Kitimat airshed assessment conducted in October of last year reaffirmed that LNG projects and other industrial projects underway can be accommodated without significantly affecting the health or well-being of residents and the environment. Continuous monitoring of air quality and ensuring compliance with regulations is a top priority of our government when LNG proposals go ahead.

While we are securing the demand for B.C. LNG, now we need to talk about the supply side of the equation. We have a vast supply of natural gas, thanks to new and innovative techniques in the natural gas sector. However, it takes much more than just having a plentiful source of natural gas to create the opportunities in LNG that we’re discussing today.

We need to have the manpower ready, with the skills and training, to make it happen. For British Columbians to be first in line for the expected one million job openings by 2022, we need an education and training system to support students and learners today. That is why our government took proactive action to reform and re-engineer the education system, supporting students throughout their education and providing a seamless path right from school to the workforce.

[1030]

The B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint — a cross-ministry initiative — is our plan to shift funding and programs to data-driven, outcome-based education, where the dollars and programs are targeted to jobs and skills that are
[ Page 4523 ]
in demand. The plan will ensure that students can access seats in critical programs at some of the best post-secondary institutions throughout B.C., learning the skills needed right now and in the future for in-demand occupations.

The fact is that 78 percent of these occupations will require some form of post-secondary education, and 43 percent of these jobs will be in trades and technical occupations. The challenge for industry and companies, however, is finding skilled trades workers or new talent to build the infrastructure or supply our operations on the ground.

This is why B.C.’s blueprint is so critical to the success of training future workers in LNG and sectors supporting these developments. It’s focused on changing culture and attitudes. That includes getting more young people involved earlier in trades and in technical training.

To meet our province’s future demand for skilled workers, we need to maximize the potential of the young people about to enter the workforce, the current workers who need to upgrade skills and people in underserved communities who face unique challenges to employment. The government currently invests more than $7.5 billion each year in education and training in our province.

But re-engineering our system doesn’t mean spending more; it means targeting more of the substantial resources already available to meet labour market priorities. That’s why, starting this fiscal year, we’re targeting over $160 million to do just that. In four years we’ll reach nearly $400 million annually. Over the span of our ten-year plan, this represents about $3 billion being redirected towards training for high-demand programs to fill jobs in critical occupations.

Starting from the ground up, students in the primary and secondary school system will have a head start to hands-on learning so they’re better prepared for the workforce and for more advanced training opportunities when they graduate. We’re going to double the number of accelerated credit enrolment in industry training spaces, or the ACE IT program, to 5,000 over the next two years. This program will let high school students get ahead and take their first level of technical training in certain trades, which could qualify them for apprentice or industry training programs.

We’re also expanding dual-credit programs to offer students courses and programs that will help them move into post-secondary studies or the workplace faster and with skills that are in demand. The North Okanagan–Shuswap school district has an exceptional career services program helping students to succeed in these programs through the support of teachers and administrators.

B.C.’s blueprint recognizes that hands-on learning and work experiences are valuable in secondary school. Therefore, reforming grades 10 to 12 graduation requirements will help to allow personalized graduation programs. For students entering college, university or trades training, we’re matching training with jobs in demand and maximizing the spaces available to provide the programs they need to compete successfully in the workforce.

In my region students will have access to critical trades seats close to home. In the Okanagan College system, 203 seats have been added to increase access and reduce wait-lists for these programs to fulfil the needs of the LNG sector and associated trades. An investment of $928,000 by our government will create an additional 86 electrical foundation seats, 30 heavy-equipment operator foundation seats, 49 welder foundation seats, 20 heavy-duty equipment and mechanic seats and 18 steam/pipefitter seats.

At Thompson Rivers University 52 training spaces will be added from a $265,000 investment to support 52 seats in programs such as welding foundation, carpenter foundation and electrician foundation programs. With more than 1,400 additional spaces, we are opening up the door for students today wherever they decide to pursue their studies across the province. These key investments in critical trade seats, totalling $6.8 million, will ensure that these spaces will be available to students when they choose to enter programs and training that lead to high-demand jobs.

In addition to these investments, last week aboriginal learners from several First Nations communities in the Shuswap received $255,000 to help them get the skills and education in demand in their communities, as part of the B.C.’s blueprint at Okanagan College. Aboriginal learning and participation in B.C.’s growing economy are critical to the success of B.C.’s blueprint, and we need to ensure that all British Columbians have the opportunity to receive their share of the benefits of this growth.

[1035]

That is why these investments in education and skills training is absolutely critical and a centre point of the LNG in B.C. strategy.

By 2017-18, 25 percent of provincial operating grants to public post-secondary institutions, or $270 million, will be aligned to training that matches with high-demand occupations and jobs. Over the next three years we’ll invest $185 million in infrastructure and equipment to bring our training facilities up to date to support new trades-related projects across the province.

Finally, the B.C. blueprint calls for a stronger partnership with industry and labour to deliver training and apprenticeships to help boost the skills and certification of students and workers. We need to ensure that all British Columbians are working by creating the opportunities in key sectors across the province. As parliamentary secretary for the B.C. jobs plan, I am proud to work every day to see progress on our targets and that we create long-term, high-paying jobs for all British Columbians.

One week ago today we celebrated the three-year
[ Page 4524 ]
anniversary of the B.C. jobs plan. Today we have a renewed focus on strategic priorities to help our economy grow and create new jobs that will strengthen families and communities across B.C. Since the launch, British Columbia has added more than 50,000 jobs and continues to be a leader in Canada in the top four provinces in terms of lowest unemployment numbers.

Our provincial GDP is up, increasing by $7.2 billion since 2011, and economic growth increased by $3.9 billion last year alone. Exports are up as well, increasing to $33.4 billion or more — increasing almost by one-third since 2009 during the economic recession.

These are real results. However, it does not mean that our government will be idle. As in any dynamic organization, we need to re-evaluate our successes and focus our approach on new priorities to create even better outcomes going forward.

That is why the B.C. jobs plan has a new, refreshed approach and a new strategic focus on how to create jobs and attract new investment. We’ll do this by focusing on cross-sector areas of strategic priority, including small business, international trade, manufacturing and aboriginal peoples and First Nations. Together, these priorities will help to foster job creation and growth across the original eight sectors.

Examples of this cross-sector strategy include supporting small businesses through the LNG Buy B.C. program, connecting project proponents with small and large B.C.-based businesses in every corner of our province. My colleague from Peace River South has spent the better part of the spring, summer and now fall leading workshops and discussions across the province, educating business owners on the program with great success.

These proactive initiatives allow businesses to get the necessary information on how their businesses can participate in the upcoming opportunities in LNG directly and indirectly. Small businesses will get the support to grow their operations through opening up the vast opportunities in international trade and commerce.

In 2012, 6,897 B.C. businesses exported abroad. With support through our network of trade offices and measures to remove trade barriers, we are working to ensure that even more small businesses can take advantage of the advantages of global trade and commerce.

Aboriginal peoples and First Nations are a key part of our renewed cross-sector focus on the B.C. jobs plan. Aboriginal-owned businesses are found across our province, especially in regions where natural resources are abundant. Given this, there is an incredible opportunity and potential for these businesses to participate in our growing economy. By supporting communities and aboriginal businesses and ensuring aboriginal learners have access to programs as focused in the B.C. blueprint, we’ll increase First Nations participation in the economy and make certain they realize their fair share of the economic benefits from the LNG industry.

Finally, manufacturing and innovation of B.C. businesses is a critical strategic priority in our renewed focus. Manufacturing is present in all eight sectors of the B.C. jobs plan, contributing $13.8 billion to our economy last year and providing jobs for 163,500 British Columbians. And as LNG proposals become reality, this sector is only expected to grow.

[1040]

Manufacturing today accounts for approximately two-thirds of B.C.’s export shipments and for 30 percent of all business taxes going to government. These tax revenues help pay for social programs, health care, public education and operations provided by the B.C. government.

It is in our best interest to focus on expanding the manufacturing sector and creating new opportunities for the over 12,000 manufacturing companies that are operating in B.C. today. As parliamentary secretary, I had the fortune of touring the province over the last six months, visiting with manufacturers and listening to them on how our government can help them grow. I have learned a lot on the tour and was amazed to see how innovative and dynamic these businesses are in B.C.

They want to see our government continue to support initiatives to help their businesses succeed, allowing them to hire new employees and find new markets for their products — whether it be internationally or supplying components for LNG projects. To reaffirm, our government is committed to this sector by expanding export and trade for made-in-B.C. products, and supports them to be awarded contracts to the suppliers of the LNG projects.

It’s anticipated there will be almost 90,000 job openings in manufacturing by 2022 in a variety of sectors including technology, agrifoods, forestry and LNG. Of course, coming full circle, to fill these new jobs, skilled labour in the trades is required. Skilled tradespeople are the heart of any manufacturing operation. I know this firsthand with my past business experience.

Every stage of the process requires skilled labour and expertise from qualified individuals. B.C.’s blueprint will supply manufacturing businesses with the skilled labour they need to run their businesses as we grow our economy. Together our strategies for seizing the opportunities of LNG need to benefit British Columbians in all regions of our province.

I’m excited for these opportunities, and as the MLA for Shuswap, I am proud to stand with our government as we seize these opportunities for growth and economic progress. It should be noted that our focus on LNG does not mean we’re neglecting or ignoring other vital sectors or industries or our economy.

The potential of LNG will unlock an incredible amount of wealth to our children. Finally, jobs for current and new British Columbians will be achieved, moving forward with this opportunity.

Thank you very much, hon. Speaker. I’m looking forward to the debate on the throne speech today and to working
[ Page 4525 ]
with my colleagues on all sides of the House in the coming session.

N. Macdonald: Thank you for the opportunity. I think, like everyone here…. I had a wonderful summer. The weather was great. I can’t say I’m happy to be back here, but this is our job.

One of the members who spoke before talked about it being a special session. It’s not supposed to be special; it’s supposed to be regular. It’s scheduled. The fact that we haven’t had one in the last three years speaks to something other than it being special. It speaks to a government that, whenever possible, avoids accountability. We see that again and again, and we’ll see it the first day of this session. We’ll see that on full display, no doubt.

I’m almost into ten years as a legislator here. When I first ran, I said the same things that I’ve said all the way in each of the elections — that I would fight for the people that I represent. I would fight on their side, and they would never be confused as to whose side I was on. That’s my goal for this session — to make sure that there is no confusion as to where I stand on any of these issues and that I speak for the people of my area.

Let’s begin with the throne speech. That’s basically the government doing a “mail it in on Monday” throne speech. You look at that, and where is the quality in even the language in that throne speech? We’re supposed to draw lessons from World War I, and then it’s not connected to anything. So we’re left to wonder: what is it? We have to respect Belgian neutrality? What are we supposed to be doing? It didn’t even connect in any reasonable way.

Let’s look at the substance of it. Let’s look at what it said about LNG, which is going to be the main focus, apparently, for this session — presuming that legislation is actually ready, yeah? LNG — what are we told? We’re told that our golden LNG dream is being downgraded now to where it’s a chance. From all the rhetoric, now we’re down to it being a chance. Where’s the hopeful language that often, when Mr. Gordon Campbell was here, would fill the room with all sorts of fantastic things that were going to happen?

[1045]

What did this one have for us? “Well, if not LNG, then we’re done, people. It’s decline. You know, we’re done.”

I mean, that’s not the reality for people in my area. People are pretty optimistic, generally, about what’s going on. Do they believe — did they ever believe? — what the Premier said about LNG? I don’t think so.

I don’t think any of you over there believed it. It worked, eh? It worked for the election. But it’s sort of like Bre-X. You can sell the stock, and you can salt the findings, but when you have to go out and actually find the gold, it’s a bit more difficult. That’s the stage we’re at — where there has to be some substance to the rhetoric.

That’s where this Premier and this government fail consistently. You know what to say. But to actually pull it off — that’s something completely different. It’s failure, failure, failure. So here we go. Fairly sad, and we…. The accountability piece? Well, we’ll see.

You know, if I was the Premier, after that throne speech I’d probably leave town right away too, right? I’d hightail it out of here and leave it for you guys to stand up and try to argue that that was something substantive and real.

Let’s talk about the first piece, LNG. All right. The purpose of this session is to deal with the tax and royalty regime for liquefied natural gas. This is the one part of LNG development that is of critical importance and that the B.C. Liberals actually control, and it is a year late.

It’s a year late, so if this is a race to get into the overheated Asian market, then the government has taken Aesop’s tale about the tortoise and the hare a bit too literally. The lesson in The Tortoise and the Hare is not that the tortoise is faster or that it’s good to be slow to win the race. Likely it’s about hubris, right? It’s about hubris. But the Liberals seem to think that while talking the talk about having to get in there quickly, they can take as much time as they want — a year late on the one part that this government had to deliver on. A year late.

By the way, if we don’t see that bill drop this week, if that LNG bill is not dropped this week, that means it’s being rewritten right now. You had the meetings with the natural gas people. You got your erasers out, and you’re saying: “What did you say? What did you say? I’d better change it right now, because we’re in trouble here.” That’s a fact. If it doesn’t come in this week, this government is doing a rewrite.

A year late, and you still haven’t finished the bill. That’ll be the fact of it. So we’ll see. Maybe it’ll come in today, maybe tomorrow. But if it comes in after the break, this minister, this government, is rewriting it after they’ve been read the law by Malaysia. Malaysia is telling us, “This is what we need in it,” and our government is following that track and doing that work. We’ll see. Maybe it’ll be in, and maybe it’ll all work out properly.

Speaking of hubris, this is what the government promised. It’s interesting to go through it. I didn’t hear it in the throne speech this time, but we remember. It was a $100 billion prosperity fund. That was the promise. Oh, second, a trillion dollars in economic activity — 100,000 jobs. The first LNG plant up by 2015. That’s coming fairly soon. I’m sure that’ll happen. It’s one of 12 to 15 plans that are coming.

Do you remember the promises you guys made — 12 to 15 plants coming and get rid of the provincial debt? Good thing. It’s growing at record levels, so it’d be lovely to get rid of it, and get rid of sales tax too.

Now we’re told that that was less of a promise, that it was more aspirational. Now what does “aspirational” mean? What does “aspirational” mean in this context? Well, that’s a novel way of taking language that is non-parliamentary and making it parliamentary, I think. I’m now going to accuse people of being aspirational, and everyone here will know what we’re talking about.
[ Page 4526 ]

Hey, by the way, that was a great negotiating stance that the government took, eh? I mean, to all those doing business with B.C. on LNG: do that business knowing that those negotiating on our behalf, the government of British Columbia, are completely desperate.

[1050]

B.C. Liberals have hugely overpromised, and now they’re going to do anything to get a deal. That is a great negotiating stance for us to take against some of these energy giants. If we end up with a poor deal, it has a great deal to do with that overpromising. Like I say, we’ve waited a year for the tax and royalty structure, and there is, as I say, some speculation over whether it’s even ready as we speak.

You know, the Asian price structure as it was presented was never honest. It has changed very quickly. There was a period of time where there was a differential in prices. That has changed quickly. If you go back and look at Senate documents from the U.S. Senate in 2006, they describe in detail a pricing pattern in Asia and North America that is the complete reverse of what exists now. And what exists now is changing very, very quickly.

Anybody who looked at this seriously, presuming there was some work that was seriously done by the government before they made these promises, would know that the promises made were simply misleading. They were not an accurate description of what was likely to happen here in British Columbia. You look at the outrageous promises that have been made, and to describe them as aspirational…. I’ve joked about it, but I think it’s incredibly disrespectful to the people of B.C. to frame a reality that is unlikely to come, you know?

If I sound skeptical, the previous speaker, unbelievably, talked about our representative in China, who spends surprisingly little time in China — right? — who gave up his seat for the Premier to run in. That’s a weird thing to put into your speech. That’s something you probably don’t want to mention.

The second one was Gordon Wilson, to bring Gordon Wilson into this. If I sound skeptical, read Gordon Wilson’s blog. Read his blog before the government removed it. If I was skeptical, he said the same as I’m saying and more. Now, $150,000, that can get a lot of people to see religion on LNG. I guess it did for Gordon Wilson. But that’s a weird thing to bring up in a speech and to remind us about on this side. Anyway, presumably there’s an LNG bill coming, and at that time I’ll speak more about it.

I want to talk about a few local issues — well, one local issue, Jumbo environmental assessment office. Very often what government does here, it’s disillusioning to me and disappointing. But on the ground there are a tremendous number of people who take democracy seriously and are willing — for all sorts — just feeling like they’re citizens who have to do things, to go out and do good work.

I’m thinking here of people in the House you won’t know, but they have my full respect: Arnör and Meredith and Bob and Jim Galloway. Jim Galloway — he’s 80 years old, and he’s camped for, I think, 25 nights all together up in Jumbo Valley just watching what’s going on. I mean, there are no government people up there. Our government isn’t doing the job of watching what’s going on, but citizens take it on, and citizens try to do their best to make democracy here in British Columbia work.

Now, for ten years we’ve had nothing going on in the Jumbo Valley other than what people think should continue to be happening. There’s some hunting. There’s some trapping. There’s some hiking, some heli-skiing. There’s lots of great wilderness, wilderness that the Ktunaxa revere and that locals like as well. People don’t want a big real estate development up there. People want democratic decision-making on public lands. Now as the old environmental assessment certificate runs out, we descend into even greater farce.

What does what is happening in the Jumbo Valley have to say about the environmental assessment office’s work? I think what’s going on there is farcical. At a time when we need the public and other jurisdictions and investors to think that we have a real environmental assessment process that one can look upon with confidence, what you have going on in Jumbo and probably other places too, I would presume, is farcical.

[1055]

The environmental assessment office sets out conditions and doesn’t even attempt to enforce them. You’ve got a municipality with no people. I don’t know. That’s funny. It’s kind of farcical. You guys voted for it. What were you thinking?

You know, it’s all cronyism. At its essence, that so-called development is all cronyism. You’ve got control of 6,000 hectares of public land — hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars — given to what? The B.C. Liberal local president, the former B.C. Liberal local president, the B.C. Liberal former candidate, and so on and so on. Perhaps up to $1.25 million over the next five years handed to that municipality, and there’s no investor. It’s not as if there’s somebody with $1 billion ready to go here. There’s nobody.

Still you proceed with this. It would stop if there was any oversight, but each and every one of you on the government side supports that. Wow. Is that opportunity open for everyone? Does everyone get 6,000 hectares? Does everyone get $1½ million of public money to play with? It’s a select few that do, don’t they? What’s the criteria? You want to ask yourself: is that how you run a province? Are those the standards that you set and accept here in British Columbia?

Well, I guess that’s a good reason, another good reason, the Premier hit the road, eh? You don’t want to answer questions about that.

How about Mount Polley? That was mentioned in the throne speech: Mount Polley. Mining is incredibly important to my area. We do it well, I think, here in British
[ Page 4527 ]
Columbia, for the most part. But government has let us down at Mount Polley. It let workers down. It let the mining industry down. The B.C. Liberals are in charge of establishing the rules for building and operating tailing ponds.

That’s your job. The tailing pond failed, and 25 million litres of mine water went into the pristine Quesnel Lake. No matter what else happens, the fact is unassailable. The minister of mines is responsible, is supposed to prevent mine tailing failures, and he failed to do that. He failed.

Let’s talk about India. It seems to be an important place for the Premier to go. It has a 1,800-year-old dam that’s still working, still holds back water. Maybe the Premier can visit that when she leaves us. It’s a fact that if you build and maintain these structures properly, then they’re fairly dependable structures. They fail at times.

They failed here. Despite what the minister said, they failed. In 2004 at Pinchi Creek, just north of Fort St. James. In Sullivan — Kimberley, 1991. A different type of dam near Oliver just a couple years ago. So they can fail if government doesn’t do its job in making sure that they’re maintained or that they’re engineered properly when they’re built.

Since 2001 there have been 22 major tailing pond failures worldwide. They happen, really, as I said, when government oversight is sloppy. That’s when they happen. Now, after the incident we still had the MLA that represents the area saying: “Well, the job we’re doing here is world-class.”

World-class? Like, I don’t know how you can go to Mount Polley and see what happened and still have the gall to repeat what you’ve been told to say — that it’s world-class. “What we’re doing here is world-class.” It’s not. It’s a demonstrable failure. This didn’t happen in Bolivia or South Africa. It didn’t happen in Australia or Russia or Uzbekistan. It happened here in British Columbia.

The way that you make sure that these things don’t happen again is you take them seriously and you take responsibility — which includes, by the way, the minister resigning. That’s what you would properly do. That’s how a government shows that it takes it seriously. But we never do that.

You know, I was the critic with the mill explosions. We had two of them. There should never have been two. There should never have been two that were so similar. Was that first one taken seriously, the way that it needed to be?

Is this tailings pond failure being taken seriously, the way that it needs to be, or does politics trump everything with this government? I would say that it does. I would say that we do a tremendous disservice to the people of this province when that’s the case.

[1100]

There are tailing ponds that I saw last week with trailer parks beneath them. They are depending upon not only the company, but more importantly, they are depending on the government to make sure that that tailing pond is a tailing pond that has integrity. It is no one else’s job other than the Mines Minister to make sure that that is the case. They have all of the power to do it.

Is there a cover-up? Yeah. The B.C. Liberals cut oversight staffing. They cut inspections. They created a lax culture of enforcement. The staff doing mine inspections and compliance was cut by 30 percent by B.C. Liberal members. What did you think was happening? Were you warned repeatedly that there would be something like this? The number of inspections — half of what they were in 2001. Was that a mistake? Demonstrably, it was. It failed on the B.C. Liberal watch. It should never have.

It’s always the same playbook for the B.C. Liberals. When they’re caught, they use all the resources of government to mislead the public, to obfuscate. Mount Polley is not just like an avalanche, as the Minister of Mines said. That’s both dismissive and inaccurate.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

My political awakening was in southern Africa. I taught in Lesotho in ’85, ’86. It was a heady time if you were being immersed in politics. Across the border was South Africa in the midst of apartheid. That that all worked out with Mandela coming through and all that followed, it sort of gave you a sense of politics as an honourable profession with all that could be done if politics was done by individuals who took their job seriously.

Now, I don’t expect Mandelas. I don’t expect anything like that. But I expect core competence, and I expect that the right thing will be done. And on Mount Polley the right thing is not being done. It simply isn’t, and we deserve better.

As I said, I’m heading into my tenth year, and in every throne speech there are claims, and then the reality is so different. You can go through the list. The northwest transmission line, promised at $400 million; after the election, it’s — what? — $800 million. They say: “Well, things changed.” What changed? The rock that was there is the rock that’s still there. What changed to make it go 80, 90 percent over?

B.C. Place roof — first talked about at $75 million. It ends up at $514 million. Do you want to get to the bottom of that? Good luck. When I was critic, I was given a report. It was 21 pages. I think it was 21 pages. It didn’t matter. Every single page was blanked out on a report about whether we needed a new roof or not and what should be done. That’s the case. You talk to Bob Mackin. He does lots on this. He tries to get information. It’s blocked all the time. How does something go that far off track and it still leaks?

Sea to Sky — the first time I heard about it, it was $400 million; now it’s $795 million. The convention centre — $495 million. John Les said: “Not a nickel more.” Okay,
[ Page 4528 ]
well, that’s a lot of nickels to get to $883 million.

No business plan. Changing on the go. A political board without expertise, including, by the way, the member for Vancouver-Quilchena, one of your ministers. He was on that board. He was there because, as B.C. Liberal president, he became a deputy minister. That was all part of, of course, Gordon Campbell’s promise not to politicize the civil service, other than that. So there we go.

South Fraser highway. The first time it was mentioned here by Mr. Falcon — $700 million. It ends up $1.26 billion Port Mann Bridge — $600 million, up to $3.3 billion and on and on.

Now we have the LNG that is going to give us, guaranteed, 12 to 15 LNG plants — $100 billion prosperity fund. No sales tax. No debt. At the same time we’re going to get the big energy companies to be happy, find that sweet spot our LNG minister talks about. Yeah. Well, call me skeptical. Call me Gordon Wilson before the road to Damascus moment for him. But it just seems a bit unreasonable.

[1105]

And the LNG minister. You know, when I was the forestry critic, he talked about bioenergy. That was going to create more energy than Site C by 2010. Hmm. Okay. Well, I could check on that. We were going to double tourism by 2015. Okay. Well, let’s move on from that one. Hey, there was a promise made in 2005 — I like Barry Penner; this is one of his promises — about the B.C. Liberal clean energy plan. It would make us world leaders in new energy technologies. Yeah, there is some interesting, great stuff out there.

An Hon. Member: That’s awesome.

N. Macdonald: Yeah, that’s awesome. And 400,000 new jobs. That was the promise: 400,000 new jobs — well, that was a bit of a swing and a miss, that one — and maintain hydro rates. Okay. Have a look at your bill.

Of course, I go back to the five great goals. Here are some of my favourites. The best system for supports for persons with disabilities, special needs, children at risk and seniors. Right. Lead Canada in job creation. Hmm. Well, there we go.

Let’s talk about another thing that was talked about in the throne speech. Without LNG there’s no money, the throne speech tells us. We’re broke. You know, no LNG and we’re broke. Well, there’s money for government ads, there’s money for communication staff, there is money for jobs for the Premier’s friends, there’s money for raises for the Premier’s friends and there’s money for SLAPP suits if an opposition MLA points that out. There’s money when the Premier wants to spend it, right? There’s money for our B.C. Liberal cronies to run a municipality with no people.

I met a person that was on disability. They served in the Armed Forces, right? Like, everyone on disability, he would have to make it on $906 per month. So the federal pension means that the province, after clawback, gives him only $198.04, and that all goes to B.C. Hydro.

You look at what this individual who served the country has to deal with because he’s injured. He lives in Donald, which is outside of Golden. It has no store or gas station. It’s a cheap place to live but a complicated place. He pays $500 for rent. He pays $50 for gas. He’s got $60 for insurance for an old car; $50 because he’s got two dogs; $168, then, for hydro; $62 for groceries per month. He lives on $10,872 per year because he’s disabled, and this is a veteran.

Now, Athana gets tens of thousands a year raise on top of her quarter million, and there’s money for a SLAPP suit. It boggles the mind that we live in a province where that happens, but that’s what happens.

I met another person at the Golden seniors centre. I was helping out at the seniors lunch. This guy was volunteering, but his back is gone. When he can stand, he tries to get out and do some things, but he’s on disability. He gets $906 a month. He said, “You’ve got to say in the House that it’s not enough,” thinking that perhaps there would be somebody on the government side that would hear that and actually respond to it. I don’t know what to say to them. I don’t know what to say that…. “Okay, you elected me. I will speak on your behalf.” But presumably no government MLA ever hears a person coming in and saying it’s impossible to make do with the amount of money that somebody on disability gets.

Do none of you on that side ever have anybody that says that to you, and do you ever take it forward to the minister responsible? Because year after year nothing happens. Yet at the same time, whenever the Premier wants to spend money on things that are, frankly, ridiculous — that, you give assent to. Like I say, I don’t expect you to be Mandela, but I expect the bare minimum in terms of doing your job representing people.

I met a third person in Kimberley, a recent widow, despairing for what lays ahead — health concerns, poverty, no changes in support year after year, while costs go up. Everything’s going up — gas. A lot of these things fall to….

The list is so long, and yet the support for people that are truly desperate — nothing can be done. No politics in that, right? No politics in that. It’s one thing to travel to some foreign country to meet with the big shots there. But to actually go and meet people here in British Columbia who are suffering and need some help: “Hey, that’s something we don’t do.”

[1110]

My politics are pretty simple. I think that we should stand together. I think most British Columbians feel the same way. We chip in to educate our young, right? Do a good job. Give everyone a chance. Chip in to help those that are sick. Chip in to help those that are in need. I believe in that. Who doesn’t believe in that?
[ Page 4529 ]

How can it be so different on the ground? How can we not be doing better than we actually are? I mean, the truth of it is that this is a government that serves a privileged elite, and then there is the rest of British Columbians.

That’s, I think, all the B.C. Liberals had to say in the throne speech. “Hey, forget the rhetoric. We’re looking out for a privileged elite and a few of our cronies. For the rest of you, hang on tight.”

Despair. I could pick that part out of the throne speech — despair. You’re on your own. While that’s a bit of an overstatement, it’s not much of an overstatement. There is a tremendous amount of proof to that basic description of what’s going on.

I believe in dispersed power with a real public say on things. I can point to many examples of where the government clearly does not believe that, but I believe in that. I think that that’s what people deserve, and I actually think that a lot of people think: “Don’t we have that?” If you’ve been in here for ten years, you know we don’t. We should. There’s the capacity to do it here, but we don’t.

What about a government being forthright with information and realistic about its intent? Is that such a novel idea, that we wouldn’t have something like that? I mean, I believe in public education. I believe in public health care. I believe in public benefit and control of our public lands. I believe in public decision-making. We can do better. We can do so much better, and we need to do better.

Deputy Speaker: Member, are you the designated speaker?

N. Macdonald: No, but it’s still a green light.

Deputy Speaker: I know. I’m just asking. Carry on.

N. Macdonald: You’re eating into my time. I’ll wrap up, though. I think you’re giving me the hook, sir. I think that’s what we’re doing.

Our opportunities are vast, and our challenges are complex, but they’re not insurmountable by any measure.

What we need in B.C. is governance that is intelligent and honest, and we are missing the mark. No member in this House can rationalize their role in having us miss that mark. Each one of you has the opportunity to stand up and say that the right thing has to be done. That’s the challenge I have for the government members. This throne speech disappoints British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

N. Macdonald: Thank you for the opportunity.

D. Bing: It is an honour to return to this House. I speak in support of the Speech from the Throne.

First of all, I would like to again thank the people of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows for the privilege of representing them in the Legislative Assembly. I am very proud to represent this riding.

Nestled between the Coast Mountains to the north and the Fraser River to the south are two picturesque communities that are ideal places to raise families. Sports, outdoor activities, arts, theatre, music — there is something for everyone. Like so many, the people of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows have made British Columbia their home because it is a land of opportunity.

Our abundant resources and entrepreneurial spirit have made British Columbia known around the world as a reliable producer and exporter. For decades we have been supplying markets around the world with wood for construction and energy to drive industry and producing some of the most desirable food and wine products that make our province synonymous with good taste and quality.

In the energy sector, natural gas is by no means a new industry for British Columbia. Already we are the second-largest producer of natural gas in the country. We are responsible for 26 percent of Canada’s natural gas industry. Currently, 13,000 people are employed by the production of natural gas. In addition to being a major source of jobs in the province, LNG is also a major source of public revenue.

[1115]

Over the past decade, British Columbia collected $8.6 billion in LNG royalties. This is money the private sector pays to the government for harvesting natural gas. This revenue helps pay for the services that people cherish, like health care and education. With money derived from natural gas royalties, we are able to build hospitals and schools. We are able to invest in the province’s future and make it a more desirable place to do business. That is the commitment of this government: to build on our current success and expand opportunities for the province to grow.

The world needs energy, and British Columbia is well-positioned to provide it. Alone, our province sits on 400 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. That is sufficient to satisfy our own domestic use for generations to come and take advantage of expanding markets.

We have all heard the skeptics. They say that B.C. is behind the competition, that we have somehow missed the boat on LNG expansion. Well, I might remind the skeptics that between the years 2000 and 2010, demand for LNG doubled worldwide. I would also like to point out that global demand for LNG is expected to increase by another 50 percent by 2020. That’s just over five years away.

It is also worth noting that in just the past 12 months, B.C. produced 1.6 trillion cubic feet in natural gas. This is equivalent to 273 million barrels of oil. In other words, we have the capacity to replace the diminishing world oil supply with natural gas, which is the cleanest-burning fossil fuel of all.
[ Page 4530 ]

It is also reassuring that British Columbia is making a commitment to ensure that B.C.’s LNG production facilities are the cleanest in the world. It is our intention to promote a clean industry to help preserve the pristine environment that British Columbia is known for around the world.

We also want a fair industry. It is the intention of this government to proceed with the further development of the LNG industry in partnership with First Nations. First Nations want a better future. They want to be a part of our resource development in the regions in which they live. We are therefore committed to work with the private sector and First Nations to ensure that LNG-related benefits go to First Nations.

Overall, we want to make sure that British Columbians are first in line for all the jobs created by LNG development. That’s the reason why the hon. Minister for Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training has been working diligently on the blueprint for skills training. It is a ten-year strategy to realign our secondary and post-secondary systems to make sure that we are preparing people for tomorrow’s job market by giving them the opportunity to train for a career that’s close to home and equally rewarding.

All the focus of our LNG industry is concentrated on developing export markets. It is also about securing our own energy self-sufficiency. In a world of uncertainty, it is nice to know that British Columbia has its own secure source of energy. Of the 18 proposed export facilities in British Columbia, three intend to focus on the domestic market that provides fuel for the transportation and heavy equipment industries. This makes for a cleaner fuel for the environment and a more secure source of energy.

Just last month, B.C. Ferries announced that two of the largest vessels in the fleet, the Spirit-class, are going to be running on natural gas by 2018. This announcement comes in addition to plans to build three smaller vessels that will all run on LNG. Fuel is B.C. Ferries’ largest expense. Natural gas is 50 percent cheaper than green diesel. By gradually converting the fleet to run on natural gas, fare prices can be kept under control rather than ruled by volatile spikes in the cost of petroleum on world markets.

Think of it, hon. Speaker. By reducing our reliance on petroleum and converting to a cleaner-burning fuel, LNG will be the source of energy for everything from public transit buses to ships at sea.

As we lead the way in LNG transportation technology, we will encourage our customers overseas to have similar conversations. Once our customers see that they can realize a 50 percent savings in the cost of fuel by converting to LNG, we will generate an even greater demand for our product, and our customers overseas will also realize that British Columbia will become a reliable source of energy.

As a free and open society, we are not subject to political strife or global sanctions that other jurisdictions sometimes are, which can seriously interrupt the flow of a steady and reliable source of energy to a customer.

Thanks to five previous trade missions the Premier has led across Asia, people overseas know about British Columbia. They know British Columbia stands for clean technology. They know B.C. is reliable.

[1120]

Thanks to a sixth trade mission that gets started this week, they will know, more than ever, that we are open and ready to do business.

There is always some uncertainty moving forward with the development of any new industry, but it is the willingness to take a risk that pays off in the future. The momentum towards LNG development in British Columbia is unstoppable. To date approximately $7 billion has already been invested by industry to acquire natural gas assets to support LNG development. In addition, another $2 billion has been spent in the preparation of LNG infrastructure, so we are preparing the province for the LNG industry.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank my colleague the hon. member for Peace River South for travelling the province to promote the LNG Buy B.C. program. The hon. member is conducting a series of regional seminars to inform the business community in B.C. to connect with the LNG industry and create commercial opportunities right here at home. We want B.C. business to become suppliers and service providers to the LNG industry so that we can all enjoy the economic spinoffs. That is our plan for LNG.

Before I conclude, I would like to address a few special events that occurred in my constituency of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows.

In September the district of Maple Ridge celebrated its 140th birthday. The Premier, the cabinet and the entire caucus were in Maple Ridge on September 10 for its fall caucus meeting. When she was there, the Premier announced an early birthday present — namely, that as of September 12, its actual birth date, the district of Maple Ridge would be allowed to change its designation and become British Columbia’s 50th city, the city of Maple Ridge.

This announcement was the kickoff to an exciting weekend of events, which included re-enactments of speeches from early mayors of the community and two days of family-oriented events and partying.

I love to tell a story about an early mayor of Maple Ridge from the early 1800s, Hector Ferguson. Mr. Ferguson was from Victoria. He planned to move to the Lower Mainland, so he asked his barber where to settle. His barber told him: “Well, if you love the Bible, move to Abbotsford. If you love business, move to Ladner. But if you love to dance, move to Maple Ridge.”

There was a lot of dancing, and it was a pride-filled weekend for Maple Ridge. It really shows how the community has developed and prospered over the past 140 years. Maple Ridge is the sixth-oldest municipality in the province. It started when a group of 50 families met on John McIver’s farm in 1874 and decided to form a municipality. It is now a thriving, vibrant community of 80,000
[ Page 4531 ]
people, and the change from district to city status is a significant landmark in the community’s history.

As much as the people in Maple Ridge love to party, so do their next-door neighbours Pitt Meadows. Pitt Meadows celebrated its centennial this year, and it has been a year-long party, with special events such as a gala with guests wearing period clothes, an extra-special Canada Day celebration and a re-enactment of the community’s very first council meeting.

The Premier visited the community on June 6 to help plant a centennial tree and to honour the community’s 100 Citizens of the Century. On June 7 Lieutenant-Governor Judith Guichon was a special guest in Pitt Meadows to help celebrate Pitt Meadows Day, the community’s annual day of celebration, as part of the centennial celebration.

That being said, the Speech from the Throne is about building a better British Columbia for all of its citizens, controlling its spending, keeping taxes low, creating top credit ratings, attracting investment into our beautiful province. Hon. Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of the Speech from the Throne.

C. Trevena: I stand here to respond to the throne speech — an honour to be representing the North Island in the Legislature — but somewhat bemused. I think my colleagues on this side of the House are wondering about this very thin, this very flimsy, somewhat vacuous throne speech. I’m also bemused to be responding to yet another Speech from the Throne.

[1125]

The Speech from the Throne lays out a government’s agenda, what its priorities are for its coming session. That, in this Legislature, has been traditionally from February through to February, and we had a Speech from the Throne in February — February 11 to be precise. The Lieutenant-Governor came in and sat and read the government’s agenda. While I didn’t agree with it then, it was the government’s agenda, and I’m not really sure what’s happened in the last few months that we need to have another Speech from the Throne.

We had, after the last one in February, a spring session, with the budget — our estimates debate about the budget — and legislation introduced by both the government, as expected, and by private members from this side of the House. It was a busy few months — our session was from February to May — so busy that the government decided it didn’t have time to get through everything in that time allotted, by the end of the spring, the end of May.

Our calendar does allow for fall sittings like we’re having right now, but that fall sitting is part of the first session. So instead of managing the legislative calendar to allow us to continue the debates on the legislation that we addressed last session, the government did what it has time after time: it brought closure on bills and literally shut down debate.

It opened what we in this chamber call the third House; so we are working in three separate areas to debate the budget estimates. That spreads private members, the opposition, any Liberal members on that side of the House, any MLAs who want to properly represent their constituents and ask questions on the record of the government so thin that with three places where we are working, there can’t be any real analysis or any real debate. But that was the government’s priority because they wanted to get everything through.

A fixed session of the Legislature, us coming back in the fall, should have avoided that. It should have allowed us to continue the debate on the legislation, finish at the end of May, take it out for consultation through the summer, bring it back here to continue the debate and finalize the debate when we’ve heard from more people. That would have possibly prevented some of the anger that was built up about the legislation on the Agricultural Land Commission and the agricultural land reserve that was very heated here last session — if the government had properly managed the legislative calendar.

Mr. Speaker, that’s what a grown-up government would have done. Simply put, it is a grown-up approach. A real government that cares about what it wants to do for the people whom it is representing and whom it is leading — we heard yesterday about leadership — the people whom it is trying to lead. A grown-up government doesn’t essentially manipulate the parliamentary mechanisms to its own end to suppress debate, to suppress involvement or any engagement in our political process.

Last month we saw a national outcry when what could be described as a B.C. Liberal fellow traveller, a Conservative Member of Parliament, refused to answer questions of the opposition in the House of Commons. But we see that every day here in B.C. in this Legislature — a government that simply refuses to be accountable, mocks the process and undermines the very fabric of our parliamentary democracy.

It’s no wonder that people become cynical of the process, that they distrust politicians. It’s because their governments, whether it’s here in B.C. or in Ottawa, abuse the very roots of our democracy by abusing this place.

We come back to the Legislature, a chance for us as the representatives of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, ready to do our jobs, ask questions of the government and represent our constituents. But instead of taking her seat to be accountable to us, to answer questions directly and not toss rhetorical questions back at the opposition, a trick that we have seen develop over the last many years, the Premier decides that after four months of not being here, it’s time to go on a trade mission.

One of the parts of a parliamentary democracy is that the leader of the governing party is here to take questions and to answer questions — take questions and answer them — from the opposition — if not just members of the opposition, at least from the Leader of the Opposition.

[1130]

Instead, you’d have thought that in the four months we’ve not been here between May and October — four or five months — there could have been a time to do the trade mission that the Premier suddenly finds so important. She could make sure that she was here and being accountable in the Legislature.

I find the government has…. For many years since I’ve been here, as my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke — almost ten years…. I’ve seen the government effectively manipulate the system. We are here now with a fall sitting but a whole new throne speech. Well, whole…. It was 16 minutes of vacuous, empty, flimsy….

We’ve heard various comments about it. It was embarrassing, Mr. Speaker. This is supposed to be the government’s vision and what their agenda is going to be to take us through and to encourage people. But I think the real reason is that it’s to fill time. So the only thing that the government hinted at having legislation about was liquefied natural gas. We know that. We need to have the debate about the royalty regime. We need to make sure that people of B.C. are getting properly recompensed for the use of their resource.

The throne speech allows all of us on both sides of the House the opportunity to stand here and talk about issues raised in the speech, if there are any. It gives us in the opposition a chance to talk about liquefied natural gas, the government’s policy, and issues raised in our portfolios and concerns from our constituents.

The other side of the House does tend to read scripts provided by people in the back rooms, full of much focus-tested messaging so it hits the right buttons and doesn’t make the government look too foolish or too dangerous, as it really is. We on this side of the House are allowed to speak from our own speeches, from our heart, on issues that are important to us and important to our constituents and important to us in our critic areas.

While the government called us back to discuss the tax and royalty regimen around liquefied natural gas, it is important because we’ve got to make sure we get fair revenues for our province. We need to ensure that we do get a good price for our resources, that we as the people of British Columbia — not the companies — get the returns for the use of our resources.

Representing resource communities in the North Island, as I have been very proud to do over the last ten years, I’ve seen the decades of impact where communities have got poorer and poorer and companies get richer and eventually move out. They take the resource and extract whatever they need, and they leave the community poorer and sometimes with nothing.

Oftentimes we’ve just not been getting good return on our resources, and we’ve not been putting that money back into our communities, ensuring that our communities have the supports and have the fabric that they need.

The government clearly doesn’t think this really important debate is going to last the six weeks that we are here. We are scheduled for eight weeks, but we’re back in our constituencies for two of them. So while it closed debate and rushed through all the legislation in the spring, it decided that this was the most important thing, and we had to close off debate and make sure it got its legislation through by the end of May. It’s not really planning to do much else this session.

I guess the throne speech…. The reason we’ve got the throne speech is that it fills those empty hours when we need to keep this Legislature moving. It allows debate to continue. It will get us through to the end of November, and it saves having to have a real debate about real issues. If we’d carried on some of the legislation that the government brought in and had discussed some of the private members’ bills, we would have been having a debate about real issues. But we really don’t want that to happen in this provincial Legislature, obviously — do we, Mr. Speaker?

The government does try to manage things so it avoids debate wherever possible. It avoids accountability. We don’t see what we need to see in a healthy, grown-up democracy — an opportunity to share ideas, to properly debate policy and to discuss how we can make things work better for all the people of B.C.

My friend from Columbia River–Revelstoke talked about the cronyism. To get beyond that, what are we going to do as legislators? There are 85 of us here. What are we going to do to make things better for the people of B.C.? But it is just not really going to happen with a government that, I’ve got to say, does manipulate this institution. This institution, Mr. Speaker, as you well know, is a guarantor of our democratic freedoms. It’s a parliamentary democracy.

[1135]

I mean, we’ve spoken about a lot of throne speeches a lot of times. We’ve had regular throne speeches. I’ve talked many times about the importance of the democratic process and parliamentary democracy and the value of that as a guarantor of freedoms that we have come to expect in B.C.

Unless we actually stand up and defend it, all of us in this place, and respect it, it’s no wonder that people, as I say, become cynical. It’s no wonder that people think that what we do is not worthwhile. It’s no wonder the Premier thinks that this is a really good time to go off on a trade mission because people aren’t going to be watching anyway.

We’ve seen in this place the manipulation, whether it’s bringing in the throne speech just for the simple fact that it fills time — and there can be no other real reason that this throne speech is — or whether it is the discussions that are happening outside of this place at the moment on electoral boundaries.

Again, legislation brought in the spring. Again, legislation hurried through by this government, desperate to get its fix on the parliamentary system — protecting 17
[ Page 4533 ]
constituencies which it has described as really in need of protection, whether it is the, as described, very rural constituency of Kamloops–North Thompson and Kamloops–South Thompson, which really need to be protected.

There are discussions going on outside this place about that. But these are things that didn’t have to be rushed through and would have protected that perception of the system being fixed.

This is what the government is trying to do. It is trying to fix the system. Not only are they fixing it now in the Legislature; they want to fix it for the next election. People start to feel helpless. They start to think: “Well, what is the point?”

What I hear from people is that what they really want, what the focus should be for this government…. It’s one of the things that I hear because of my role as the spokesperson for Transportation and Infrastructure and B.C. Ferries. We are now a shadow cabinet here. What I do hear very clearly from when I’ve been travelling around is the need to improve infrastructure. Not just B.C. Ferries — B.C. Ferries I’m going to be coming to talk about in a moment — but highways and transit.

In the reorganization that we’ve had on this side of the House in the opposition, we now have a shadow cabinet. I have been talking to businesses and communities who have seen many, many years of neglect from this Liberal government for the very essence that they have, which is their infrastructure.

We have a government that talks about the economy, and it’s all about the economy, and: “Don’t you get it? It’s about the economy.” Well, they clearly don’t get it because they have not been investing in that infrastructure.

We’ve had the announcement in the last throne speech that we’re going to have a ten-year transportation plan. That was announced in the last throne speech. We’ve had a reannouncement today about that ten-year transportation plan. Again, it is a very superficial overview of what is really needed.

We’ve had for years discussions about four-laning the Trans-Canada, Highway 1, an integral route for the movement of people and goods across this province. And still it’s not happening. We’re getting another chance to discuss it, another chance to consult. Highway 3, an alternate route across this province — we need to be investing in that. We get another chance to discuss it here.

The government is so concerned about its photo ops and its glossy brochures and its spurious consultations that it forgets what it’s supposed to be doing, which is working on behalf of the people of this province, everywhere across this province.

I mentioned Highway 1. There is an area on Highway 1 where, again talking to colleagues who live along the route, they talk about how their communities get cut off there in the winter. There are severe accidents. The road is dangerous.

The government has known about this for many years. Instead of actually doing something about it, it issues a consultation paper from something that was mentioned way back in February. We’re just starting to get it.

[1140]

Really, I’d say it’s sad. It’s sad that they aren’t able to connect the dots. I mean, the minister is very eager about his portfolio. He likes his portfolio. He likes the projects. But the reality of what these projects are about is making sure our economies work and making sure our communities work.

We’ve got the second crossing of Okanagan Lake, a new bridge. It’s obviously going to be a big project. I find that very odd. We just had the Bennett Bridge open a few years ago. You’d have thought it would suffice 20-plus years. In fact, one of the previous Transportation Ministers, Mr. Falcon, had indicated that that was going to be it.

But I guess since the Premier…. One of three party leaders to lose their seat — one party leader won — in the last election, she scuttled into the Kelowna area constituency. I guess it really is payback time. So they’re going to get that bridge, and we’re going to get the replacement of the Massey Tunnel. These are all good digger projects, not recognized in the transportation plan that we’ve had put in front of us.

We’re going to get a replacement to the Massey Tunnel right in time for the provincial election, 2017. No business plan for that. Again, the economics of infrastructure and how it’s going to help our economy — there is a disconnect.

I may still be an innocent after ten years in this Legislature, almost ten years, but I would have thought that there would be more of a vision from the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure, not really putting the province together bridge by bridge.

There is also, of course, the new announcement of the bridge to Gabriola Island. There’s going to be a feasibility study on that. What cost is that going to be, going ahead? That’s in response to a petition of about 500 or 600 people.

Now, I’ve been keeping pretty close track on B.C. Ferries issues. It’s been at the forefront for many months across B.C. I’d say it’s across B.C., not just in ferry-dependent communities. There have been thousands of names going to the minister on petitions for a reduction in ferry fares. Since cuts in services came in last year — rather, earlier this year, announced last year — there have been thousands of names on petitions asking to please restore our service.

You’d have thought that a government and a minister who can be responsive to a petition with 500 to 600 names and just jump into action and call for a feasibility study on a bridge and make sure that those needs are going to be met would have been equally responsive to the thousands and thousands of people who said, “Fares are too high. You’re killing the economy. You’re cutting off our communities by closing routes” — but no, never
[ Page 4534 ]
mind the fact that this bridge goes against local planning, goes against the Islands Trust — “Let’s get on with it right away.”

If the minister had been really serious about this…. I think that if he had, again, connected the dots and put the realization that transportation and infrastructure are important for the economy, he would have looked at these other petitions with thousands of names, sat down with Mr. Corrigan, the president and CEO of B.C. Ferries, or Mr. Macatee, the Ferry Commissioner — Mr. Macatee, who actually recognized that fares are beyond tipping point and our communities are dying because people can’t afford to use the ferries — and said: “Okay, we’ve got to do something. We have got to fix the system.”

Instead, he’s talked about making the ferry system sustainable or responsive and throwing in various other — if you think, again — focus-group-tested buzzwords that really have no real meaning on the ground.

There is no recognition that the ferry system is part of our provincial infrastructure. In the new transportation plan it’s isolated. It’s: “Oh, we’ve done that consultation.” But you can’t take it out of the bigger picture. I think the minister forgets that Highway 16 is not just going from Edmonton to Prince Rupert. It goes all the way to Masset, and there happens to be a ferry — that now takes about seven hours; it used to take five hours, but they’ve slowed it down to save fuel — that connects that highway.

Highway 1 runs to Horseshoe Bay, and it picks up again on the Island. It comes down to here in Victoria. This is integral to our infrastructure. It’s not vessels just sort of sailing from island to island carrying sightseers who hope to catch a glimpse of a whale, and I think they’ve been quite lucky this season. The ferry system serves more than one million people, and it is inextricably linked to the economic well-being of our province — inextricably linked.

[1145]

I know that the minister dismissed, in a blistering four-page letter to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, the findings of a socioeconomic impact study on the cost of rising fares to the province. As the author of that report stated very clearly, the figure cited was $2.3 billion lost to provincial GDP. I’m going to repeat that, because it is a significant amount of money: $2.3 billion lost to our GDP and more than $600 million lost in tax revenue.

The author underlined that those are not his figures, as the minister has tried to portray it. They’re not his figures; they are the figures. Using an economic model, you put in all the information you have, and what comes from the calculations is $2.3 billion lost to the GDP and $600 million lost in tax revenue. It is incredible that this could be the case; it really is — that we’d just basically say: “Goodbye. It doesn’t really matter.”

I mean, you would have thought that a government that professes to be fine fiscal managers would have done that sort of study way back in 2002, at the start of the privatization, rather than just saying, “Oh, we’re going to do this hands-off model, and we’re going to have this very strange two-tiered board system. We’re going to have B.C. Ferries over here. I’m only going to dabble my fingers in when I need to, when I’m fixing schedules” — as was seen last year.

You’d have thought that the government would have said, before it set up this whole new model: “Is it cost-efficient? What is the impact going to be on the B.C. economy? What impact is it going to have on businesses in B.C.? What impact is it going to have on our economic well-being?” Nope. Nope.

Maybe before very severe cuts were made…. Some very severe cuts were announced last November and came into place this spring — cuts that I’ll talk about in a few minutes — which have isolated communities completely, communities where people live and work. They’re not there as tourists, but people live and work in these communities. They are the loggers and the fishers. These are the fish farm workers, the people who actually make our economy work, the resource industries. They are cut off because of these stringent cuts.

You’d have thought that before doing this, before taking apart the system, the ministry would have maybe done some economic analysis and said: “Okay, look. We want to make the ferries sustainable and responsive. What sort of impact is that going to have?” But no. When the evidence is put right in front of them, it’s a case of “attack the messenger.” It’s not what you’d hope from a minister of the Crown.

I’ve got to say I think it really is a reflection of a government that just shows no respect for anyone who disagrees with them and tries to manipulate the system with language that is there to really create a whitewash or a smokescreen or some sort of haze.

I used some of the time when we weren’t in the Legislature for travelling to other ferry-dependent communities. As the House knows, I actually live on an island off Vancouver Island. I live on Quadra Island, and I rely on the ferries myself. My neighbours obviously do, because they also live on an island. I could speak for many hours about what a mess the system is in. The schedules are a mess. The fares are unaffordable.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

I’d like to bring to the House some of the realities of the more isolated communities whose marine highway is being dismantled. The Heiltsuk live in Bella Bella. It’s a First Nations community. It’s a large First Nations community, and it relies on the ferry system for its supplies. But the new scheduling means that the ferry hardly ever stops there anymore. It used to stop on its way north, drop off supplies and stop on its way south. There would be a milk run that goes through the smaller communities.
[ Page 4535 ]
It would stop there.

[1150]

Now it stops approximately once a week, which means that perishable goods, building supplies and other things that are needed in that community don’t get through. That’s not good for a community that is part of British Columbia as a whole.

I use the analogy and have used it before…. Imagine if we cut off the road to Vanderhoof for six days a week because there weren’t enough vehicles using it, and nothing could get through. I think there would be an outcry. The people of Vanderhoof would be up in arms. It would not be allowed to happen. Yet for the people of Bella Bella, it’s allowed to happen.

The ferry service between Port Hardy and Prince Rupert has been cut to once a week and service to Haida Gwaii to twice a week. This is the winter schedule I’m talking about. But the winter schedule was introduced in September. This is a period when businesses — and I know the government recognizes business — are relying on the shoulder season. They’re relying on tourists to come though. They’re relying on people to travel to their communities.

What we’ve seen is a drop of about 60 percent in tourism because of the cuts in ferry systems. The reduction of the shoulder season, the loss of September and the loss of the early part of the season have had a severe impact.

In Haida Gwaii we’ve got cuts in sailings, down to two sailings a week. That’s fine if they are working, but you know, with storms, it might be down to one a week. I’m expecting that. We’ve already got milk costing $9 a jug. If a sailing is cancelled, that’s going to impact delivery of supplies.

People are worried about getting to medical appointments over on the Mainland. While there are doctors and hospitals on the islands, the specialists are obviously on the Mainland. Because of the change of schedules, even doing a 20-minute appointment often means people are away from home for a week. Just to get to a 20-minute appointment — to get out, to have the appointment — they don’t make it back for the turnaround ferry. They’re away from home for about a week.

A government that actually realized the geography of the province would ensure that the infrastructure was in place and was effective to assist individuals and communities and businesses. These places — Haida Gwaii, the north and central coasts — are not just about tourists. They’re about people who’ve lived and worked in these communities for years. Whether they’re First Nations or settlers, they’ve worked as loggers and fishermen, and their resources are what have made B.C. wealthy and strong.

I would hope that in this session, the minister recognizes the integral part of our infrastructure that B.C. Ferries is and our highways and bridges are. All deserve respect, as do all our communities. You can’t hive them off. It’s a bit like the manipulation of this Legislature, as the government has been doing — manipulating our communities. Playing one off against another is not healthy. It is not good for us as a people in B.C. It is not good for our economy if that’s the base measure.

We really do need to have a better government. To be quite frank, we need to have better government — be more collaborative, be more open, be more honest with people. We do deserve better, and we can do better.

We need to engage people with honesty and with integrity, with hopes and ideas. That’s what I’m going to be trying to do during this session when I’m working in my portfolio as the shadow for Transportation and when I’m working in my constituency.

What I’m very worried about is that with this throne speech, this approach of the government both to this place and to the province as a whole, people are getting cynical. They’re turning away. They say it’s not important.

Madame Speaker, I know that you care about this. I hope that the government cares, because we can’t let the cynics win.

C. Trevena moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. T. Stone 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 11:54 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Access to on-line versions of the official report of debates (Hansard),
webcasts of proceedings and podcasts of Question Period is available on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television.

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

Copyright © 2014: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada