2015 Legislative Session: Fourth 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)

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 19, Number 2

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

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2015

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

J. Horgan: Here on our first day of the 2015 spring session is a good day for those of us in Juan de Fuca. We have a couple of introductions to make today.

[1335]

Joining us in the gallery is the youngest school board trustee in the Sooke district, Ravi Parmar, who turned 20 on election day, with the second-highest number of votes in Sooke, by the way. Ravi is here to watch parliament in action, and I’m confident we’ll give him a good show.

With him as well is someone I think that the Lieutenant-Governor might have been thinking about when they were talking about a volunteer medal, my ten-year volunteer, Larry Fofonoff, who every Friday for the past ten years has come and helped me in my constituency office and helping the good people of Juan de Fuca. I want to thank Larry for that. I don’t know if I can get you a medal, Larry, but thanks for coming today.

Two other guests that had to drive through Juan de Fuca and brave the Malahat to get here come from Campbell River. One is Robin Geary, who was the constituency assistant for Rosemary Brown in the 1970s and worked for the NDP caucus in the late ’70s into the 1980s. She now is a free-form gardener in Campbell River. She works with the Stephen Lewis grandmothers foundation, and she is the mother of our executive director, Vanessa Geary. Would the House please make her very welcome.

Lastly, I’d like to introduce someone who is no stranger to this place — five times elected, once from the North Shore and four times from the North Island. He, of course, knows the Malahat and the community of Juan de Fuca very, very well. That is the former Attorney General, Colin Gabelmann, who joins us here today. Colin is one of the lucky people to have his picture by himself on the wall in this place. I know many Attorneys General on that side of the House also have their portraits there, but none as dashing as Colin. On his birthday I think we should all give him a big round of applause.

Happy birthday, Colin. Thank you for being such an outstanding Attorney General.

R. Lee: In the gallery today we have four visitors from the Baina Mining Corp.: Mr. Jun Ren Wang from China; Sam Peng, Frank Xu and Frank Man from Vancouver. Baina Mining is exploring the jade mining in British Columbia. As you know, jade produced in B.C. is known as B.C. jade, our provincial gemstone. Would the House please make them welcome.
[ Page 5658 ]

S. Robinson: I’d like to introduce to the members here in the House…. Ruth Nicholson has joined us from Coquitlam-Maillardville along with her friend Wendy Mazur. Ruth is a loyal friend and supporter who always shows up with a great big smile on her face. I think the House will appreciate it when I say that she’s one of those few people where I can actually look over Ruth’s head and get a sense of how everyone else feels when they talk to me. I’d like the House to please give Ruth and Wendy a warm welcome.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I’d ask the House to welcome Mr. Dan Little from Mill Bay, who serves as president of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of British Columbia and also as chair of the Chartered Professional Accountants of British Columbia. With him is Mr. Bob Strachan, who serves as board chair of CPA Canada. Would the House please welcome them.

L. Krog: I’d just like the House to welcome back one of my strong supporters and a strong supporter of this side of the House, a young woman who because of her straight-A average can afford to take some time off high school in Nanaimo and come and visit us in the House. Would we please welcome Avery Valerio.

Hon. S. Bond: I’m very pleased to introduce someone visiting in the gallery today, Mr. Gordon Macatee, who is the B.C. Ferry Commissioner. But my connection to him is in his role of providing oversight at Worksafe B.C. He was also the person who did the work to present a report to government and an action plan last July. That report was very well done, and I am very impressed with the dedication, attention to detail and professionalism that Mr. Macatee has demonstrated in this very critically important work. I know the House will want to welcome him here to the gallery today.

[1340]

V. Huntington: I’d like to introduce two people today: one, Jeanette Cormier, a faithful volunteer in my constituency office, visiting the precinct for the first time; and the other, one of my constituency assistants, Bernadette Kudzin. Will the House please make them welcome.

S. Hamilton: I’d like to introduce someone who doesn’t join me in Victoria very often because she has a life of her own back in the Lower Mainland: my lovely, long-suffering wife, Kristen, of 31 years. Her guide assistance dog, Gambit, is joining us today as well. Would the House please make them welcome.

G. Holman: I’m pleased to introduce members of my constituency here today: representatives of the Pender Ocean Defenders, or POD for short — that’s very clever — who are advocates for the protection of the Salish Sea, including protection against the risks associated with oil transportation. We have Leslie McBain, Monica Petrie and Lynn Wells here today. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

Also a member of POD is another member of my constituency visiting today, Ms. Mae Moore, an iconic Canadian singer and songwriter who’s likely very well known to this assembly. Would the House please make welcome all of our guests here today.

C. Trevena: I’d like to join the Leader of the Opposition in welcoming Robin Geary and Colin Gabelmann to the House. I owe a huge amount to them. Colin had been retired about ten years when I was first elected, and he was still sorely missed. While we may have differences in approach, I think we’re still striving for the same end. I’d ask the House once again to give them both a very warm welcome.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 9 — WORKERS COMPENSATION
AMENDMENT ACT, 2015

Hon. S. Bond presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2015.

Hon. S. Bond: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

I’m pleased to introduce amendments to the Workers Compensation Act. In light of the tragic mill explosions in Burns Lake and Prince George and the subsequent appointment of Gord Macatee to ensure that B.C. sawmills are safe and that we have a world-class inspection and investigation regime at WorkSafe B.C., this legislation aims to improve workplace health and safety by implementing the recommendations from Mr. Macatee’s report.

The bill will strengthen the tools that WorkSafe uses to achieve compliance with B.C.’s workplace safety laws and regulations. Specifically, the legislation will expand WorkSafe B.C.’s ability to stop work where unsafe conditions present a risk to workers. It will also expand the court’s authority to bar the worst offenders from continuing to operate in an industry.

As well, the legislation introduces two new enforcement tools: a compliance agreement for use in circumstances where employers agree to voluntarily comply with the safety requirements and a new administrative penalty for employers that can be issued on the spot, like a ticket.

The amendments will specify new time frames for employers to conduct an investigation when there is a significant workplace safety incident. The intent is to ensure that corrective action happens quickly to avoid similar incidents in the future.

Finally, this bill will create two new director positions to ensure occupational health and safety expertise is added to the WorkSafe B.C. board of directors.

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

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, two votes. First reading.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: Motion to refer to…. Second reading.

Bill 9, Workers Compensation Amendment Act, 2015, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

[1345]

BILL 2 — B.C. TRANSPORTATION
FINANCING AUTHORITY TRANSIT ASSETS
AND LIABILITIES ACT

Hon. T. Stone presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled B.C. Transportation Financing Authority Transit Assets and Liabilities Act.

Hon. T. Stone: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. T. Stone: Today I am pleased to introduce Bill 2, the B.C. Transportation Financing Authority Transit Assets and Liabilities Act. The legislation being tabled today is administrative in nature.

The province currently owns rapid transit assets in Metro Vancouver through a variety of entities: the Expo Line and the West Coast Express, which are held by B.C. Transit; the Millennium Line, which is held by Rapid Transit Project 2000 Ltd.; and the Evergreen line, which is held by B.C. Transportation Financing Authority.

The consolidation of these assets has been a longstanding issue. Consolidating ownership of Metro Vancouver rapid transit assets into the BCTFA has many benefits to the province. Introducing this legislation today will support greater control over managements of the assets, enable cost savings through efficiencies, simplify and
[ Page 5659 ]
streamline operations.

The legislation may appear technical, but the intent is straightforward: to transfer the ownership and control to the BCTFA of all assets and liabilities on an “as is” basis. That is, to move provincial transit assets held by B.C. Transit and RTP 2000 into the BCTFA seamlessly and without any changes in status.

The legislation will ensure that the BCTFA has all the currently available powers and authorities applicable to these assets and liabilities so that BCTFA is in a position to operate the assets as they have always been operated. The transfer of assets by statute has been done before, and it is efficient, transparent and certain.

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

Bill 2, B.C. Transportation Financing Authority Transit Assets and Liabilities Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

BILL 4 — CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL
ACCOUNTANTS ACT

Hon. A. Wilkinson presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Chartered Professional Accountants Act.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I move the bill be introduced and read for a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I’m pleased to introduce Bill 4, the Chartered Professional Accountants Act.

Most of us are familiar with the idea that in this province there are three different bodies that have traditionally been responsible for governing the accounting profession: that is chartered accountants, certified management accountants and certified general accountants.

This act creates a single professional organization to be entitled the Chartered Professional Accountants of British Columbia. The Chartered Professional Accountants Act will unify the three accounting regulatory organizations in British Columbia and amalgamate them into the one Chartered Professional Accountants of B.C.

This will continue the strong self-regulatory system for chartered professional accountants in B.C., which is a self-regulated profession. It will also establish a governance structure for the chartered professional accountants, set out the powers of the body regulating the profession to regulate and investigate and discipline both members and students as well as accounting corporations and firms. It’ll provide for chartered professional accountant education programs and reserve the use of certain accounting titles or designations for chartered professional accountants.

This bill will include transitional provisions to ensure that the amalgamation does not adversely affect the public interest or members of the current three accountancy regulatory bodies.

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

Bill 4, Chartered Professional Accountants Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

BILL 7 — PRIVATE TRAINING ACT

Hon. A. Wilkinson presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Private Training Act.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I’m pleased to introduce Bill 7, the Private Training Act. This legislation is the result of a core review process, and the initiative is to strengthen the governance and regulation of private career-training institutions and the educational sector.

[1350]

The Private Career Training Institutions Act, under Private Career Training Institutions, currently regulates the private training industry in the province. The new legislation will replace that act, dissolve that agency and bring its functions and responsibilities into the Ministry of Advanced Education. This will involve government assuming direct responsibility for regulation of the private career-training sector and the institutions involved. It’s consistent with the approach in other Canadian jurisdictions.

The government announced its intention to make these changes in April of 2014. We held extensive consultations with private training institutions, students and other stakeholders. All of this feedback helped to shape the process that the province is going through now with the introduction of this bill to regulate private career training in British Columbia within government.

The legislation will create higher quality standards for the sector and ensure a high-quality education for students. It will streamline approval and administrative processes. It will introduce a risk-based approach that protects the public interest, and will reduce the regulatory requirements for private institutions with a strong history of compliance — that is, institutions that have operated successfully and within the framework for a
[ Page 5660 ]
number of years.

The legislation will create better student protection and will improve public confidence in the private training sector. Finally, it will help to reduce student loan default rates in the private sector.

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

Bill 7, Private Training Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

2015 CANADA WINTER GAMES
IN PRINCE GEORGE

M. Morris: In just two days the 2015 Canada Winter Games will commence in the host city, Prince George, co-hosted by the Lheidli First Nation. The games will run from February 13 to March 1, attracting athletes from the Canada’s ten provinces and three territories.

Athletes will compete in 19 different events. The games are expected to draw 2,400 athletes, along with 1,000 coaches and officials. The host committee has enlisted over 4,500 volunteers to assist with the logistics and provide assistance to an estimated 15,000 visitors. The scale of this sporting event is eclipsed only by the Olympics. Team B.C. will bring a team of 350 athletes, accompanied by their coaches and mission staff, to the games to compete on home soil.

The competitors you will see at the 2015 Canada Winter Games are the future of sport in B.C. They are the next generation of national team athletes, and many will go on to higher levels of competition, including the Olympic and Paralympic Games. In addition, the 2015 Canada Winter Games Arts and Cultural Festival will showcase the incredible diversity of talent in our province.

The 2015 Canada Winter Games will be the largest multisport and cultural event ever to be held in Prince George and northern B.C. No other country in the world has an event like the Canada Winter Games. These games are a tremendous opportunity to share the incredible beauty and spirit of B.C.’s north and of its residents, as well as the many opportunities that abound in the region.

Madame Speaker, we are ready. Many people have been working hard to make sure that the first-ever edition of the Canada Games in B.C. is an unforgettable experience. On behalf of this House, I wish to congratulate them on their effort. The games will be generating a lasting legacy across the north.

PROTECTION OF GRACE ISLET

G. Holman: I’m honoured to rise as the first speaker on this side of the House for this session of the Legislature and also, on behalf of the member for Esquimalt–Royal Roads, to thank all those First Nations, community leaders and citizens who’ve worked to protect Grace Islet.

We’ve all participated in grass-roots efforts supporting worthy causes. The coalition that formed around Grace Islet — initiated by Joe Akerman, a young Saltspringer with aboriginal heritage — was strengthened by the patient resolve of south Vancouver Island First Nations. Countless hours of organizing, fundraising, media interviews and even legal actions went into this campaign.

My experience with such campaigns — coming from Saltspring, I’ve been involved in a few — is that everyone plays their role. We all become leaders and followers. In this case we were all followers of the peoples of Saanich Peninsula, Cowichan and the Penelakut.

I’m very proud of my community of Saltspring, which was at the forefront of the campaign. Once described as 10,000 opinions surrounded by water, Saltspring has protected over 4,500 acres of land since 2001. I also want to thank the Nature Conservancy of Canada, which will hold title to Grace Islet in trust for First Nations. The Land Conservancy of B.C. will also be playing its part soon.

[1355]

Finally, although highly irregular in this House, I want to personally thank the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations. It is said that all that’s required for evil to prevail is for good men to remain silent. Many good men and women spoke up for Grace Islet, and that includes the member for Kelowna-Mission. Hychka, Mr. Minister.

85th ANNIVERSARY OF CENTRAL
ELEMENTARY COMMUNITY SCHOOL
IN CHILLIWACK

J. Martin: I am pleased to report to the House that the oldest school in Chilliwack has turned 85 years old. Central Elementary Community School opened in 1929 and has been pivotal in the education of thousands of young Chilliwack students, many whom have grown up to do great things in our community and beyond.

Built in the heart of Chilliwack’s downtown, Central Elementary is a key community partner, fully integrated into the neighbourhood — undoubtedly, one of secrets to the school’s longevity. At a community school, a full-time coordinator works with agencies and organizations to host Gateway for Families programming, which respectfully engages inner-core community members from all age, ethnic and socioeconomic realms to promote health and independence in their lives.

Shannon Carmichael leads these initiatives, part-
[ Page 5661 ]
nering with MCFD, aboriginal child and youth mental health, the Fraser Valley Child Development Centre and others to provide a supportive environment for children and families during the day and after school. This is in addition to providing a world-class education for kindergarten students through to the sixth grade and English-as-a-second-language programming. For more than eight decades students have walked the halls of Central Elementary with impressionable minds. Bright-eyed Central students have gone on to become mayors, athletes, business owners and other community leaders. It’s quite likely that each Central alumnus can identify a teacher who made a difference in their careers and in their lives.

I would like to thank Principal Leslie Waddington and staff for leading Chilliwack Central Elementary Community School through its 85th year and into the future.

2015 CANADA WINTER GAMES
IN PRINCE GEORGE

D. Donaldson: Northerners like their winters crisp to cold. Northerners like their winters with snow. Northerners are fiercely independent yet proud of our communities, so we like to show them off to outsiders, especially in winter. You might think that’s an intro to discuss the storm that just hit Kitimat and Terrace. No, I’m talking a little further east and a little further south where, on Friday, it will be not as crisp as we like and not the most amount of snow, but the hospitality will be there in spades as Prince George welcomes athletes from across the country for the Canada Winter Games.

I remember, shortly after being elected in 2009, writing a letter of support for Prince George’s bid. Now here we are after countless hours and hard work by organizers. The games are about to begin. I’m looking forward to attending the opening ceremonies on Friday night. The numbers are staggering: 2,400 athletes from 800 communities, 1,000 coaches and volunteers, and up to 4,500 volunteers as well.

For the first time for the Canada Winter Games, there’s an official host nation, the Lheidli T’enneh, on whose territory Prince George sits.

I would especially like to pay tribute to the volunteers making the whole show happen, volunteers from places like the Smithers Ski and Snowboard Club. President Gary Huxtable and Vice-President Philippe Bernier and a crew are heading to Prince George to take care of the alpine ski events. It couldn’t happen without people like this from all over the province.

Northerners have a close connection to the land that sustains us and have winter outdoor sports that can reinforce that connection physically and spiritually. It reminds us that we have a valid way of living that is sometimes a bit different from mainstream B.C. At its core is reciprocity, the responsibility to ensure that this can continue, to share our way of life and the riches of the land with others with the understanding that we’re willing to receive in return.

Well done, Prince George. Go, Team B.C., and let the games begin.

PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICAL
ENGAGEMENT BY CITIZENS

G. Hogg: A disconnect between politicians and their citizens continues to grow. Our polling has suggested that 76 percent of Canadians do not believe that politicians share their view of the most important problems that they face. This is a 14 percent increase since 2005.

England’s 2013 annual audit of political engagement found that their citizens were disgruntled, disillusioned and disengaged and that the form of disengagement was more severe than anything they had previously seen.

[1400]

France’s Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, chaired by Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, found that a political voice was an integral component of a citizen’s quality of life.

Policy development is not easy. Today’s policy issues are more complex, more horizontal and, in many ways, more intractable than ever before. Today there are many more players on the policy field, and on every issue, concerned citizens have an opinion and many ways to express themselves.

A Canadian study on engagement found that when citizens participate in setting priorities and finding solutions, the process invokes more trust, more openness and more personal responsibility.

Denmark has found that citizen involvement is a cost-effective means of ensuring that new solutions better meet citizens’ needs and government goals. England’s 2014 audit of political engagement found that only 23 percent of their citizens agreed that parliament encourages public involvement, and this was a drop of some 7 percent from the audit done two years before.

New technologies and new approaches provide new opportunities for democracies to explore creative ways of increasing citizen engagement, thus shrinking the growing sense of disconnect between politicians and their citizens while, at the same time, increasing public confidence in politicians, in the quality of public discourse and in decision-making.

May we all learn from the experiences and practices of other democracies.

PARTICIPATION BY B.C. STUDENTS IN
TAIWAN INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE FAIR

R. Fleming: A hypothesis can come from just about anywhere, and for two bright young British Columbians
[ Page 5662 ]
representing B.C. and Canada at the annual Taiwan International Science Fair this month, they came from the kernel of an apricot and a pile of hay.

Emily O’Reilly, a grade 12 student from Prince George’s College Heights Secondary School, was selected to present her project, entitled “Ancient Knowledge — Modern Approach.”

When she was younger her grandfather told her that apricot kernels could help reduce the pain of stomach ailments, and Emily wanted to find out why. With the help of UNBC organic chemistry professor Guy Plourde, she proved that cyanide-absent apricot kernels could hinder the growth of harmful stomach bacteria, and that amazing discovery earned her a chance to present her findings.

After hours sifting through hay from 22 farms in the Peace Valley, Victoria Platzer, a grade 9 student from Fort St. John’s Bert Bowes Middle School, analyzed and planted over 5,500 seeds and discovered that over 600 of these seeds were actually invasive plants. Her project, entitled “Hay Aliens,” looked at how invasive plants travel in harvested hay and can cause harm to animals who ingest them.

The participation by Emily and Victoria at the Taiwan International Science Fair is made possible by grants from the Science Fair Foundation British Columbia.

I would ask members of both sides of the House to send our thanks for the support that the science foundation gives to young students like these to inspire them and allow them to pursue their love of science, and also, of course, to congratulate the two students who are representing British Columbia in Taiwan this month.

Oral Questions

INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL REPORT
ON TAILINGS POND BREACH
AT MOUNT POLLEY MINE

J. Horgan: We’ve all had time now to review the findings of the expert panel looking into the catastrophe at the Mount Polley mine site in Likely, British Columbia. The government has done its level best to blame one thing and one thing only for that failure: a design flaw early in the development of the mine. But the report paints quite a different picture. In fact, the report says it’s a story of too little, too late.

I’d like to quote for the House one section that goes as follows: “Something had to give, and the result was oversteepening dam slopes, deferred buttressing and the seemingly ad hoc nature of dam expansion that so often ended up constructing something different from what was originally planned.”

There were 13 amendments to the initial operating plan at Mount Polley, the bulk of them on the watch of the B.C. Liberals. So after cutting staff and reducing oversight….

My question is to the Premier. She’s had an opportunity to read the report. She’s had an opportunity to assess accountability in this matter. Can she tell this House, and British Columbians, why her government stood by and watched a preventable accident happen?

Hon. C. Clark: Thank you very much, Madame Speaker, and indeed, it is a delight to be back in the legislative session again this year for this session of the Legislature.

[1405]

In answer to the member’s question, first I would say this. We are not talking about a report that was delivered by the government. It was delivered by an independent panel, independent of the government, that drew its own conclusions. Amongst those conclusions is the very clear statement that additional inspections would not have prevented the failure.

This was a dam that was permitted in 1995. It was a dam whose construction was underway for many years after that. They identified the source of the failure in the design, and despite the fact that the panel says there is no blame to be found on the side of the inspections, we take no comfort in that. We are going to take the results of this report and the subsequent reports that are yet to come, make sure that we take a very close look at those recommendations and implement all that we need to, to make sure that this does not happen again in British Columbia.

Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental.

J. Horgan: It’s the selective reading of the government of the expert findings that is disconcerting. In fact, it was disconcerting to the panel. I’ll read another excerpt for the Premier so that she’s aware of what she speaks.

“The panel was disconcerted to find that while the Mount Polley tailings dam failed because of an undetected weakness in the foundation, it could have failed by overtopping, which it almost did in May of 2014. Or it could have failed by internal erosion, for which some evidence was discovered. Clearly, multiple failure modes were in progress, and they differed mainly in how far they had progressed down their respective failure pathways.”

In other words, it wasn’t a ticking time bomb; it was multiple ticking time bombs. And those bombs were ticking on the watch of the B.C. Liberals.

Now, overtopping is a serious issue, and we’ll talk about that as question period unfolds. But again, it’s a question of accountability — 13 amendments to the operating permits at Mount Polley, the bulk of them on the watch of the B.C. Liberals. Certainly the Premier will acknowledge that accountability rests at the feet of her government. Will she acknowledge to the people of British Columbia today that the failure at Mount Polley is the result of this government?

Hon. C. Clark: It would be equally easy for members on this side of the House to say almost the same thing in opposite back to the member. The mine was approved on
[ Page 5663 ]
the NDP’s watch. Inspections were done on the NDP’s watch. But we shouldn’t be playing politics with an issue that is as serious as this one.

It is not a question of, “The government inspectors on the NDP watch didn’t do their job,” or that the government inspectors since the B.C. Liberals have been in government didn’t do their job. The independent report is absolutely crystal-clear about that.

There was a problem in the design of this dam when it was permitted in 1995. The most important thing that we can do for the people of British Columbia, thousands of whom depend on mining for their livelihood…. So many communities are mining-based and depend on that income for all of the things that keep those communities thriving.

The best thing that we can do for all of those working men and women in mining across British Columbia is answer the recommendations that come out of this report, take seriously what they said and put aside politics for once — for once — to ensure that British Columbians know that we care about mining. We want to make sure that it succeeds in our province, and we want to make sure that it is done in as safe and environmentally sound a way as it’s done anywhere else in the world.

Madame Speaker: Recognizing the Leader of the Opposition on a final supplemental.

J. Horgan: It’s tragic that it takes a failure of a mine for the Liberals to acknowledge that mines did open and operate in the 1990s. That’s a revelation. It’s unfortunate that it has to come like this. But Mike Harcourt didn’t allow the oversteepening of the walls. Mike Harcourt didn’t allow too much water to be in the tailings facility. Mike Harcourt didn’t defer buttressing. Mike Harcourt’s government did not stand by in May, six weeks before the failure, and disregard evidence that suggests that there were serious concerns.

[1410]

Let me read some of that evidence — alarm bells. On May 28, 2014, AMAC, the consulting engineers responsible at Mount Polley exchanged e-mails — three engineers. They said the following. “If they are not removing water, then they are operating in direct contravention of the EPP that the ministry expects. That is a dangerous game to play, and we just need to make sure that our backside is covered by telling them to pump water out of the TSF” — the tailings storage facility.

Now, the Premier is correct. Workers at Mount Polley are fearful for their future, the people in Likely are going to have to live with that disaster for decades to come, and the government’s response is no accountability at all.

When you take the reins of the government of British Columbia, you have to be responsible for what happens on your watch, and on your watch this tailings pond failed. Will you stand and acknowledge that today?

Hon. C. Clark: So far what we have is the geotechnical panel report — an independent report, made independent of government. We also have the Leader of the Opposition’s suppositions about who was to blame and what was to blame, as he mischaracterizes consistently what was actually in that report.

I’ve quoted from the report a number of times already. The report says that it does not blame the inspection process for this problem. It was a design problem that was inherent in the dam in 1995 when it was permitted.

Now, since then there have been many changes to the mine. There is much more information to come as well. We will be getting further reports from two separate bodies independent of government that will give us more information, and we can work from that information.

But it is vitally important that politicians in this House put aside their ambition for personal and political gain and make sure that we look after mining, make sure that we respond to this report appropriately, ensure that people in British Columbia can regain their trust in the mining industry.

Unlike on that side of the House, on this side of the House we support the mining industry. We support the men and women who depend on the mining industry. We want to make sure that it’s done safely, that it’s done in an environmentally sound way, and we want to make sure that it’s done with the trust of the people. But we want to make sure that it gets done, because mining supports a lot of people in British Columbia.

N. Macdonald: The panel report pulled no punches about the problems caused by water accumulations at Mount Polley in the disaster that followed the breach. The report goes on to say, and this is a direct quote: “Had the water levels been even a metre lower and the tailings breach…wider, this last link may have held until dawn the next morning, allowing timely intervention and potentially turning a fatal condition into something survivable.” But the minister and the Premier continue to dismiss and deny.

In August the minister told the press there was no evidence to indicate that there was any caution for concern at Mount Polley. When a radio host asked him about whether he should have shut down Mount Polley in May until the problems with the tailings pond were addressed, he called the question “yet another piece of misinformation.”

The question is: will the minister or the Premier finally acknowledge that they are ultimately responsible for the lax oversight that turned this dam failure into an environmental disaster?

Hon. B. Bennett: I can perhaps put the opposition’s collective mind at rest by saying that when the panel states, as it does in numerous occasions in the report, that the regulator was competent, the regulator did his job, the regulator wasn’t responsible for the accident, that covers the whole period of time during which the dam was designed,
[ Page 5664 ]
constructed and then steepened and raised over the years.

I’m not going to stand in the House here and blame this accident on the NDP. You’ll notice that the Premier of the province didn’t stand here in the House and blame this accident on the NDP either.

[1415]

The report is very, very clear. Here’s what the report says. “The root cause of the breach was the undrained failure of the upper GLU” — that’s a glaciolacustrine unit — “under the imposed load of the perimeter embankment on August 4, 2014.” That’s on page 104. You can follow along if you have the report.

Another quotation: “The dominant contribution to the failure resides in its design. The design did not take into account the complexity of the subglacial and preglacial geological environment associated with the perimeter embankment foundation.” The design was doomed to fail — page 105. Page 135: “The breach…was caused by shear failure of the dam foundation materials when the loading imposed by the dam exceeded the capacity of these materials to sustain it.”

There are many, many quotations where the panel quite clearly states what the cause of the accident is. What I want to say to the opposition at the end of this answer, though, is that that’s not the end of it.

We understand there are recommendations that come in this panel report. We understand that this panel of three PhD geotechnical engineers took the time to make recommendations to government and to the mining industry and to the engineering industry on how we can improve how we permit mines and operate mines in this province. We have accepted all of those recommendations.

N. Macdonald: So it’s a continuation of the evasion and not taking responsibility, which started on day one. On May 28 the engineers at AMEC were worried about the dam and the very survival of the mine itself. These engineers were concerned about safety, and these concerns were profound.

I’ll again quote from some of the e-mails that were included in the package from this panel. “We cannot blankly support the ‘just keep operating in the danger zone’ attitude. Remember, if they lose the dam, then the mine cannot operate anyways.” But on August 7 the minister told the newspaper: “We don’t have any indication, certainly that I’m aware of, in our files that any inspectors had a concern about the tailings dam.”

To the minister: presumably your staff didn’t tell you that the engineers at Mount Polley were worried that they could have lost the dam and mine in May, so how can you possibly claim that you were regulating Mount Polley properly?

Hon. B. Bennett: I’m not actually claiming anything personally. As the minister responsible for Energy and Mines in the province, I am quite content to let this report speak for itself. The report is very clear. If the opposition wants to continue to argue about what the cause of the accident was, we can do that.

There’s enormous evidence within the report that the panel believes that the cause of the accident was some unstable material that was not identified when this dam was designed. The engineers clearly…. And if you want quotations, they’re certainly there to show that the dam was designed to sit on stable ground, on stable foundation. They did not do sufficient drilling to get the core samples….

Interjections.

Hon. B. Bennett: Hon. Speaker, I was asked a question. I’m going to try to answer it.

The engineers, according to the panel — not according to the Mines Minister but according to the panel — failed to do adequate drilling in the area of the perimeter embankment where it failed. They therefore did not know the location of this GLU, and as the panel said, they did not understand the nature of the soils that were there. That is why the dam failed.

Again, we need to learn from this. Government knows that. The panel has made some very significant, important — I would say profoundly important — recommendations for us. We are going to take them to heart, and we’re not going to blame the NDP for this. But we’re also not going to blame the people who work in the ministry who have been completely cleared of any wrongdoing or negligence by this panel.

[1420]

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS FOR
COMMUNICATIONS ON TEACHERS
LABOUR DISPUTE NEGOTIATIONS

R. Fleming: Last week the B.C. Liberals got caught red-handed using taxpayer money to help out their friends — $350,000 direct-awarded to a company that worked on the Premier’s leadership campaign and even designed the B.C. Liberal Party’s logo, lavished with contracts to help her pick a fight with teachers.

Can the Premier stand up and explain to the taxpayers of British Columbia, who were fleeced by this scheme, why her friends are getting special access to government contracts?

Hon. P. Fassbender: Well, I’m really aware that the members opposite are still smarting from the fact that this government was able to negotiate a settlement with the BCTF that’s a historical settlement in this province. As part of that, this government made it very clear from the beginning that a negotiated settlement was our priority. That’s fact one. Fact two is that we were going to keep the people of British Columbia informed as to what the issues were and what this government’s position was.
[ Page 5665 ]

I find it interesting that the very members opposite who wanted an arbitrated settlement, who wanted a legislated settlement, now are complaining because this government informed the people of British Columbia so that they could avail themselves of a support payment because of the strike. We had almost 100 percent subscription.

I suspect that there is a large number of teachers who availed themselves of that support payment as well. We make no apology for keeping the people of British Columbia informed through the means that were available to us. Indeed, their response to us at the end of the strike was that we did the job we promised to do.

Madame Speaker: Recognizing Victoria–Swan Lake on a supplemental.

R. Fleming: What the minister just said is just the kind of spin that taxpayer money was wasted on to describe the longest school disruption dispute in British Columbia history. It’s bad enough that the B.C. Liberals wasted money on this scheme when kids in our schools in this province have seen so many special education teachers laid off. But now, to make it worse, we see this government writing fat cheques — for Facebook spots, for promoted tweets, for Google ad words and all of those things — to B.C. Liberal friends and insiders.

It’s downright offensive to every British Columbian, no matter how they felt about the school dispute.

Madame Speaker: Question.

R. Fleming: Will the Premier do the right thing and apologize to kids and parents in B.C. for cooking up this wasteful scheme that rewards her friends using taxpayer money?

Hon. P. Fassbender: Well, I’m sure that the member opposite is trying hard to move into the top five that the Leader of the Opposition….

You know, it is very interesting that the members opposite who wanted us to arbitrate or legislate — not to communicate to the people of British Columbia, not to keep them informed, not to use the very vehicles that were being used by all of the other people that are involved in this dispute, including the members opposite….

I will say this. The people of British Columbia knew the issues. They knew what this government stood for. They knew that this government — supposedly, the longest strike that resulted in the longest-ever negotiated settlement….

[1425]

As the weather vane revolves on the other side of this House, I can tell you this. The government is going to continue to keep the people of British Columbia informed.

M. Mungall: I’d like to remind the Minister of Education that taxpayer-funded ads are supposed to be neutral, and these simply were not. And now taxpayers find out that they are on the hook to the Premier’s friend for these mean-spirited ads to the tune of $350,000. That’s after they have already been billed nearly $900,000 since the Premier took office in 2001. That’s money that should have gone into the classroom.

Why is the Premier able to find money for her insider firms, for her friends from her leadership campaign, but cries, “Empty coffers,” when it comes to putting money into B.C. classrooms?

Hon. P. Fassbender: I would urge the member opposite to look at how social media is used on that side of the House when it comes to besmirching other members of this House and doing a character assassination.

This government gave facts to the people of British Columbia — to a firm that was qualified through an open RFP process. And that firm did not receive all of those funds. It was used to buy the space to give the people of British Columbia the facts that they deserved, and they got the facts. They understood where the government was, and they knew that the government was going to get a negotiated settlement. And do you know what? The facts speak for themselves.

HUNTING ALLOCATION POLICY CHANGES

K. Conroy: Changes made by the Liberal government to hunting allocations are literally taking food off the tables of British Columbians. There are over 100,000 resident hunters in this province who hunt for food, accessing a public resource, yet changes by this government have meant that many will no longer have that opportunity. Instead, those allocations will go to the guide-outfitter industry so that wealthy foreigners can hunt our wildlife.

Can the minister explain why he has chosen to favour foreign hunters over moms and dads who are just looking to stock their freezers for the winter?

Hon. S. Thomson: Sustainable hunting contributes over $350 million in economic activity for the province of British Columbia — $120 million from the commercial guiding sector; $230 million from the resident sector, the recreational sector. Finding the allocation formula is all about finding the balance between the sharing of the resource, and that’s what this process has been: a long, ten-year history of determining that allocation.

What we have done is found a balance that, in the end, transfers about 60 animals from the resident hunting community to the guide-outfitter hunter community, less than half of 1 percent of the total 47,500 animals harvested in British Columbia. And we talk about taking meat out of the freezers? Thirty thousand of those animals are deer, and deer are in general open season and not affected by this allocation policy at all.
[ Page 5666 ]

HUNTING ALLOCATION POLICY CHANGES
AND ROLE OF ENERGY MINISTER

K. Conroy: Well, we know full well, and the minister knows full well, we’re talking about percentages — we’re not talking about numbers — and we’re talking about over 5,000 allocations.

This file actually does belong to the Minister of Natural Resource Operations, but to no one’s surprise, the Energy and Mines Minister has been front and centre on this one. He’s the one who went off on Facebook telling hunters he didn’t care about their protests. So it’s no surprise that we have found some leaked e-mails from him, throwing his weight around the Natural Resource Ministry to get a guide-outfitter to access land that has always been reserved for resident hunters.

[1430]

Again to the Natural Resource Minister: why is he letting the Energy Minister push around his staff to get preferential treatment for foreign hunters?

Hon. S. Thomson: I hope the member opposite is not questioning at all my integrity or approach in coming to this allocation decision. This took years of review, years of study, years of analysis of the numbers to come to this formula. Both parties, both the guide-outfitters and the resident hunters, knew that this decision was coming, that we needed to make a decision, because they couldn’t reach agreement on the allocation, and they were both aware that this decision was going to be made.

After all the analysis, we made a decision that recognizes three core principles: one, conservation first; second, First Nations’ interests; and resident hunter priority — that resident hunter priority is maintained through these decisions. As I said, less than half of 1 percent of the total animals harvested in British Columbia are accounted for in this allocation decision. It doesn’t include…. Out of the total number of opportunities available, 17,500 opportunities, this affects about 475 opportunities, less than 4 percent. The balance has been found that maintains those core principles.

R. Austin: The minister is being disingenuous here. Yes, a deal was arranged after years of negotiation, but then that deal was broken by this minister with no notice whatsoever to the resident hunters.

But let’s get back to these e-mails, because they speak to e-mails that came out last June. As you read them, you can hear the voice of the Energy Minister come ringing through. The first one was just a sentence long, written to a senior staff member in the Natural Resources Ministry: “Bob Cutts is wondering whether he’s going to get that piece of land east of his guide-outfitter’s territory to make up for what he lost in Wheeler Creek.” Now, anyone who’s ever met the Mines Minister knows that this isn’t just him wondering about anything. He’s demanding action for his friend.

Does the Natural Resources Minister think it’s okay for the Mines Minister to be pushing around his staff in this way?

Hon. S. Thomson: Again, just to reiterate. A decision that was over ten years of discussion where agreement was not reached between the two respective sectors of the hunting community and one where they knew that a decision was coming…. We needed to make a decision that respected that balance, that respected the important economic contribution that guide-outfitters, and the long history of guide-outfitting in this province, have made to the province of British Columbia — to the tourism sector, to the hunting sector — recognizing the important contribution of resident hunters — $230 million in economic activity.

Again, those core principles have been maintained: conservation first, which both organizations keep at the forefront of their code of ethics in their approach; secondly, First Nations consideration for ceremonial purposes; and thirdly, resident hunter priority. This allocation formula, this decision, maintains that priority.

[End of question period.]

Point of Privilege
(Reservation of Right)

K. Conroy: I rise to reserve my right to raise a matter of privilege.

Madame Speaker: Thank you.

Hon. M. de Jong: I rise to seek leave to move two motions activating two parliamentary committees. These motions continue the work of the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth and the Special Committee to Review…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. de Jong: …the Independent Investigations Office. I’ve provided the full text of the motions to the official opposition House Leader and to independent members of the House.

Motions Without Notice

APPOINTMENT OF
CHILDREN AND YOUTH COMMITTEE

Hon. M. de Jong: By leave, I would move the first motion regarding the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth.
[ Page 5667 ]

[That the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be appointed to foster greater awareness and understanding among legislators and the public of the BC child welfare system, and in particular to:

1. Receive and review the annual service plan from the Representative for Children and Youth (the “Representative”) that includes a statement of goals and identifies specific objectives and performance measures that will be required to exercise the powers and perform the functions and duties of the Representative during the fiscal year;

2. Be the committee to which the Representative reports, at least annually;

3. Refer to the Representative for investigation the critical injury or death of a child;

4. Receive and consider all reports and plans transmitted by the Representative to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia; and,

5. Pursuant to section 30 (2) of the Representative for Children and Youth Act, S.B.C. 2006, c. 29, complete an assessment by April 1, 2015, of the effectiveness of section 6 (1) (b) in ensuring that the needs of children are met.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon Select Standing Committees of the House, the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to conduct consultations by any means the committee considers appropriate;

d) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

e) to retain personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.

The said Select Standing Committee is to be composed of Jane Thornthwaite (Convener), Donna Barnett, Mike Bernier, John Martin, Dr. Darryl Plecas, Dr. Moira Stilwell, Doug Donaldson, Carole James, Maurine Karagianis, and Jennifer Rice.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: Go ahead.

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE
TO REVIEW THE INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATIONS OFFICE

Hon. M. de Jong: Again, with leave, I move the second motion, regarding the Special Committee to Review the Independent Investigations Office.

[That a Special Committee to Review the Independent Investigations Office be appointed to examine, inquire into and make recommendations with respect to the administration and general operations of the Independent Investigations Office in accordance with section 38.13 of the Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 367, and in particular:

1. To conduct and conclude a review of:

a. The administration and general operations of the Independent Investigations Office; and

b. The Chief Civilian Director’s progress towards a goal of having an Independent Investigations Office that is staffed entirely with employees and Independent Investigations Office investigators who have never served as officers or members of a police or law enforcement agency.

2. To consider the written and oral submissions received during the Third Session of the 40th Parliament

3. To submit a report, including any recommendations respecting the results of the review, to the Legislative Assembly by February 25, 2015.

The Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.

The said Special Committee is to be composed of Mike Morris (Convener), Dr. Doug Bing, Scott Hamilton, Dr. Darryl Plecas, Jackie Tegart, Spencer Chandra Herbert, Scott Fraser, and Jane Jae Kyung Shin.]

[1435]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Reports from Committees

J. Tegart: I have the honour to present the first report of the Special Committee on Local Elections Expense Limits. This report covers the first phase of the committee’s work in relation to local election expense limits.

I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

J. Tegart: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

J. Tegart: In moving adoption of the report, I’d like to make some brief comments. This report summarizes the committee’s inquiry into principles for the relationship between elector organizations and their endorsed candidates with respect to expense limits, and principles for establishing expense limits for third-party advertisers.
[ Page 5668 ]

This inquiry took place in October, November and December of last year. The committee conducted a comprehensive public consultation process. It received presentations from stakeholders at public hearings, including from candidates and electoral organizations, and received written submissions, including many responses to an on-line questionnaire.

I am pleased to say that the committee worked cooperatively throughout the review and unanimously agreed to all of the recommendations in this report. The committee recommended that fairness, neutrality, transparency and accountability be principles which may inform the development of legislation on expense limits for candidates, electoral organizations and third-party advertisers.

In the second phase of its inquiry the committee is examining expense limit amounts for candidates and for third-party advertisers.

In closing, I would like to thank my fellow committee members, including the Deputy Chair, the member for Coquitlam-Maillardville.

With that, I move adoption of the report.

S. Robinson: As the Deputy Chair of the committee, I, too, would like to echo some of the sentiments we heard from the Chair of the committee. I’d like to thank everyone who participated in this first phase. It was certainly a learning experience for everyone, and hearing from British Columbians and local governments of all sizes helped the committee identify key principles to consider as we move forward into phase 2 of our work.

The principle of fairness was the consistently dominant principle that witnesses expressed to the committee as it relates to expense limits. We also heard over and over again how donation limits would also support this principle of fairness. I do hope that going forward we will continue to hear from a variety of stakeholders about how to actually implement these principles.

I’d like to thank the staff who helped us do this work and, in a very tight timeline, get this report tabled here in the Legislature.

Madame Speaker: The question is adoption of the report.

Motion approved.

D. Ashton: I have the honour to present a report of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services. The report covers the committee’s annual review of the budgetary estimates of the statutory officers. I would move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

D. Ashton: I ask leave of the House to move to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

D. Ashton: In moving the adoption of the report, I’d like to make a few brief comments. This report summarizes the committee’s annual review of the budget proposals, annual reports and service plans of the eight statutory offices of this House.

This year’s review took place in November and December. The committee met with each statutory officer and their staff and carefully reviewed the budget proposals for the coming fiscal years. I am pleased to say the committee worked very cooperatively together throughout the review.

In addition, the committee considered a number of measures to enhance its legislative oversight role, including holding more frequent meetings with the officers at other times of the year and improving the format of reporting and submissions to the committee. These are mentioned in the report, and we look forward to the undertaking of this work in the coming months.

In closing, I would like to thank all of the statutory officers and their staff, fellow committee members, the incredible staff of the committee and Clerk’s office and especially the Deputy Chair, the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill.

[1440]

This is the second year in a row that the recommendations have been accepted and forwarded unanimously by the committee. In my opinion, I feel that the citizens of British Columbia like to see their representatives working together to advance their causes and concerns.

With that, I move the adoption.

C. James: Thank you to the Chair of the committee and, just to add, a thank-you to the statutory officers who presented to the committee.

I think one thing was very clear, as the Chair has said. More time and more opportunities to learn about the work of the statutory officers will give us a better ability, as members of this Legislature, to be able to review the budgets and be able to make better decisions.

I think the positive part of this report coming forward is the fact that we will spend time over this next year meeting with the statutory officers, talking about the work that they do, so that when budget time comes and we review their budgets, we have that understanding of the kind of work that they do. I think it was a very positive experience from that perspective.

Motion approved.

Personal Statement

WITHDRAWAL OF COMMENTS
MADE IN THE HOUSE

Hon. B. Bennett: I want to retract a word that you
[ Page 5669 ]
wouldn’t have heard but the member for Kootenay West heard. I want the House to know, and I want the member to know that I was questioning the validity of the information. I would never question the integrity of the member. I have the greatest respect for the member for Kootenay West. I just want to make that clear, and I do retract the word.

Madame Speaker: Thank you.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: Madame Speaker, I call debate on the reply to the throne speech.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

Throne Speech Debate

Deputy Speaker: As the Government House Leader has pointed out, we’ll now call on the member for Surrey-Panorama. I’d ask the members that are leaving the chamber to respect the member that has the floor.

M. Hunt: In accordance with the parliamentary tradition, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Prince George–Mackenzie, 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.]

On behalf of my constituents from the riding of Surrey-Panorama, it is indeed my privilege to be the first to rise in this House today and to address the Speech from the Throne. First of all, of course, I want to thank the residents of Surrey-Panorama for the tremendous honour that they have bestowed on me in giving me the privilege of being able to serve them here in this House.

In officially opening this fourth session of the 40th parliament, the Lieutenant-Governor reaffirmed our government’s commitment to creating jobs and opportunities across British Columbia while maintaining strong fiscal discipline.

I personally am very, very proud of both the cabinet and the caucus that I serve in because of the focus that they have brought to this year’s throne speech and to what is going to be transpiring throughout this session. We ran on an election platform with a strong economy and a secure tomorrow. That is exactly where the focus remains in this session.

Thanks to the diversity of our economy here in British Columbia, British Columbia is performing well compared to other jurisdictions, which have not fared as well through the continual fragility of the global financial markets, as well as the unforgiving commodities markets. Our commitment to maintaining the diversity in this province is seen through the eight sectors that make up the B.C. jobs plan, first of all — agrifoods, forestry, international education, mining and energy, natural gas, technology and the green economy, tourism and transportation.

[1445]

We will continue to deliver on the jobs plan, which has created more than 74,000 jobs since its introduction in 2011. As well, we will continue to implement the skills-for-jobs blueprint to meet the growing demand for skilled labour and to make sure that British Columbians are first in line for those new jobs.

We also want to continue to build on our strong trading relationships. An example of that is that since 2001 British Columbia’s trade with China has grown rapidly. They are now our second-largest trading partner, accounting for $6.5 billion in 2014. That’s tremendous, but that is a part of the relationship that we have to have as the government in creating those strong relationships and, of course, working with the federal government.

In addition to delivering on the jobs plan to support economic growth — responsibility across all sectors — our government has consistently taken the right first step. That, of course, is fiscal responsibility. We know that in our own households. We know that in our own homes and our family relationships. In the midst of trying and challenging times, the first thing you’ve got to do is make sure that you are living within your means.

We’ll soon be introducing our third balanced budget, which protects taxpayers and sustains public services while maintaining costs and controlling spending. We’ll also be focused on saying yes to continued economic growth so that we can grow revenues instead of raising taxes. Our government has a strong vision. We’re sticking to it, and we’re seeing that hard work will continue to pay off as we build a most prosperous province.

Now, when we introduced the budget in 2014, we were one of only two jurisdictions in this country that balanced their books. It looks like we may be the only one this year. We are standing here at the beginning of this session with the potential of delivering our third consecutive balanced budget. This reaffirms the government’s commitment to controlling our spending, creating jobs through diversification, growing the economy and increasing our ties with emerging economic powers.

Our pledge to employ fiscal restraint — which is, of course, coupled with our triple-A credit rating — means we spend less on interest payments and servicing our debt and therefore have more money for health care and education. If we simply took our current debt in the province of British Columbia and were paying the rate that the province of Ontario is paying, we’d be spending $2 billion more just in interest — which, of course, we’re not having to do. We can have that available for health care and education. Ultimately, investors crave stability and economic certainty. I believe that this is exactly what our government’s decisions are bringing, in bringing forward
[ Page 5670 ]
this balanced budget.

In a world filled with economic uncertainty and turmoil, B.C. is seen as a choice destination, thanks to our competitive tax rates, our supportive business climate and our stable fiscal position — which is, of course, as I said, reaffirmed by a triple-A credit rating. These distinctive advantages are what make British Columbia a great place to invest and to increase trade looking forward.

Obviously, small business is the engine of any economy. This coming year our government is looking as to how we can engage and interact with citizens in our government services. We want to continue to reduce red tape for real people, and we want to continue to propose changes to ease unnecessary burdens and to save time and make things more efficient within government systems.

As we are talking about small business, I want to use the example of a couple of businesses we have in Surrey, one of which is Endurance Wind Power. This is a company that started only seven years ago. It started with six employees. Today they have over 200 employees in two new facilities — one in Surrey and one in the U.K. It’s a rather interesting niche that they have looked for in wind power. Where most of the European turbines are looking to utility generation and very large turbines, they have focused on on-site generation rather than utility generation.

[1450]

In December of this past year, just over two months ago, they completed construction of their 1,000th wind turbine. They export them to Nova Scotia, to New York state, Italy, the United Kingdom, as well as other places throughout the world. They’re focused on income for farmers and communities.

The ultimate question comes: why are they in Surrey? Because in Surrey we have no wind turbines. Actually, we don’t have enough movement of air to be able to make them efficiently operate. But what we have, as we have here in the province of British Columbia, is the skilled labour.

We have the access to suppliers. We have the access to the markets. We have low taxes and stable governments. And so Endurance Wind Power has chosen to build their industry here in the province of British Columbia, in the city of Surrey particularly, and are thriving on the world stage as a result.

We have Donia Farms, which is a dairy farm in Surrey. Actually, I believe it’s the largest dairy farm in Surrey. Rather than just continue the family tradition of the dairy farm, what the sons have done is they have created Kefir Smoothies, which they are marketing in the local stores throughout Surrey, again trying to diversify their income while working with the main portion of what they have, which is the dairy industry.

We have the same thing with Heppell farms, which is a potato farm. Again, a multigenerational family farm that has been a part of Surrey’s history for a very long time. They have expanded into packaging vegetables for themselves and for other farmers, but now they’re actually going into the development of potato chips. Again, the business is growing and expanding in our province because of the great conditions that we have within our province.

The Speech from the Throne also reaffirms B.C.’s dedication to the burgeoning natural resource sector. That accomplishment is a direct result of this government working diligently to create growth and to expand our markets to build on mutually rewarding relationships with new customers.

We’re also seeing the effects of this burgeoning industry in the urban centres. So often when we talk about it, we seem to be talking most about the northeast sector, the transmission through the northwest sector of this province of British Columbia. But actually, it has tremendous effects on urban centres such as Surrey. In my hometown, in Surrey, we are feeling the effects in every aspect of our lives, and businesses are booming.

I simply want to use an example of Murray Latta, which is a large company within the city of Surrey. One of their key challenges is finding and attracting highly qualified skilled workers, especially in light of the ongoing retirements that we have and the perception of a talent drain going to projects up in the north.

Well, Murray Latta Progressive Machine, as they call their company, has been a leader in millwrighting machinery and moving and custom industrial machining manufacturing parts and distribution since 1918.

It was started by two guys in the fishing industry who wanted to make a pressure cooker for canned salmon. Now obviously, it’s not a little pressure cooker like we have at home. It’s a very large retort that they’re building.

In fact, Murray Latta is still building those retorts. When I was there a few weeks ago at their plant, they were building another one coming out of the plant for a company, continuing the tradition from 1918 but also expanding into other areas of development, manufacturing and, ultimately, dealing with custom machinery that is needed within planer mills, sawmills, structural steel fabrication.

Actually, they’re doing ski lifts as well. When you go up to Whistler, in the summertime at least, and you take your bike up, and you…. Well, for those that are adventurous and want to come down the mountain on the bike, when you put your bike up on the tram to run up the ski lift, you’re actually putting it on fabricated productions that they have to be able to take those bikes up the ski lift.

They’re also doing heavy equipment and waste and recycling shredders in their plant, which is 60,000 square feet. They’re also creating new jobs. Every year since 2009 they have been creating jobs. They have 170 people on staff. So 110 of them are tradesworkers, but four to five of those at any particular time are, in fact, apprentices, as they continue to develop apprentices and develop skilled trades within our province and within their company to begin with.
[ Page 5671 ]

[1455]

They also have about 60 office and staff workers, 50 more that are working out in the field. Currently they’re in the hiring mode. They are hiring millwrights, boring mill machinists and operators.

It is, as I said, a custom machinery manufacturer. They are the ones that…. When you get on and off the planes at YVR and here in Victoria, those loading bridges — they created them. They are also the ones that…. When you get your baggage, most likely your baggage has gone over some of their production, as well, because all of the extensions to the baggage handling systems have been produced by Murray Latta. They’re doing all sorts of things — developing jobs and servicing this entire province of ours.

Our government’s blueprint commitment is delivering a trained workforce — those who are ready for the jobs that are coming available within liquid natural gas as well as many other industries. A career in the trades provides an opportunity for long-term, well-paying jobs that strengthen our families and our communities.

There are new trades-training equipment and spaces that are being made available for post-secondary training institutes throughout the Lower Mainland. Students will have the opportunity to get the skills necessary to take advantage of those job opportunities throughout this province.

Three of our post-secondary educational institutions in the Lower Mainland are going to be receiving a total of $1.1 million to buy new trades-training equipment and to support students in entering into those in-demand occupations that are critical to our economy.

Part of the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint is a commitment to $185 million over three years for trades-training infrastructure and equipment at our post-secondary institutions. Now, the funding for the equipment also builds on the commitment of last July for 404 additional critical trades-training seats at these three particular institutions. The institutions are….

BCIT, the British Columbia Institute of Technology, is receiving $421,000 for training equipment.

In our own area of Surrey, Kwantlen Polytechnic University is receiving $325,000 for equipment to support pipefitters, electrical, millwrighting and construction craft workers and apprentices; training equipment to deal with fire suppression training; simulators; high-voltage and low-voltage trainers, as well as backup to energy and fire alarm control systems.

Vancouver Community College is also receiving $356,000 — again, for trades equipment, to help them with such things as full-sized blast furnaces and ranges and ovens for their culinary systems.

Continuing on with BCIT, our government is delivering on the commitment to the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint by increasing access and reducing waiting lists by adding 272 seats to BCIT. Now, that’s a 4 percent increase. You know, we think that should be normal and that, but the waiting list that we have in the Lower Mainland for people to get into some of these trades is absolutely amazing.

For example, dealing in the heavy-duty mechanic apprenticeship program….This extra 272 seats, a portion of which is going…. I believe there are about 70 seats altogether that are being involved in the heavy-duty equipment mechanics side. That will reduce the waiting list by 10 months.

We have students, individuals, that are waiting to get into these programs. These funding allocations are based on the most recent labour market data and consultations with the institutions as well as the Industry Training Authority and the province’s labour market priorities board.

Also, the government of British Columbia is aligning our operating grants to provide public post-secondary education institutions the ability to continue to train, with another $40 million. Again, that was outlined in the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint. You see, B.C. is shifting education and training to become more aligned with those in-demand opportunities, and that’s ultimately where we need the economy to be going.

The top 60 occupations that were listed in the B.C. 2002 Labour Market Outlook, as well as the priorities of health occupations, regional labour priorities and, of course, working with aboriginal communities and those with disabilities are all part of that shift in funding.

[1500]

We see, for example, at BCIT….We’re dealing with power engineering. Capilano University is developing programs in business administration. The College of New Caledonia is dealing with community support workers. North Island College is opening up facilities for registered nursing. The Nicola Valley Institute of Technology is dealing with social work; Simon Fraser University in computing science; Thompson Rivers University in law; University of the Fraser Valley in construction and electrical and carpentry. The University of Victoria is dealing with computer science and engineering.

All of this is dealing with trying to make our young people ready for the jobs that are going to become available. That is our commitment. That’s why a part of that commitment is the Find Your Fit tour that has been going on throughout the province, dealing with our youth and trying to give them the opportunity to find the tools and the resources that they need in order to consider the full range of those in-demand occupations.

I don’t know about other members of this House, but I remember, as a kid, skipping. As we skipped, what was it…? “Doctor, lawyer, Indian chief” were the main ones we had as choices as we were thinking of our occupations for the future, but today there is such diversity. We want our young people to be aware of all of the different opportunities that are there and give them the potential
[ Page 5672 ]
ability to actually have interactive, hands-on experience so they can see whether they have the gift for that, the inclination towards those types of industries.

So far, over 10,000 students have taken part in that provincewide tour, whether it’s in Prince George, Fort St. John, Terrace, Burns Lake or my own community of Surrey.

This is a defining moment for British Columbia. As we see in our burgeoning LNG industry, we have the opportunity to increase revenue and maintain the world-class services our growing population relies on. Behind all of that is our third consecutive balanced budget, which is the strong backbone for our future growth and the foundation upon which that future growth rests.

I’m incredibly optimistic about our future and the future for my children and my 13, soon to become 14, grandchildren, which is why I’m honoured to be a part of this government and to represent Surrey-Panorama here in Victoria. That’s why I’m pleased to be the first speaker to speak in support of this Speech from the Throne, because we’re working together to build a great province for today and for future generations.

M. Morris: It’s my privilege and great honour to stand in the House today and second the Speech from the Throne in this sitting of the Legislature and on behalf of the people of my constituency, Prince George–Mackenzie. I’d like to thank my colleague from Surrey-Panorama for moving the debate on the throne speech.

I, too, was just recently blessed. My fifth grandchild was born last week, just in time for Family Day. My grandchildren are one of the most significant reasons why I chose to take on this role as MLA for Prince George–Mackenzie and put my oar in the water to see what I can do to make life better for British Columbians and to make sure that my children have the opportunities that all British Columbians should have in the future, with a secure future and a strong economy in British Columbia.

Prince George is a community I’m well-versed in. I’ve lived many, many years in that community, but I’ve also lived in many communities throughout the rural part of British Columbia. Most of them have been designed around a single commodity within the resource sector that we have in British Columbia. Most of them have suffered the swings — the highs and lows — of the commodity sector throughout my lifetime.

Those swings have caused all kinds of devastation within the communities. They’ve caused all kinds of hardship for various community members and for the province in general, because the province relies so much on the forest industry and the other resource sectors in order to provide the social infrastructure and the fabric that we have across our great province here.

One thing that we’ve noticed over the last number of years, though, is the diversification that we’re experiencing in the province here. We’re picking up speed as we move along.

Getting to where we are today hasn’t been an easy task. It has taken a lot of work by a lot of people, a lot of focused people, to ensure that we do everything we can to get the resource sector and our economy running strong; to balance our budget, as we have for the third consecutive time — one of the only balanced budgets in the country; and to maintain our triple-A credit rating, as we have.

[1505]

To get to the point where we are today has taken a lot of discipline. It’s taken a lot of determination to maintain that balanced budget and to watch how we spend the scarce resources that we have coming in.

One of the things that we’ve done to get there is to try and diversify our economy as much as we can. We’ve talked about LNG. The members opposite will probably think we’ve talked about LNG ad nauseam. But that’s the only way that we can make things come about and to breathe life into some of these projects that we have here. LNG is going to come along. Canada and British Columbia have no control over what happens worldwide with respect to the oil prices, with respect to the other commodity prices, which all dictate how quickly we move ahead with some of these great projects that we have in mind.

A couple of weeks ago in Prince George I was very fortunate to host the Natural Resource Forum that we’ve put on now for 12 consecutive years. It has grown in scope and in attendance every year since it was initiated a dozen or more years ago. One thing I noticed this year…. We had 850 registrants who came to the resource forum this year from all facets, from all sectors of the resource industry in British Columbia — from industry, from the suppliers, from transportation. There was government representation there as well. There was a lot of collaboration that took place within that forum.

We had a sold-out trade area. I think there were over 65 participants in the trade area that represented everything from engineering to supply to transportation to advertising — everything that the resource sector needs in order to flourish within the province here.

I had some significant compliments from major CEOs and executives from the corporate resource sector. They said that this was…. One gentleman, in fact, said that the resource forum that we had in Prince George was second to none. He had never been to one like it in Canada.

It provided them the opportunity to hear from other resource sector employers, companies, to network with a variety of disciplines within the resource sector in order to see what they can do to make things better. The collaboration that I saw at that particular forum was fantastic. I think that collaboration leads to better efficiencies in economies of scale as a lot of these corporations develop their businesses and move forward in British Columbia.

We’re not a single commodity–based province.
[ Page 5673 ]
Forestry was the foundation of British Columbia. It developed a lot of our social infrastructure that we have in the province. Mining has come along, and mining has seen its swings. But in the last number of years mining has contributed significantly to British Columbia’s economic base and its employment base.

We do go through the commodity cycles in single-commodity communities like Tumbler Ridge, which is experiencing a downturn in metallurgic coal prices, for an example. It is devastating for that community. But the province is buoyed by other sectors that enable us to get through these times. Where it’s such an impact on some of these smaller communities, we can help them out to the extent that we can.

To show the strength that this government has and this caucus has in supporting the resource sector in British Columbia and the economic development base that we have here, on the Wednesday morning of the resource forum we tried something that was a little bit different this year. We had what we called the minister’s breakfast.

The ministers were given an opportunity to answer questions from the 300 or 400 people that attended the breakfast. I think that gave the people there an opportunity to see that this government was committed to strengthening the resource sector and strengthening B.C.’s economy, by attending this breakfast and this function. We were also graced with the presence of the Premier, who give a keynote address on that particular afternoon as well, signifying the diversity of our economy that we have and the strength that we have within the resource sector of British Columbia.

With all my colleagues that were in attendance there as well, I think it demonstrated to the 850-plus people that attended, plus the residents of Prince George and throughout the country, that this government is strong and is committed to making sure that we have a strong resource sector and a strong economy.

[1510]

I’ve talked about the LNG industry and the steps that we’ve taken. We’ve introduced the LNG Income Tax Act, giving proponents a clear understanding of the tax framework so they can begin to make some of the final investment decisions that are necessary to move forward with this. These are big decisions for companies to make when they’re investing $10 billion, $20 billion, $30 billion into the various LNG plants we have.

We’ve also introduced legislation to ensure that the LNG plants that we do have are going to be the cleanest of technologies in the world.

We’ve launched the LNG-Buy B.C. tool program, connecting small, medium and large businesses with LNG proponents looking to invest their billions of dollars in British Columbia.

We’ve talked about pipelines in the past. It’s been quite a topical issue for years in this province. We’ve got various proponents talking about building pipelines across British Columbia to provide natural gas to the coast to supply these LNG plants.

We also have a couple of proponents that are talking about transporting oil as well. This province stands behind the five conditions that we had laid out for the pipeline proponents for heavy oil. We’re still committed to stand by those five conditions for the transportation of heavy oil across the province.

Forestry. Oftentimes I hear from different folks throughout the province that forestry appears to be not in the forefront any longer as far as this provincial government is concerned. Nothing could be further from the truth with regard to forestry. Forestry has increased its exports by 65 percent over the last five years, and the dollar value of those exports has gone up significantly, contributing to the coffers of British Columbia.

The forest industry is reinventing itself and is looking at new and better ways to do business. The forest industry has developed some of the most modern high-tech sawmills in the world, in the interior of the province. We’ve got one recently built in Prince George. We’ve got a new one in Burns Lake. We’ve got forest companies that have spent millions of dollars upgrading their sawmills north of Prince George and down into the 100 Mile area to make sure that they’re competitive with the world forest companies, all competing for a share of the market there.

We’ve got the Wood Innovation and Design Centre in Prince George that we recently opened, and we’ve recently announced a partnership between the Wood Innovation and Design Centre — the program that they have with UNBC — and the Emily Carr University of Art and Design. They’re collaborating together to come up with new and unique ways to use wood throughout British Columbia. I think that kind of a program is going to reveal all kinds of different ways that we can utilize wood products and value-added wood products to the betterment of the entire industry.

I talked a little bit about mining, about Tumbler Ridge. Exploration expenditures in British Columbia accounted for $330 million and accounted for over 21 percent of all exploration spending in Canada. I think that’s pretty significant, when you look at the vast array of mineral deposits across Canada. I think this government has created an atmosphere where mining companies feel comfortable in investing in exploration in British Columbia.

You can’t be faint of heart if you’re going to invest in mining stocks anywhere in the country or in the world. It takes a long time to take a mine from the identification of an ore body until you can get it into production, and it takes a lot of money to get there.

We’ve since thrown in some other dynamics in British Columbia, with the recent Tsilhqot’in decision, in bringing First Nations’ partners into a lot of the decision-making process we have in mining. I think that’s a good thing.

At the Natural Resource Forum we had in Prince George, we had a couple of prominent experts from
[ Page 5674 ]
across Canada speaking about the evolution of aboriginal rights and title across Canada. They told me that British Columbia is leading the charge, that we are doing things right in British Columbia. We may not be where we want to go yet, but we are doing things right. We’ve come into several economic benefit agreements with over 200 First Nations bands throughout British Columbia where they’re benefiting from the resource development in their particular area.

[1515]

One of those bands is in my riding — the McLeod Lake Indian Band. They’ve been working in collaboration, and they’ve got a construction company working for Mount Milligan. They’ve been able to invest quite heavily in their community. They’ve paved the streets. They’ve paid dividends to their community members, and they’ve made life quite a bit more livable for the people in their community.

Since June of 2011 we’ve opened five new mines in British Columbia. We’ve created over 1,300 new jobs. There are seven major mine expansions that have been approved. The mining industry in B.C. employs 30,000 workers, with an average salary of $114,000, a significant increase from 2001, when there were only 14,700 workers employed, with an average salary of $81,000.

The transportation network that we’ve created in British Columbia and that we continue to invest in, in British Columbia is a vital part of making this province work. Prince George is ideally located in the centre of the province as a services and supply area for the resource sector. We’ve got highways intersecting north and south, east and west. We’ve got railways intersecting north and south, east and west.

Those corridors are providing access to the Port of Prince Rupert. We have a CN intermodal terminal in Prince George, which is an integral part of that. The Port of Prince Rupert is becoming one of the fastest-growing ports in North America. It provides direct access for goods coming into British Columbia and being shipped all the way to the eastern seaboard, to Chicago, by rail. It’s providing opportunities for Canadian goods.

British Columbia has a significant responsibility within the confederation to provide access to the Asia-Pacific markets. The Port of Prince Rupert, Deltaport, Vancouver, Nanaimo — all of our ports — play an integral role in ensuring that access for Canadian goods manufactured across Canada. That is a benefit for the Canadian economy and buoys our economy in times of commodity fluctuations that we see with the commodities that we have in British Columbia.

We also have our airports that are becoming more and more involved in the economy of British Columbia. The Vancouver airport is one of the best airports in British Columbia. It moves a lot of passengers. It moves a lot of cargo. Prince George Airport has the third-largest runway in Canada.

There are all kinds of opportunities to expand the aerospace industry and cargo shipping from the central interior of the province. I think we’ll see that part of the province become very competitive in the air shipping market in the not too distant future.

The agriculture sector in British Columbia is also a significant contributor. The Lower Mainland, the Fraser Valley, the Kootenays and the Okanagan Valley all produce high-quality agricultural products, and Vancouver Island as well, that make up the difference.

When you have a community that has an agricultural base as well as a base with their fingers in other economic areas such as forestry, for an example, such as transportation or some of the other areas that we have there, it balances things out when commodity prices are down. The agriculture sector is very strong, has contributed significantly to the economy, and will always be there. It’s going to grow.

In addition to the traditional agriculture sector, our aquaculture products are increasing all the time. We have significant production with Atlantic salmon, the fish farms on the coast of B.C. Our shellfish industry has increased significantly. Those have room to expand and grow even more to contribute to the economy and the employment of First Nations people along the coast and other communities along the coast.

Technology is involved in everything that we do. If we walk into a mine…. I’ve visited Mount Milligan. I’ve visited many other mines. To walk into the control room and look at the technology involved in running those mills today versus what they looked like 15, 20, 30 years ago is a completely different story.

[1520]

There are large computer screens. Everything is run by a keyboard, and the operators are sitting there focused on these screens that give them up-to-date, real-time information right down to the macrolevel details — the temperature of bearings and whatnot. It leads to a much safer and economical environment for these factories and mills to run in.

That technology is very apparent in the forest industry as well. We’re seeing technology increases right across the board but more so in the film and gaming industry in British Columbia. They’re contributing millions of dollars to the provincial economy in the Lower Mainland. It has diversified things significantly.

We are lucky in British Columbia. There’s a symbiotic relationship between rural B.C. and metro B.C. B.C. is one of the most highly urbanized provinces that we have in Canada.

I’ve seen studies indicating that 55 percent of the employment in urban B.C. is attributable to the resource sector in northern British Columbia — the diversified resource sector that we have. I believe I saw another figure where around 66 percent of the small businesses in the urbanized part of British Columbia have association
[ Page 5675 ]
to the resource sector in British Columbia.

B.C. is well positioned. We have gone through some fairly trying times fiscally and financially because of the commodity markets around the world, but things aren’t always that way, as we know. If we look back over history, there are highs and lows throughout. We’re at a low right now, and if we ride this out, then we’re certainly going to be looking at better times down the road.

We’re going into these better times down the road with a triple-A credit rating, with a balanced budget — the only province that has a balanced budget — and this is going to position us well for the future. We’ll be able to make significant inroads in addressing the provincial debt and providing some of the social infrastructure that the public and the people in British Columbia want.

Our Premier has a vision for a diversified economy in British Columbia, a strong economy. We’re going to do whatever we can to build that. It has been my honour to talk about this, and I appreciate the time.

J. Darcy: It is a great honour to open debate today on behalf of the official opposition. I’d like to begin by thanking the wonderful people of New Westminster for the opportunity to speak for them and represent their issues and concerns in this House.

I’m also deeply honoured to be the official opposition spokesperson for Health and to have the opportunity to advocate on behalf of people right across British Columbia when it comes to improving health care in this province.

I must confess that I have been eagerly anticipating a return to the Legislature and a new throne speech and a budget, hoping that it would indeed be an opportunity to speak to those very real concerns that my constituents are dealing with and that people across this province want us to be speaking to.

Then, when I listened to the throne speech yesterday, I must say I was deeply, deeply disappointed. It was a throne speech that shows that this Premier is, frankly, out of touch with the reality for British Columbian families, a throne speech that shows that this government is out of gas and out of ideas, a throne speech that shows that this Premier and this government are missing in action, offering no solutions to the problems that people and families are facing every single day.

The sharp contrast between what’s in this throne speech and what’s happening in the lives of real people, real families across British Columbia, is really quite shocking. Every single day I hear from people who tell me how their families are falling further and further behind, that they’re paying more, that their wages aren’t keeping up, that their future is uncertain. They say that everywhere they turn they are being nickel-and-dimed by this Liberal government.

[1525]

Medical services taxes have more than doubled under the B.C. Liberals. They’re now at $144 for a family, which is a real hardship, especially hitting those people who can afford to pay it the least — a regressive form of tax if there ever was one. The Liberal government even broke its own promise that medical services taxes would only rise in direct proportion to the increase in health spending. They broke that promise.

Not only that, ICBC rates continue to rise. Hydro rates are on their way to an 80 percent hike. Ferry fares have doubled on some routes. Even camping fees have gone up. The cost of child care for families is already way out of control.

At the same time, real wages in British Columbia have fallen. It is simply astounding that there is nothing, zero, in this throne speech that reflects that reality, not one word. Is the Premier not listening, or does she simply not care?

It certainly does say a whole lot about this Premier’s priorities that while families are paying more and people’s wages aren’t keeping up, the Premier has chosen to give a $230 million tax break to the richest 2 percent of income earners in British Columbia. I don’t see this government giving the same kind of help to people who are struggling to make ends meet. In fact, everything just keeps getting more and more expensive for middle-class families.

I can’t tell you how many parents say to me, in my community every day, how concerned they are that their sons and daughters are going to be the first generation that is worse off than they themselves are. But it doesn’t have to be that way. We can do better. We must do better. We have to do better. But this throne speech does not point us in that direction.

We have so much potential in this province. British Columbians work so hard every single day, no matter where it is they work. We have a wealth of natural resources. We have important new sectors of the economy developing. We enjoy a strategic location for global trade. And yet so many British Columbians are living paycheque to paycheque. We have such enormous potential, but it is being squandered by this Premier and by this government.

The Premier bet big on liquefied natural gas, and we are all paying the price for her having neglected the other sectors of the economy. Forestry, technology, mining, tourism, the green economy, small business, agriculture — token references to these other vital sectors in a throne speech just doesn’t cut it. The fact is the Premier put all of her economic eggs in one basket — liquefied natural gas — and that basket is still sitting empty.

You just can’t take this Premier at her word anymore. Yet this throne speech carries on with the same empty promises about an LNG industry that the Premier says is the central preoccupation of her government.

So far, all we’ve seen are promises of jobs for temporary foreign workers — not workers, I might add, with a path to citizenship like my parents had and many others
[ Page 5676 ]
before me have had, but temporary foreign workers who remain here strictly at the company’s beck and call.

While this Premier placed a risky bet on LNG and while she’s been preoccupied with her friends at the top, she has neglected everything else — like public education. Did we hear anything in this throne speech about investing in public education in order to improve classroom learning? The answer is no.

For years now parents and educators have been speaking out about the need to invest in our children’s education for their sake and for the sake of the future of this province. That’s what we heard that from parents all through the education dispute. That’s what the Finance Committee heard over and over again. That’s what I hear every day as an MLA. I received more e-mails and phone calls and letters on the issue of investing in public education than on any other issue since I’ve been elected.

As one parent said to me recently, we spend $1,000 per student less than the average Canadian province on education. Can we really afford to not even be average? The Premier obviously thinks we can.

[1530]

Essentially, all we got from the throne speech on public education was this Premier bragging about labour peace. But when it comes to public education for our kids, we have a Premier who just doesn’t listen, or she just doesn’t care.

And what about transit and transportation, an issue near and dear to my community, which is at the crossroads of the Lower Mainland? Some 500,000 vehicle trips pass through every day without stopping.

Well, because the Premier said there was going to be a referendum, we’re going to have a referendum. That’s what passes for leadership on this issue. We’re going to let people vote. We didn’t vote on whether we were going to have the Sea to Sky Highway. We didn’t vote on the Port Mann Bridge or the Golden Ears or the Massey Tunnel.

This throne speech was an opportunity for the Premier to lead on a vital issue of transportation and public transit, to say yes to transportation and public transit and also to say: “Yes, this Liberal government made a mess of TransLink when we took away accountability and democratic control, and we’re going to fix that.”

It was also an opportunity for her to say that if voters vote yes in the upcoming referendum, the provincial government will also step up to the plate and commit its one-third of the funding and go to bat to get funding from the federal government too. But instead, we got a complete failure of leadership from this Premier.

Let me turn now to health care. Health care — two words in the entire throne speech. “Health care” — stated once. That’s it. Forty-two percent of the provincial budget and it merited two words. I kept thinking there were more paragraphs to come, but no. Several paragraphs on liquor. Not a single sentence on health care — a sure sign of a government that’s out of gas and out of ideas; not listening, or maybe just not caring.

If the Premier were listening, she would be hearing the same stories that I hear every day and that people on both sides of this House surely hear. Uncertainty about whether health care is going to be there for ourselves and our families when we need it. If the Premier isn’t hearing those concerns, maybe she should spend some of those days when she doesn’t come to this House out there visiting some hospitals in order to find out what’s really happening.

Hallway medicine is the order of the day. Sadly, there are an awful lot of hospitals to choose from. Like Royal Columbian Hospital, in New Westminster. What’s happening right now as we speak: a 68-year-old man who was admitted several weeks ago for major surgery — he thought he might have to have his foot amputated; luckily, he didn’t — has been on a stretcher for more than three weeks. We can do better. We must do better.

Hallway medicine is nothing new in my community, and sadly, it’s nothing new across the province. And what does the government say? What is their response? “Be patient.”

At Fraser Health, they say: “We did a top-level review. We’re hoping to find ways to be more efficient. Be patient.” Small comfort to that man who’s been lying in a hallway for three weeks now.

The Premier could also visit Surrey Memorial Hospital, where there’s a new emergency room open. Half a billion dollars and still overflowing. Some days 300, some days 500 — and again people stacked up in hospital hallways.

What’s the government’s response? “We didn’t anticipate volumes this high” or “It’s flu season. Be patient.” How could the government not anticipate a spike in volume with a spanking-new emergency room? And as for flu season, it’s completely predictable. It happens every year.

So we have a brand-new emergency room severely short-staffed and the same old hallway medicine. The same story is happening as we speak, in Prince George at the University Hospital of Northern British Columbia. The story goes on in one community after another.

We also didn’t hear anything in this throne speech about deepening concerns about wait-lists, whether it’s MRIs, wait times for surgery or even for cancer treatment. We certainly heard those concerns raised in the fall, about the B.C. Cancer Agency. We heard them from oncologists. We heard them from research scientists. We heard them from former CEOs. We heard them in this House on many occasions.

This would have been an opportunity for the Premier to acknowledge, “Yes, we once led the world. We were on the leading edge of cancer cure and cancer treatment. But we’ve fallen behind. Our wait-lists for cancer treatment are getting longer,” and to set out a bold vision to make sure that we restored that world-leading role for the sake of those of our loved ones who have cancer now or who
[ Page 5677 ]
will in future. They deserve much better, and we didn’t hear anything about that in this throne speech.

[1535]

Throne speeches are about a time to set out lofty goals — brand-new slogans, I understand. Like “A GP for me” — a general practitioner for every British Columbian by 2015. Not a word about that in this throne speech. No wonder, because right across the province the story is the same: hundreds of thousands of British Columbians who cannot find a family doctor. They are worried, very worried. I hear about it in my community every day. I hear about it on Twitter. It’s commonplace — a sign on a doctor’s office: “I’m retiring. This office is closing. There’s no one to take my place.”

I visited Logan Lake a while ago, after hearing about the dire situation there. They’ve been without a regular doctor for eight months. The only nurse practitioner in the clinic had a wait-list of six weeks or more. And what a shock it was to see an entire emergency room — when you contrast it with what’s happening elsewhere — sitting empty, the beds empty because there wasn’t a doctor to tend to people who had emergency needs.

Those patients had to travel to Kamloops in sometimes treacherous weather conditions in order to get to Royal Inland Hospital there. In order to see a family doctor — that was for an emergency, just to see a family doctor — sick people, including very ill seniors, had to get up early, travel to Kamloops — again, often in very difficult weather conditions on the Coquihalla in the middle of winter. Once they got to Kamloops, what happened there? Well, they faced the same situation as thousands of Kamloops residents already do. They lined up at the walk-in clinic. They took a number. “Take a number.”

They had to compete with the Kamloops residents already in line outside of the walk-in clinic. They told me, some of them, that they prayed that their number would come up before the quota for the walk-in clinic was filled up for the day. If their number didn’t come up by whenever that clinic was closing and if they were taking only 25 patients that day, what did they have to do? They had to drive back home on the Coquihalla and travel back the next day.

If they were really, really gravely ill, where do they go? The emergency room, compounding already serious, serious problems at Royal Inland Hospital or wherever this same story plays out.

The story is even worse in communities like Fort St. John and many other northern and rural parts of British Columbia. So I have to ask again: whatever happened to the government’s promise of “A GP for me”? It was a great slogan — a GP for every British Columbian who needs one, by 2015. Well, it’s now 2015, and somehow that slogan didn’t make it back into the throne speech. No mention of nurse practitioners either. That was a great slogan too — “An NP for me.” “A nurse practitioner for me” — no mention of that in the throne speech.

No mention of expanding the team-based care that urban and rural communities in British Columbia so desperately need. Our government could look to other provinces to see how they are moving ahead by leaps and bounds with team-based care. In Alberta, for instance, the government has invested in several new family care clinics, and nine more are scheduled to come on stream soon.

In Ontario there are 140 community care centres — I visited one just a few weeks ago — with more of them coming on stream all the time in urban and rural and northern and First Nations communities. They have a wide range of health care providers. They have family doctors, nurse practitioners, public health nurses, dietitians, social workers — the appropriate care provider for what the patient needs.

Do you know what? We talk a lot about outcomes, and outcomes are critically important. Well, here’s an outcome that our government should learn from: 22 percent fewer emergency room visits in Ontario by patients of team-based community health centres. If this government wants to look for solutions, they’re there. It’s an excellent model, tried and true, serving urban and rural and northern and First Nations communities.

[1540]

No vision like that for expanding team-based care to take pressure off our emergency rooms, pressure off our more costly acute care hospitals. In fact, as we know and as we have debated in this House, this government shut down several community health centres in primary care in Vancouver in the last year.

I mentioned rural health, because these community health centres serve rural and northern communities extremely well when they’re in place. There was not one single word about rural health in this throne speech, not one single word about mental health either.

At a time when — and this happens across B.C. — one in three calls to police stations is about mental health issues, when our emergency rooms are full of people with mental illnesses, when that’s absolutely the last place in the world where they should be but there are no proper services in the community, there’s not a word, not one word in this throne speech, about mental health. Does the Premier have any idea what’s happening out there? Is she listening? Or is it that she just doesn’t care?

Then let me speak also about seniors care. Perhaps the most heartbreaking stories of all are about what’s happening with care for our seniors. Family after family expresses to me their uncertainty about seniors care, whether it’s going to be there for their parents who need it now, or whether it’s going to be there for themselves in the future when they need it.

Last week I heard a story from a home support worker that made me want to cry. This community health worker had five clients to visit in their homes in a six-hour period, and that included her travel time. Needless to say, against
[ Page 5678 ]
everything that this care worker believes in, everything she wants to do, is trained to do and is passionate about doing, she’s essentially put into an assembly-line situation, trying to bathe people, to feed them, to assist clients — mainly frail, elderly patients — with toileting and then rush on to see her next frail, elderly client.

This is the heartbreaking story she told a group of people assembled at a seniors conference, speaking to the seniors advocate about what’s happening in seniors care. She told the story of seeing one of her regular clients, an elderly woman. This woman didn’t want a bath. She didn’t want to eat. She told her she just wanted to die.

Yet for this care worker, comforting this woman in her hour of fear and loneliness, taking the time to sit and to hold this woman’s hand…. Well, that’s not something that a care support worker is supposed to do. She didn’t have time in her schedule to do that.

This is unacceptable. These seniors built this province and built this country. They deserve the right to live out their last days with dignity and respect, and they can’t get the support they need in their own homes.

In my own community an elderly woman contacted my community office recently for help. She has MS, a deteriorating condition, and she desperately needs and wants more home support hours than she’s able to get — not only for feeding, bathing and assisting her with toileting at different times of the day but also support so that she can get some exercise, so that she can maybe rebuild, minimally, a little bit of her strength, so that she can have a bit better quality of life and maybe be able to be independent in her home just a little bit longer.

I think she deserves that. But she can’t get it. We can do better. We must do better. Our seniors deserve better.

In residential care we hear the same heartbreaking stories. It’s rush, rush, rush — little time for caring. Not enough time to attend to the residents’ physical needs, their medical needs — much less their emotional needs, their need for social support, their loneliness, their isolation, their fear. Care aides are often told that it’s just not part of the job. If they’re not told that…. Well, they still just don’t have the time to be able to provide that care.

[1545]

Then there is the devastating impact of contract flipping in residential care. This is a familiar story, back since the days when this Liberal government introduced Bill 29, the case that went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, to say that breaking contracts was about violation of fundamental Charter rights and freedoms.

However, there’s a little piece that remains, and that’s one that allows, in workplaces like residential care facilities, for the owner to flip a contract, the contractor to be replaced by another contractor. That story is being repeated time and time again. We hear it every month. We hear it many times a year. It’s a disgrace. Something should be done about it, and this Premier could have done something in this throne speech.

It’s happening as we speak — pink slips being given to care providers at the Inglewood Care Centre in North Vancouver. This is a practice that doesn’t just hurt the workers who have dedicated their lives to caring for our vulnerable seniors. It tears the care providers away from those vulnerable seniors, and they are the people who are often closest to them in their lives, dealing with their most intimate care needs, seeing them more often than their blood family members.

At this particular facility it’s been the sixth flip of a contract since Bill 29 came in back in 2002 — the sixth time the contract has been flipped. It needs to change. This Premier, this government, should step up to the plate and take care of this disgrace.

Let me conclude by saying, as I did at the outset, what an honour it is to represent the people of New Westminster and what an honour it is to advocate for better health care for British Columbians — for British Columbians from one corner of the province to the other.

I have to say that the most moving and memorable day in my time as official opposition spokesperson for Health came last Saturday when I had the opportunity to join the Pediatric Cancers Survivorship Society to celebrate their hard-won victory in finally, finally getting a specialized program to deal with childhood cancer survivors who are dealing with often horrifying late effects of the treatment they received as children. It was an honour to be by their side, to celebrate. It was an honour to stand by their side and to advocate for them in this House. I say today that their struggles are far from over, and we will continue to stand by their side.

Let me finally say that while this throne speech on every front ignores the real concerns of families right across British Columbia, the people of New Westminster and the people of British Columbia can count on the official opposition to fight for them every single day of the year — day in, day out, 365 days of the year.

I am honoured to have been able to open debate on behalf of the official opposition.

D. Barnett: I am pleased to rise today and have the opportunity to respond to the throne speech. But first and foremost, I would like to begin by acknowledging and thanking each of the constituents of the Cariboo-Chilcotin riding. I appreciate the enduring small-town spirit and the resilience of the constituents of the Cariboo-Chilcotin, who want to help themselves and others. I would also like to thank my constituency assistants, Bonnie Gavin and Beverly Harris; my legislative assistant, Chantel Elloway, and staff; and my dear friends and family.

[1550]

British Columbia has been built on a vision. It was never built in one day. It was built over time. Our government has taken bold steps towards realizing that vision by focusing on economic growth, creating jobs and
[ Page 5679 ]
focusing on our thriving resource industries. We have worked to predict the needs of the economy, to work with the private sector — whether that’s mining, forestry, natural gas, agriculture, technology or tourism — to understand what their needs are going to be and then work backward to re-engineer our educational system and to ensure that British Columbians have the skills that they need to be able to take advantage of the one million new jobs by 2020, where close to half will be in trades and technical professions.

The importance of resource industries. It is one thing to say we choose growth; it is another to find new ways to grow. Our government has done this with 18 proposed LNG export projects, consistently being in the top three provinces for business confidence, more than 250 treaty and non-treaty agreements with First Nations and trade up with China by 1,900 percent over ten years. We have increased softwood and lumber exports 20-fold, mining employment has doubled since 2001, and we are on track to balancing our third consecutive budget in a row.

British Columbians elected us on a promise of a strong economy and secure tomorrow. We’re delivering on this mandate for British Columbians today and for future generations. We are going to stick with the plan. That is a plan that means we are going to support the resource economy in our province. We are going to grow British Columbia jobs. We are going to focus on international trade. We are going to build a workforce that is second to none. We are going to create a future for our children, the equal of what our parents and grandparents created for us, bar none.

Our province has a choice to make. Do we choose the path of growth, create hope for the future and leave a sustainable legacy for our children, grandchildren and future generations? Or do we continue along our existing path and not seize on the opportunity presented to us? Our government believes that taking the path less travelled will truly make all the difference. That is why it is time we not only think outside the box, but it is time to act.

Our government is taking action and looking at ways to say yes to job growth, yes to responsible resource development, yes to standing up for the skills they need and yes to the interests of all British Columbians regardless of where in the province they live. We do this by working together to achieve the best possible future for our province and responsibly develop our resources so we can create a legacy that will indeed benefit all British Columbians.

Agriculture. A legacy is not only something previously received, but it is also the contributions made. British Columbia is planting the seeds of growth today — the growth of our economy, of jobs and of the secure tomorrow. The seeds sown today will be the harvest of tomorrow.

Today the economy of the Cariboo region is resource-based — forestry, mining, tourism and a strong and unique agriculture sector. With agriculture representing one of the earliest primary industries in the Cariboo-Chilcotin since the gold rush days, it is truly our ranchers who are the heart of B.C. food production.

Our nation was built on the work of not only ranchers but foresters, who work hard to feed our families and sustain rural communities. Forestry is a multigenerational industry that has created nearly 58,000 jobs in very small communities.

[1555]

The William title case. I understand there is an uneasy feeling in the West Chilcotin, as those who have timber tenures, private land grazing leases, are waiting to hear about their future.

Last year’s Supreme Court decision presented all of us with a unique opportunity, a chance to build a better, more stable and fairer partnership with B.C.’s First Nations peoples and provide certainty for all.

It is industries such as mining that have sustained the people of British Columbia from the very beginning. We believe this is the right approach, as it enables First Nations to fully participate in economic development and brings more benefits quickly to aboriginal communities.

It starts with agreements. Since 2006 the provincial government has signed over 250 significant agreements with First Nations. They range from history-making treaties and reconciliation agreements to economic development agreements.

The Cariboo is a region dependent on forestry but, as previously and currently, benefits from the mining and mineral exploration sector. Mining takes up a very small portion of B.C.’s land base — less than 1 percent — but it makes a tremendous impact on our economy. British Columbia’s economy and workers benefit greatly from mining, contributing millions in revenue to help pay for services like health care and education and employing over 30,000 workers with an average salary of $114,000.

Mining provides well-paying, secure jobs throughout British Columbia and is one of the most important industries in the province. Our mining industry is respected around the world, as we are becoming more attractive to investors and creating partnerships with First Nations in support of resource development.

As a result, our government recently announced it will establish a major mines permitting office to improve the coordination of mine permits across government, add staff to conduct more inspections and permit reviews, and improve turnaround times for work permits.

In addition, the environmental assessment certificate for the Prosperity gold-copper project, located over 120 kilometres southwest of Williams Lake, has been extended for another five years.

We are more than halfway towards achieving our jobs plan goals of eight new mines and nine mine expansions
[ Page 5680 ]
by 2015. To continue our success, our government believes in building and maintaining partnerships with industry, communities, government and First Nations. It is fostering these partnerships and continuing to improve permitting processes that will continue to benefit communities in our province and strengthen our mining industry so it will thrive for decades to come.

The Mount Polley devastation. One of the many ways that our community in the Cariboo-Chilcotin has collaborated and shown their resilient, small-town spirit is by their strength and support in good times and bad times and standing together as one.

We know today that the accident in Mount Polley could have happened anywhere, but it happened here in British Columbia. Now that we know the cause we can devote all of our energy to taking the leadership in Canada and internationally to learn from this and ensure it never happens again.

I hope the mine opens up soon, as approximately 400 workers depend on this mine to take care of their families, not to forget all of the support service they provide — schools, health care, small business and other professions that are used to support these 400 workers.

Responsible stewardship of the environment is a vital element of natural resource industries, and if there are findings that make them better and safer, our government is going to do it.

[1600]

Our local economy is not only based on agriculture, forestry and mining, but also tourism. Although it is the land that sustains us, the Cariboo couldn’t be without the people that enrich its culture, history and uniqueness. With so much diversity of family-owned-and-operated local businesses, the business owners still have that welcoming rural, small-town spirit.

I am so proud of the Cariboo-Chilcotin region, which is rich in the spirit of adventure and is such a beautiful land that is full of entrepreneurs, outdoor enthusiasts, artists, explorers and families in our community that contribute so much to making those from close by or far away want to visit, work and play.

As a former mayor of 100 Mile House, the current Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations for Rural Development, and holding the responsibility of leading the new rural advisory council on the creation and implementation of the rural dividend, I have truly been a longtime advocate and believer in the importance of rural B.C.

The majority of wealth is generated by resource development in rural areas. In 1908 natural resources were the only game in town. Whether you were born here or had just arrived, natural resources offered the only real chance to build a career. But those unexpected changes are the ones that we will adapt to — even find opportunity in.

The concept of a dividend recognizes that when investments in our communities yield results, we have to ensure that the communities are able to share those benefits. We need to ensure that rural British Columbians have an equitable share in the economic benefits generated from resource-based industries.

In B.C. our strength in so many diverse sectors means we have protected B.C. from being dependent on a single market or single commodity downturn. That’s progress, but there is still much work that needs to be done. With the innovation and collaboration from citizens of rural communities, we all hold our destiny within ourselves — a destiny that is not a matter of chance, but a matter of choice.

British Columbia made a strong choice by re-electing our government, who has a clear vision. Let us lead, and we’ll be partners, as together we make British Columbia stronger.

The throne speech enforces how our government is supporting the economy by creating the winning conditions for business, developing our workforce, supporting rural communities, promoting entrepreneurship, driving innovation and, most importantly, growing our natural resource sector. The throne speech is one that I am proud to be a supporter of, and I urge all my colleagues to do so and support and vote for this throne speech.

N. Macdonald: First, let’s deal with what was not in the speech but sums up perfectly the government’s agenda. It is this government’s intent to give a $230 million-a-year tax break to the richest 2 percent of British Columbians at a time when everyone else is losing services and ordinary families are being squeezed.

Let’s be clear. Despite whatever that was in the throne speech that was said, the true agenda of this government is put out clearly with that move. This is a government that is for a privileged elite and operates to the short- and long-term detriment of the broader public consistently.

The question is: how did they get elected? How did that happen if that was the case? But it is the case in their actions. How did they get elected? Let’s spend a little time digging into that, because this is the year that the government literally ran out of gas in their throne speech.

[1605]

This year’s throne speech downplayed the LNG fantasy for the first time. We have gone through where you could literally have parlour games. It didn’t matter which question you asked government or the Premier. Somehow, it would be related to LNG.

Then all of a sudden, as the LNG dream, fantasy fizzles out, you have government standing up and saying: “Well, good thing that failed, because now we’re diverse.” Right? “Good thing we don’t have LNG to depend on, because then we’d be just depending on LNG.” So that’s quite a switch.

I guess it reminds me of Bre-X. You know, at some point it all falls apart. We’ve arrived at that point. Just like
[ Page 5681 ]
with Bre-X, we were overpromised. It was always a salted sample that the Premier was offering voters. That’s the reality of it, and that’s the reality that is more and more clear to this day.

As the government members stand up and revel in the fact that we don’t have LNG, so therefore we have a diverse economy…. Well, that’s an interesting switch. Good on the 200 or 300-odd people in government services that provide government members with those talking points. Well done. Good.

I mean, let’s understand this. The concept of a liquefied natural gas industry in British Columbia is based upon a substantial price difference between the North American market and Asian markets for natural gas. Because of relatively new technologies and drilling techniques, the supply of natural gas in North America increased dramatically, and it pushed down prices here. Now that trend continues — to this day, actually. Prices are pushed down in the North American market.

For a time, the time that we are really going to focus on here, it was about $4 per million Btu for natural gas in North America, and it was up at as much as $18 per million Btu in Asia. At those prices, conceivably, one could take our natural gas from the northeast of the province, and you could pipe it to the coast. You could liquefy that natural gas by cooling it to minus 162 degrees Celsius. You could put it on specially designed ships and send it to market in Asia, where it is returned to gas and then piped to markets in Japan and China and Korea as well — other markets, potentially. That was the idea that we heard about ad nauseam, as what was going to create wonderful things for British Columbia.

The problem is and the problem was that that price difference was always ephemeral. It was never something that was going to stay that way. Even in 2011 it was clear that the Asian prices would change. I would ask members, if you take the issue seriously, to just google energy market reports and articles from that period. It is all there. Once Asian prices get to about $10 per million Btu in Asia, none of the economics work. That’s the reality. That was the reality then; that is the reality now.

In 2011 — I’ll just remind members — Japan shut down all 42 nuclear reactors because of Fukushima, and they started buying natural gas — liquefied natural gas. At the same time, China decides that it has to deal with an air pollution problem and replaces thermal coal with LNG. So you had in that period of time in Asia a price spike. In 2012 and 2013 you can look at articles that are talking about that price spike. From them, if you read them, it makes it clear that most knew it was a temporary spike, for a couple of reasons.

First, you had a series of massive Australian projects coming on line. You had a Russian pipeline deal that was expected and, of course, now came into play. You had Turkmenistan. Turkmenistan is actually the largest supplier to China of natural gas. They were going to increase their production. You also had Uzbekistan increasing shipments to China, and China itself getting ready to develop its own reserves. You now have Japan starting back its nuclear program.

[1610]

Prices in Asia are below $10 per million Btu, which means that the economics for B.C. LNG projects are marginal or nonexistent.

None of that was not known — or I mean it should have been known — going back prior to the election, which means that all of this, like Bre-X, was just salting the sample for voters. That’s all it was. Like I say, the proof is there. Google it. Go back. Have a look at the articles, the reports that were there. An election trick for the B.C. Liberals. And just like Bre-X, most lose, but I guess from a B.C. Liberal MLA’s perspective, there are always a few that seem to win, right?

By the way, the bills that passed in the fall mean that it’s not the cleanest LNG. That’s clear from the bill. And there’s no revenue. Now, $125 million per year six to eight years after an LNG plant starts operating does not give you the revenue stream that you talked about, that was promised by Liberal MLAs.

Let’s move past that. I guess the government speechwriters have and have started to talk about the beauty of diversity, all those things that were forgotten about for years on end.

Let’s get all the MLAs up to speed. The previous speaker talked about 17 or 18 LNG plants. Well, that’s not going to happen. I think the person who sits behind the member who just spoke, the member for Peace River North, was more accurate in saying we’d be lucky to get one. Right? We’ll be lucky to get one. If we do, we’re ahead of the game — sure.

But let’s put this in perspective. It’s not a game changer. An LNG plant employs — what? — 130 people. Less than a pulp and paper plant. How about saving a few pulp and paper plants? We’d be further ahead.

What does the Premier say? Even in this speech they threw out numbers that are made up on LNG. Let’s give you a few examples. One hundred thousand jobs. That’s a made-up number. That’s not a number that was ever real or true. It’s simply a talking point that was repeated and repeated. Just like with Bre-X, if you repeat it enough, you can get people excited, get them in there, and sure, it worked. But the ethics of that, the morality of that — well, that’s worth thinking on a bit more deeply.

A $1 trillion boost to the economy. Not happening. A $100 billion prosperity fund. That’s not happening. And get rid of the debt. Well, what a joke. The debt has risen under this government, under the B.C. Liberals, from about $31 billion to $168 billion when you combine contractual obligations and debt. That’s the record. But stick “debt-free” to the side of the bus and off you go, and see what happens.

Are there going to be 17 LNG plants? Is the first one
[ Page 5682 ]
going to be in place by 2015? The answer is a resounding no. That is just not going to happen.

Okay. Now, it is amazingly delusional. I think when running a $44 billion organization like the government of B.C. with the ability to impact people’s lives so dramatically and as the highest level of democratic institutions in the province, there would be some need to work within the realm of what is real rather than fantasy. But obviously that’s not the case from the B.C. Liberal perspective.

The government says: “Well, diversity. We’ve got other things we’re concentrating on now.” And look at that list. I’d just invite members on the government side to actually look at that list and see how lacking that list is.

For transportation — what was listed under transportation? After 12 years in power and literally shelves of plans, the promise is another transportation plan. Well, that’s great. Another transportation plan. What about the old Trans-Canada Highway plan? The promise was four-lane divided by 2021 from Kamloops to the Alberta border. Remember that promise?

[1615]

At the pace that work is being done and has been done over the past ten years, it will take 61 years to complete that promise. Not six — 61 years.

Now, the government did do some work. There’s no question. Prior to the 2009 election the government put up signs saying: “Four-laning, divided highway coming soon.” They replaced those signs just prior to the 2013 election. I’m sure they’re painting them, getting them ready for the 2017 election.

That’s not the same as a road that is safe. That is 400 kilometres between Kamloops and the Alberta border of some of the most dangerous driving that you could do in this country. Between 2007 and now there have been 100 deaths. I think all of you need to understand, and I’m sure you know, the ripple effect that those violent tragic deaths have on families, on individuals — and in that same period, over 1,000 serious injuries.

You also have over 500 closures, sometimes days at a time, of a road that carries twice as much in value of goods as any other interior B.C. road combined. This is a critical, critical road. The value of exports that travel on that road on trucks is $3 billion per year, and it is, in places, a Third World road.

I’ll give you an example just out of Golden, at a site where a bus filled with students — this goes back into the ’90s — was hit by a truck that was carrying pipes, and students died. It was a band trip. That section still hasn’t been fixed. It is a 40 kilometre per hour corner on our national highway, right?

It is divided all the way across Manitoba. It is divided all the way across Saskatchewan. It is divided all the way across Alberta. But when you hit the B.C. border, you better watch out, because it is substandard in too many areas, despite promises and despite an ongoing promise.

What was said here in this throne speech? “Oh, we’re going to do a plan. We’re going to talk to people.” Like we haven’t talked about this forever? How about doing some work and meeting the commitments that were made?

As I drove here, I went on a road that had rocks on it — a major highway with rocks scattered across it. It’s unbelievable. Maintenance is too often a problem. We should think about that when you’re talking about balancing the budget, because first, you play tricks with that, with accrual accounts and other tricks that you use. But you also are making decisions that impact people’s lives when you skimp on maintenance.

Deputy Speaker: Through the Chair.

N. Macdonald: These are roads that at times you can’t…. We have people that phone the office saying they cannot stand on the road because it doesn’t have the grit. It doesn’t have the work that should be done. Maintenance is one issue. For a substandard road, when you don’t maintain it, that’s a problem — the fact that the quality of the road isn’t there.

In the summer, to be honest, there are 10,000 vehicles a day on that road, and it is Albertans and semis. If you’re from that area, you’ll understand. I mean, I love Alberta. But Albertans — they take outrageous chances on a substandard road. I guess they’re used to freeways. They pass when they just shouldn’t. They’re like the Seattle Seahawks, I guess. They should not pass in places. There are consequences to how they drive, but it’s the numbers as well — the numbers of semis, the numbers of people that are inexperienced on those roads.

The problem with nothing but false promises is that people have expectations built and then not acted upon. It also means that there is a lack of using our resources wisely. There are things that we should be doing here in this House.

We had a forestry committee that all agreed on the direction that we should go. The previous speaker was part of that. We made recommendations collectively in the last parliament. We spent $300,000 of taxpayers’ money, and we said that there needed to be investments in these areas.

[1620]

That was work that reflected what we were told in communities across the Interior and reflected the opinion not only of the NDP but also reflected the opinion of government members. It went nowhere. Nothing was done with it.

The money that is being given to the top 2 percent, that $230 million…. Do you realize what it could do? In forestry, where we’ve lost 30,000 jobs, where we’ve had 100 mills closed, where the growth in exports that members talk about…. It’s raw logs. It’s 7.7 million cubic metres of raw logs. A raw log is a telephone pole of wood. If you took that wood and you put it on logging trucks, you could line it up in one year — what we send off as a log
[ Page 5683 ]
— and send it all the way to Thunder Bay and halfway back. It is an incredible amount of wasted opportunity.

You know, 100 years ago we could take a log and do something with it. It’s still the law. We’re supposed to, but we don’t. So when you’re up bragging about what you do in forestry, realize, as government members, that you’re the ones who allow 7.7 million cubic metres to leave the province with nothing done. The branches knocked off, chopped a couple of times, on the boat. As if we couldn’t, as British Columbians, do more with that resource. That’s what you’re agreeing to here.

As I said, $230 million. What would you get with that in forestry? Well, you’d get an inventory that’s up to date. You would be able to have community consultation on what happens on public lands.

Have none of you heard people come to your offices and say: “That would be an important thing to have happen”? You could replant so we don’t have 2 million hectares of public lands — and this isn’t the companies that are responsible — that should be replanted that’s not. That’s not, because, wow, we’ve got to give the richest 2 percent another $290 million. Because the gold faucets on the yacht need to be changed every two years or something. What are they going to spend it on?

Are there not better ways of spending that money? I’m pretty sure that you could find many.

I’m just talking about the committee that I sat on. Of course, these committees really go nowhere in forming the opinion of the government, and yet, still government members go along with everything you’re handed. That’s what I don’t understand. You come here as free thinkers with all sorts of experience in local government where you thought for yourself, and you come in here and just go along with whatever. Like I say, that’s something I don’t understand at all.

That’s what’s happening with forestry. For years, we’ve had: “Don’t look at that. Look at LNG.” Now we’re not looking at LNG anymore, so what are you looking at? Back to forestry? Now that’s all of a sudden the most important thing in the world after years of ignoring it? Okay. I guess that’s what you’re left with.

We miss opportunities to build ships here. We can build ships here. We’re paying for them. It’s not just Germany or Poland that can build ships. We can build ships. There was a time…. W.A.C. Bennett, all that time ago, had a vision. Now, that was a vision. He forced mines to take and create what you have in Trail — that was out of the Sullivan mine in Kimberley — saying: “Okay, there’s lead, there’s zinc, we’re going to do something with it here.”

Yet what do we do with our copper? Do we process any of it? Is that not a possibility? Are there not ways that we can use our natural gas domestically? Golden, Revelstoke, Invermere, places I represent — we don’t have natural gas. We don’t have the system completed into our communities. Isn’t it possible that that’s a project one could take on to use our resource for people here in B.C.? I think if you ask people, they would say that’s a pretty sensible thing to do. But we don’t really ever ask those people, not with forestry, not with any of these resource decisions.

You sit with the CEOs. I don’t think many of the government members sit with the CEOs, but the people who tell you what to vote for do. They get what they want. It works for them.

The throne speech talked about the pledged open mines. Let’s be clear. When that pledge was made, these mines were on line, right? So that wasn’t much of a guess. The pledge was to open eight mines by 2015.

[1625]

Well, it’s 2015. Five are opened. I didn’t see it in the throne speech — foreclosed, right? One is down to half-shift, Mount Polley. Hopefully it’ll get going again, but it’s certainly not working full. If that’s what you’re bragging about and we’re supposed to be enthused about “steady as you go,” first, you missed your mark. Secondly, it’s not a great record.

Now it might be more honest to say that these are always going to be complicated projects. That’s true. And the B.C. government will never control the value of these commodities. Is the government to be taking credit for things when it picks up? At the same time, you have to take the blame when it goes down.

To be honest, there’s nobody in this House that really controls an awful lot of the factors in the commodity prices. We simply have to go along with it. It is true that mining is an important employer. Properly done, it can be beneficial and can have limited impact on the environment.

The government’s central job here is oversight. I don’t have time here to go into all of the factors. But on August 4, 2014, 25 million cubic metres of water and tailings poured into Quesnel Lake. That should never have happened.

The government spin that there was one factor…. The problem with that is not political, as you think. The problem is that you’re not going to fix the problem if you don’t embrace the fact that there are tremendous weaknesses here. That mine built up….

With the permission of the government of British Columbia, the Ministry of Energy and Mines built a wall that was unstable at its base. It’s true. It turns out the wall was too thin. There was no buttress. It was designed to take tailings with a covering of water, and instead it was filled up with water. It should never have been operated that way.

The report that was done by this panel, I was prepared to be cynical about. When I first heard the news coverage I thought: “Oh, what a whitewash.” But as I read the report…. It’s actually a very, very good report, and there is lots in there to learn. These are three people who did a very good job. I would invite people to read it. And we also have about 100 documents that are missing that
[ Page 5684 ]
were kept out of the report by the Ministry of Energy and Mines that we need to see.

What cannot happen is for this to be just passed off as a one-off. The conclusion of the panel is that this could happen twice again in the next ten years. That’s in there — a number of times in the next 30 years. It can never happen again.

The comparison that I try to give is how do you manage this sort of structure if you want it never to fail? There are examples of that. You simply need to look at B.C. Hydro. Above Revelstoke is Mica dam, which is an earth-filled structure. And Revelstoke dam, which is concrete in parts, is largely earth filled as well. These can never fail. If Mica dam failed, it would devastate the Columbia Valley all the way down to Portland. Portland would be inundated.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

The mindset of B.C. Hydro is: “Safety first. The structure cannot fail.” You just look at the regime they have. When we talk about inspections and observations…. It makes it sound, when the minister’s talking, like these inspectors just come and have a look. They don’t just come and have a look. They look at the instruments that are there. They look at the written documents. There is a whole regime that catches problems before they become disasters.

Here in B.C. we had no geotechnical engineer for a number of years. You know how many investigations were done by government on Mount Polley in 2010, 2011, 2012? How often did our government go and check on how they were doing? They were doing terrible, by the way.

Zero. Didn’t check at all. Big surprise that there’s a problem. I think there’s no surprise at all. But as this government tries to evade the core problems here, it sets up a scenario where they can be repeated.

[1630]

We only have to look at Burns Lake for an example of the consequences of what is politically expedient but of course is to the detriment of the broader public. Burns Lake offered lessons. First off, we know what should have been done to prevent Burns Lake. It should never have happened in the first place. The explosion of the mine… But the same thing should never, ever have been allowed to occur shortly thereafter, in exactly the same situation.

It speaks to a failure, and it speaks to a government that put a tremendous effort in controlling the political fallout but to the detriment, I think, of the safety of workers. We can’t have the same thing happening with Mount Polley.

You know, in the context of a tax cut of $230 million to the richest 2 percent, I’d just like to bring you back to what you’re hearing in your office. How many are hearing from people that are struggling to pay their fees, struggling to pay for B.C. Hydro?

We have people on fixed incomes. We have people that are limited in their choice for other heating options, and B.C. Hydro is an example of a good idea from a previous government that this government has messed with and damaged, perhaps irreparably. We’re going to have 26½ percent increases over the next two years in hydro. People are still unhappy about the smart meters. I mean, you’re hearing about it too.

B.C. Hydro is something that is the crown jewel of our Crown corporations. It is an incredible organization. Like I say, the way they manage dams that are in our region is a wonderful example of how you would do it properly, but the B.C. Liberals have encumbered it with debt. They messed with it. If I had more time I would go through and just list all of the mistakes that this government has made with B.C. Hydro as it removed it from oversight of the B.C. Utilities Commission.

One interesting point is that I guess we’re bringing the B.C. Utilities Commission back. It does remind you of….

Interjection.

N. Macdonald: In 2018, right. It’s like St. Augustine said. I think I’m quoting him from you. It’s: “Give me chastity; just not yet.” I think that’s the government’s attitude with the B.C. Utilities Commission. I think I’m quoting my colleague from Vancouver on that one.

Interjection.

N. Macdonald: St. Augustine.

There’s so much more I wanted to get into, actually. I want to talk about environmental assessments. I’ll just quickly say that the member from Cariboo south talked about Fish Lake. Let’s just be clear. The Mount Polley disaster wrecked Quesnel Lake.

The environmental assessment in process here in B.C. is so lax that the government was going to skip the step of a dam breach wrecking a lake. They gave permission, through the environmental assessment process, to go ahead and wreck Fish Lake with the Prosperity mine: “Just dump them in there. Let’s not wait for the tailings pond to collapse. Let’s just dump it in there.”

Thanks, as always, for the opportunity. I’ll, of course, be voting against it.

Hon. S. Cadieux: As always, I’m pleased to respond in support of the Speech from the Throne and the direction set out by the government. I’m humbled always by the opportunity given to me by my constituents to serve as their representative — I know that we all are — and I will continue to work hard to ensure that they are represented well in this House.

I am, of course, ever grateful to my husband, Daniel, for supporting me and to my extended family for understanding the long absences that this career provides. As
[ Page 5685 ]
many of us note when we rise in the House to speak, we couldn’t do the job here if we didn’t have fantastic people in our offices back in our constituencies assisting us and assisting our constituents to navigate government systems and just to listen and express and convey concerns to us.

I’d like to say thank you to Sharon Crowson. I’d like to welcome Annie Christiaens. A fond farewell to Holly Halford, who’s decided not to return but instead to stay home with her young family, which I respect greatly. And a thank-you and best wishes to Scantone Jones, who’s been with my office this past year but has other passions to pursue, not the least of which is his work with young entrepreneurs in Surrey.

[1635]

Here in Victoria I also have a great, hard-working staff: Valerie Richmond, Terry Lalari, Brandon Reddy, Wendy King and Julia Phillips. Thank you to them for their long hours and excellent support.

What is Surrey-Cloverdale as a riding? It’s certainly a riding with a history of agriculture. It was first settled by the Boothroyd, Anderson, Shannon and Armstrong families in the 1870s. It was a major transportation hub by the 1890s, with three railways running through the area. Many of the buildings standing today in the historic downtown area date from the major land boom in 1910, including the original municipal hall, which is now the home of Surrey Archives.

The first Cloverdale Rodeo was held in 1945, and it’s grown into an event that incorporates the 127-year-old fall exhibition, now held in May. It’ll be with us again this year, with the rodeo now only second to the Calgary Stampede in size. Be there with us May 15-18 this year.

Cloverdale is rich in B.C. history. That’s evident if you visit the Surrey Museum, the Vintage Truck Museum and the Fraser Valley Heritage Railway, which is now in its third season. If you want to learn about your own history, the Cloverdale library has one of the largest collections of Canadian family history and genealogy in the country.

We’re creating new history in Cloverdale, with new attractions and new community events. The Surrey Night Market had its first year last year, and it’ll return this May, providing excellent family entertainment on the exhibition grounds.

We’re a caring community. Just one example of that is the Cloverdale Christmas hamper program. The Pacific Community Church is the nerve centre for that each December. Armies of volunteers, from the Girl Guides and Scouts and the soccer teams and church groups and local businesses and the RCMP and Kwantlen University, all get together and compile and put together food hampers and things for the season for families, helping more than 627 Cloverdale residents this year. A shout-out to them for that excellent, excellent annual endeavour.

We’re an eclectic community in Cloverdale. We have the Cloverdale flea market, which in 37 years has seen over five million people visit and pass through the gates. It’s well known in the Fraser Valley — lots of fun every Sunday. Certainly, if you’re in our area, I’d encourage you to check it out.

As many in the House will know as may pay attention to the size of neighbouring ridings, we’re a fast-growing riding in Cloverdale. We have quickly densifying neighbourhoods in Clayton and in Grandview, which comes with its own set of challenges.

We’re also a fast-growing community in the business sector. Campbell Heights business area is the fastest-growing industrial area in Metro Vancouver. Far from our agricultural roots, we now have an incredible diversity of companies in Surrey, and in Cloverdale in particular. Endurance Wind Power, Ktech Manufacturing, Loblaws, T&T Supermarket, Sleep Country and B&B Contracting all have offices and locations in that industrial area.

There are great people in Cloverdale. I’d like to note a couple that have been recognized recently: first by the South Surrey and White Rock chamber — business person of the year Guy Dorchester, who owns the Morgan Crossing White Spot; and the Surrey Board of Trade Business Excellence Awards for business owner of the year to Vikram Vij and My Shanti restaurant in Morgan Crossing.

We’re also an engaged community. By that I mean that we have a fabulous engagement between volunteers, community members and our institutions in Surrey on some of the most pressing issues. Certainly, one of those right now in Cloverdale is crime.

This year at the Police Officer of the Year Awards, where they recognized some of those volunteers and civilians as well as RCMP, Jen Temple, who owns Hillcrest Village in Clayton, was presented with the Business Partnership Award for her work. Five out of eight categories for awards this year had nominees from Cloverdale, including Shona Yuzwa, Darlene Bowyer, Linda Stromberg, Dennis Bell and Staff Sgt. Marty Blais.

[1640]

We’re a sporting community in Cloverdale. That’s important with the upcoming Winter Games in Prince George, because among the 2,400 athletes that are competing are a bunch of young people from Surrey — Pin Kuan Ho in badminton, Tyler Tardi in curling, Stephanie Divin in figure skating, Michael Rasmussen in hockey.

A special note there. Michael has been my neighbour for the past 12 years, and I can attest to his great skill, as we have on many occasions wondered what that banging noise was coming from next door. It was Michael shooting hockey pucks in the garage.

All the best to Michael, to Shayna Goodwin in snowboard, Michele Garceau in squash, Seray Sefayi in synchronized swimming and Brooke Ashcroft in target shooting. We’ll wish them well as they compete. We’ll be watching and cheering even if we’re not in Prince George with them, as we are a great community of fans in the sporting arena.
[ Page 5686 ]

Also, in South Surrey–Cloverdale we’re going to host the 2016 Women’s World Fastpitch Championship. Upwards of 30 nations are coming to compete in that softball extravaganza, and we’re very excited to host that.

I wanted to give a little context for the fact that I have a vibrant community that I represent. But switching gears, what’s a throne speech? Many constituents will ask that as we talk. The purpose, of course, is to lay out government’s agenda for the coming session. The fact that that or this isn’t mentioned or that that or this priority or issue isn’t discussed is not that that or this has been pushed aside or ignored.

In fact, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. The throne speech is an opportunity to talk about leadership, and it’s an opportunity to talk about vision — two things that often run a little light on the other side of the House. This throne speech touched on the continued steady course of diversification of economy and continued fiscal discipline, and that is leadership. It touched on the Premier’s commitment to ending domestic violence and the need for strong social services. That is leadership.

The fact that something doesn’t appear in the throne speech doesn’t mean it’s not important. It doesn’t mean we’re going to stop doing the things we started last year, like the push for more adoptions or for building child care or improving early-years services. It doesn’t mean for a moment that we lose focus on our core mandate to protect and support vulnerable children in the Ministry of Children and Family Development.

Now, I’ve been clear in my previous speeches that a strong economy is vital to the work that my ministry does, and I truly believe that. A strong economy allows us to support a robust child protection system to keep children safe, a valuable child care subsidy system for low-income families and countless other services that assist and support families when they need help most. That is the reality, and that is why I am in full support of this government’s direction.

I understand that there are critics and opposition members who believe that the solution often lies, and always lies, in simply spending more money, but I know that taxpayers disagree with that. My constituents disagree with that, and I’m proud to be part of a government that delivers on what voters have asked for. Our government has been clear on our fiscal approach. We have remained steadfast in holding the line on spending to maintain our balanced budget, and the throne speech makes it clear that we’re going to deliver on that again.

It’s also clear that we in B.C. are likely to be one, if not the only, jurisdiction in Canada to deliver a balanced budget this year, and we didn’t get to a balanced budget alone. I want to take a moment to thank the public servants who work with us day in and day out to deliver on government’s agenda and to deliver services to British Columbians, especially those who work in my ministry.

While we are one of the few ministries that have seen budget increases over the past couple years, those increases have been modest, and the dedicated public servants in my ministry have done tremendous work in finding new ways of doing things. As an example, we’ve recently developed a comprehensive plan to address workload issues across our front-line staff. That plan includes an additional 200 staff on the front line and a recruitment and retention strategy aimed at the hardest-to-recruit areas and recruitment lag.

In addition, we’re updating our business processes to better meet the needs of children, families and youth while also — importantly, also — addressing the workload concerns of our staff. All of these changes are being done within our budget, because as I’ve said before, the solution is not always more money.

[1645]

We’ve worked across government to improve services. Case in point: the Ministry of Children and Family Development undertook a strategic project aimed to improve child and youth mental health services and health system services, because one of the most important things we can do is to help those who need our services find them and access them as quickly as possible.

One of the goals was to increase and improve access for families in finding mental or substance use supports and services for their children. We’ve just announced a new on-line map that’s been developed to alleviate some of the stress and frustration that families have felt when navigating the complex system in British Columbia for mental health and substance abuse. The map provides convenient access for B.C. families trying to find supports and services close to home, and it’s a direct response to client and family feedback.

Since its launch on February 4 the new map has received approximately 2,800 page views. That’s a really good result for a government website and a testament to the good work that our public servants do in trying to deliver better services to the public.

Last week the Premier launched the violence-free B.C. strategy. The aim of that strategy is to prevent violence, respond when it takes place and ensure that women can access the supports they need to rebuild their lives. It’s a cross-government strategy to build on the progress that government and our community partners have made in this field in recent years. Together we’ve developed targeted plans and initiatives that are working to make the world, at least in British Columbia, a safer place for women.

Under our three-year provincial domestic violence plan released in February of last year, we are investing in direct services for victims, survivors, perpetrators, aboriginal children and families affected by domestic violence and services specific to remote and rural communities. Why? Because that’s what our stakeholders told us was needed most.

We recognize that there’s still more to do, and
[ Page 5687 ]
violence-free B.C. is the next step. It gives us direction and focus for the coming decade as we work to challenge beliefs and behaviours, to ensure that services are responsive, to support women to rebuild their lives, to address violence against aboriginal women and to foster strong relationships and new partnerships.

Everybody has a role to play. Our strategy lays out a long-term vision that calls on government, on stakeholders, on community partners and, in fact, on every British Columbian to do their part to keep women in this province safe from harm.

British Columbians will be learning more about that and ways we can all help in the coming weeks. We’ve been working on a campaign that’s nearly ready for launch, and I look forward to sharing that with members.

Now, we know that the earlier we help young people build capacity in their own lives, the better off we’ll all be later. That’s why we’ve placed such a strong focus on the early years. The early-years strategy announced in 2013 is an eight-year government commitment to improve accessibility and affordability and quality of early-years programs for families with young children.

We’re building on the $1 billion per year government currently spends on early learning and childhood development, including things like Success By 6, full-day kindergarten, programs that support healthy pregnancy and infancy, early childhood development and care, and programs and services to address the specific needs of children and youth with special needs.

A big part of the strategy was the creation of the provincial office for the early years to help ensure that services across government and across B.C. are coordinated.

The office will focus on the needs of families with children up to age six and will be a one-stop access for families or parents for a range of practical advice, support and services — not the least of which we know where there is need, and that is child care.

We’re working to create up to 13,000 more spaces by 2020. In November we took the first step and announced that 28 communities would benefit from a total of 1,000 new child care spaces. In January we announced that applications are now open for phase 2, which will create at least another 1,000 spaces by March of 2016.

While there’s always demand for those spaces and more spaces, there’s also a demand for qualified early childhood educators. Whether those educators are working at child care centres or delivering government programs like StrongStart B.C. or Ready, Set, Learn or working in a community agency, they play a critical role in ensuring the delivery of high-quality early-years programs to help kids get the best start in life. That’s why government invested $513,000 to increase the number of educators in B.C.

[1650]

Our valued partner, the Early Childhood Educators of B.C., has used this funding to establish a bursary program for students in early childhood education. I’d encourage early childhood education students, and future ones, to apply for that bursary so that they can enter a career where they’re going to really make a difference in the future of young British Columbians.

Another key priority for my ministry is the continuous improvement of services that support the positive growth of aboriginal children, youth and families. It is a truly unfortunate reality that aboriginal children continue to represent a large percentage — a much too large percentage — of kids in the care of the ministry. It’s essential that government provide services that will make a direct difference in the lives of aboriginal children and ensure that they have the ability to stay connected to their culture and traditions.

As government works to maintain a balanced budget, my ministry remains focused on ensuring that direct services and measurable outcomes for aboriginal children and families are a focus. That’s why we’re funding a new aboriginal service innovations approach. The new approach requires service providers to provide clear targets on how they intend to deliver direct services to children and families that provide better outcomes and that do, in fact, provide for that connection to culture and tradition.

The aboriginal services innovations early-years initiative is supporting 36 community-based programs. Through the aboriginal service innovations child safety and permanency program we’re further supporting vulnerable aboriginal children and families through $8.2 million each year. These programs, because they are dependent on plans that identify how we’re going to work to keep children from coming into care, how helping children who are in care returning to their families and communities can be done and how we can strengthen permanency plans for children who have been in care for long periods and are likely to remain…. That is how we’re going to make a difference for children, and that’s how we’re going to make a difference: by building on the experience of our partners.

Resources need to be focused on direct services to children and families and not where they can’t be measured. I can assure you that we as a ministry will continue to explore ways to improve outcomes for aboriginal children in this province because we want the same outcomes for those children as we do for every other child in this province.

Lately I have spoken a great deal inside and outside of this House about adoption. It’s an area of policy that I’m passionate about for a number of reasons, first and foremost because it makes such a positive difference in the lives of kids who have been in government care, particularly our older kids who might otherwise stay in government care until they age out.

We know that young people who have a foundation of a permanent home have better long-term outcomes. It’s not rocket science. They’re more likely to graduate.
[ Page 5688 ]
They’re more likely to go on to post-secondary careers. They’re less likely to be involved in the social welfare and criminal justice system as adults.

We have to remember that when you become an adult, it doesn’t mean you stop needing support. We all have experienced the support of our families. Every child that’s growing up in British Columbia today also needs that. You need a family, a core group of people to rely on and a place to call home. It’s important that young people have somebody there for their graduation and their wedding, for family milestones throughout their life, a place to go for Christmas or Easter or other cultural holidays.

Not only does adoption make a difference in the lives of those children, but it makes a difference and can change a family. At the start of this year we were fortunate to share a personal story from the Locke family. Not only do they have two of their own children biologically, Jessica and Andrew, but they have three adopted children — Jordan and the more recently adopted Kate and Ryan.

For Kate and Ryan, this past Christmas was the second they’d spent at the Locke house, but it was the first since their adoption was finalized. It represents one of many firsts, taking place in their forever home with their forever family. We were fortunate that they shared with us the wonderful flurry of activities around their house this Christmas and that their newest additions claimed to have had their best Christmas ever.

We’re committed to ensuring that children and youth in our care have the support they need. In the past five years 1,300 kids have found forever homes, but the need for families continues and will continue as more than 1,000 children wait today for a home to call their own. That’s why we’re going to continue with our focus on adoption and permanency.

[1655]

We’re going to continue to strengthen those processes. We have a chance to set these kids up for stable, long-lasting supports and the best prospects for success in life. We recently joined forces with the Representative for Children and Youth to encourage British Columbians to consider adoption. In November we launched a campaign to encourage British Columbians to consider adopting one of the 1,000 children and teens who are currently waiting for a family in B.C. It’s been a really successful first campaign.

Our web analytics show we’ve reached an audience of over 650,000 people, and we’ve increased traffic to the Adoptive Families Association, where people can get a lot more information and support from families who’ve experienced adoption. We’ve increased their traffic by 525 percent. I’m hopeful that some of these people who have taken the first step will move from the gathering-information stage to the building-a-family stage.

I’m very proud of the work that the ministry, my ministry, is doing and will continue to do over this year. The opposition will likely criticize much of that work. The opposition has a role to hold government to account, to provide an alternative, to question and to inquire deeply. Too often, though, what we seem to hear is blanket criticism — the “It can’t be good; it wasn’t our idea” approach. It’s not really the most constructive.

If governing was easy, if the answers were always yes or no, if everybody could have everything they wanted or needed, if it was that simple, we wouldn’t need to be here to debate. The work of governing, the work of building the economy of British Columbia and the work of improving supports in our social safety net — in health care and education and in my ministry — is just not simple. It’s a lot of grey areas. It’s hard, and it’s complicated. It involves trade-offs. It’s about negotiations. It’s about balancing and rebalancing and acting and reacting. It’s about planning, consulting and executing, rejigging and altering, meeting, debating and amending.

It’s not simple, but to listen day in and day out, as we often do, to the members opposite, you would think it was simple. Often what we hear is: “It’s going to fail. It won’t work. It’s stupid. It’s irresponsible.” You know, it takes more than skepticism and a negative attitude to provide a useful opposition. But I’m not going to let that get in the way — not in my ministry.

This government, this Premier and this team are providing leadership — leadership that has B.C. on track to post its third consecutive balanced budget, to lead the country in economic growth, providing what investors want most. That’s stability and consistency. I am optimistic for B.C., not just for this year but for the future — a future full of potential and of possibility. In our quest for that better future, we are guided by a fundamental principle, one that my parents taught me as a child from the time I started receiving an allowance: you can’t spend more than you have. It’s hard to earn, so spend it wisely.

If that principle was easy to follow as a government, we wouldn’t be the only province in Canada to be doing it. It’s not easy; it’s hard. And when you commit to being responsible with people’s money, hard decisions have to be made to stick with it. And in that, disagreements about priorities are bound to occur, not only in this Legislature but, frankly, in our meetings in our caucus, in our cabinet and in my ministry.

We know that the opposition will have disagreements about what the priorities should be. I know they don’t disagree, though, that the overall purpose and the reason we all get elected is to do the best job that we can for B.C., for the people of B.C. And I believe that across this House we hold a lot more in common in terms of our values than the things that divide us. We work every day, all of us, on behalf of our constituents, regardless of which side of the House we sit on — to help them, to better our communities, to better our province.

While we do that, the news around us is clear — that the 2008 economic collapse is still having global impacts. Economies that rely too heavily on single sources of in-
[ Page 5689 ]
come are going to suffer. Lo and behold, all the work that B.C. has done to diversify our economy is insulating us somewhat from the current drop in energy prices, for example. B.C.’s economy has experienced steady growth so far in 2014 and into 2015 in key sectors. Housing starts are showing increases, not to mention gains in our exports.

[1700]

Locally, at home in my constituency, I see those results. As I mentioned earlier, our local economy is powered by a range of industries: clean energy, finance, insurance, real estate, high tech, advanced manufacturing, education, health, agriculture and arts. For the third year in a row the Real Estate Investment Network has named Surrey the best place in British Columbia to invest.

It’s no surprise that we’re growing. Our growth rate averages nearly 10,000 new residents a year and accommodates more than 18 percent of Metro Vancouver’s population. We have, in Surrey, the lowest residential taxes and second-lowest tax burdens in the region, and every year 2,000 new businesses choose to locate in Surrey. So I’m confident Surrey’s diversified economy will continue to drive their growth and our success no matter what the worldwide economy throws at us, just like I believe that will be the same for rest of British Columbia.

It’s why I’m optimistic, because a strong economy supports a strong social safety net. It means that we are able to say to a woman who is fleeing domestic abuse that there’s a place for her to go. It’s directly tied to our ability to assure a family with an autistic child that there’s help and support. It means we have the front-line child protection workers necessary to take a child out of an unsafe situation and find them a safe haven. And for the Locke family, it meant that this past Christmas was their first as a forever family.

That’s the power of a strong fiscal plan, a diversified economy and, frankly, sticking to it.

C. Trevena: Perhaps it has got something to do with frequency, but three throne speeches in one year is maybe just a bit too much. It would be nice to think that it’s a reason that offerings delivered by Lieutenant-Governor were so light yesterday. I think, as my colleague from Nanaimo would say, that it’s thin gruel.

I would say it was vacuous. That’s the word that came to mind. It’s the word that went out on my Facebook page and into the Twitter world. Then I realized that that was the same word I chose the last throne speech, which was back in November, and I think also the throne speech before, back last February. Vapid, vacuous — there was nothing in it.

First, I would like to challenge the very need for a throne speech.

Mature parliamentary democracies have these after an election when a new government is charting its course. On a rare occasion it is used between elections. I think people can remember back to when the Governor General prorogued the House of Commons. After that, the crisis in Ottawa, there was another throne speech.

But this annual display of pomp — or, as has been the case recently here in B.C., semi-annual display — smacks of a government throwing baubles to the crowds, distracting people from the unpalatable truth of a government bereft of ideas.

One of my touchstones here is the story of the emperor with no clothes, but perhaps there is a more gothic interpretation of this continual distraction from the real and urgent needs of our province. Put fine clothes on the body, and no one will notice the corrupt body underneath.

What were we presented with, as the Lieutenant-Governor eked out a half an hour? Little that is new. I think that is why it was so hard to get the full half-hour.

There is a medal for volunteers, which I guess is for those who miss out on reaching the Order of B.C. but still need more than an honourable mention and a nice thank-you from their MLA. There’s going to be a task force, which I hear from the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin that she’s going to be leading, so we’re looking for a lot of energy there. Otherwise, it’s mainly reannouncements and platitudes and spin and some banalities.

What happened to those miraculous three letters LNG — those letters that echoed across the government benches, falling swiftly out of the campaign bus during the election? This was the mantra. It was also the silver bullet. It was the saviour from the 2013 election through all our throne speeches of 2014.

Remember all the things it was going to bring? I mean, along with the fairy dust, we were going to pay off the debt. We are not going to have a deficit. We are going to have a Norwegian-like prosperity fund. Everything was going to be rosy. Spring would come even earlier than it already has come this year.

[1705]

Jobs, an unlimited number of jobs for people. But what have we seen?

We were promised the riches of Croesus. We really were. It was all going to happen this year; 2015 was the date we were told. In 2013, back when it was the election, we were going to have all this wealth by 2015.

Well, LNG did get a mention, somewhat of a deflated mention for any of those who were pumping it, literally pumping the gas over the last two years. It is still happening, the government hopes, but the promises that everyone was offered do seem to have diminished quite greatly.

So we will have LNG. Well, we will be proceeding with it. We already know, as my colleague the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke mentioned, that it’s not going to be the cleanest LNG. We saw that last session. But we are going to have LNG in a small amount.

Instead, though, we have a government talking about
[ Page 5690 ]
diversity. Well, diversity is important. We do need to have a diverse economy. Somehow it has been ignored for the last number of years, as we had the LNG fantasy playing through the government benches and the election campaign and back to the government benches. That fantasy continued, and they forgot that we have a very diverse province and that we need full stability. For any economic stability, you need to have diversity. You don’t want to put all your eggs in one basket.

This time this was perhaps the mantra of the throne speech. I counted, just on a quick count through as the Lieutenant-Governor was delivering the speech, at least eight mentions of it. I didn’t do a word count, but there are at least eight mentions of this important word.

We are a diverse province. But frankly, this throne speech, the government laying out its plan, doesn’t actually create the path to build that diversity. It mentions the softwood lumber agreement, which anyone who lives in a forest-dependent community will tell you was a sellout. It’s going to be renegotiated. We knew that. There’s going to be easier permitting for mines. We also knew that. But will there also be the very necessary oversight and tougher environmental regulations?

We hear once again that people are going to get training for those few LNG jobs that we still know are going to happen, or we hope are going to happen. But there’s no acknowledgment that we need to invest fully in all our levels of education — and, if I may say, even before education, from child care, from preschool, through school, through kindergarten, through to grade 12 — to give our youth real opportunities. Yes, we need people to be in the trades, but we need poets as well as plumbers. There’s no mention of that.

However, we have heard that there are going to be three more offshore schools for people who want to have a B.C. education who don’t come to B.C. They are for foreign students. Perhaps the Premier’s next trade trip — we’re told it’s her seventh — is going to be opening one of those schools.

I know that my constituents — parents in Port McNeill or Port Hardy, parents in Campbell River or on Quadra Island or in Gold River — would like to see some investment in schools right here. Rather than just investing in offshore education, which may or may not bring in some money, invest in people we have here.

Public education is the true equalizer, and it gets very, very poor treatment here in B.C. We have public funds going to the elite private schools as well as those with a religious foundation.

But we have in our public school system parents fundraising for textbooks. It’s shocking that we, in a rich province, have parents fundraising so that their kids can get the books, so that they can learn in our public education system. We’ve long had parents fundraising for playground equipment so that kids can have outdoor activities.

We have teachers in school districts trying to be innovative, but after a while even the most eager advocate of education gets tired trying to make things happen for their students out of nothing.

So while the government can boast the end of the longest teachers’ dispute, educational dispute in the province’s history, they have sorely forgotten the fundamentals of our public education system.

It’s similar in health care. The member for New Westminster mentioned in her speech a scant one-word mention in this, the government’s plan for the next session of the Legislature — hopefully, for the next two years. But we know that this will shift. The government’s thinking does shift.

[1710]

There’s not a whisper of seniors care.

There’s no talk about the real needs of our communities. The social fabric that knits our province together has once again been completely ignored by this government.

We all stand very proud to represent our communities, and I do have great pride in having the honour to represent the North Island, to be the voice of the people in a very diverse constituency. It’s the top half of Vancouver Island. It takes some of the mainland. It has a lot of neighbouring islands.

Like other members of the House, I try to connect with constituents to find out what they want and what they need. That means going travelling around, visiting people in their communities — talking to them, listening to them, just engaging with them. They want more than what this speech offered. They really do. They were expecting so much more, because this is what the government is supposed to be doing in its mandate. As I said, it lays out the government’s chart. It explains its priorities.

What they got was a government on autopilot. But what people in my communities want, what they tell me, is leadership, and they want vision. They want a government with a vision — a vision that both inspires and embraces people, not just the top 2 percent, not just the corporations but middle-class working people, people who are trying to look after their kids, are looking after their parents, people who are working really hard just to catch up.

They want a government that can inspire them and that listens to their needs. They’re looking for a vision that gives them hope and encourages that possibility to work together and strive to work for a better place to live, to bring up their families and to work in.

Now, if any time, is surely a time for vision, when people are worried about the economy and what the tumultuous gas price and the falling dollar are going to mean for them. When they see, continually, the rising fees and the rising costs, they feel nickel-and-dimed, and they are still trying to deal with the pressures that life is giving them.

People see, as I think this year may have shown more clearly than many years before, that climate change is real, and that is going to have an impact on their lives, on their economies, on their kids’ lives and their grandkids’ lives, and they’re concerned. We look at the instance…. We know that 2014 was the hottest year on record. We can see, this winter, record snow in the east. We have spring way ahead here in Victoria, blossoms that we never see quite so early.

It’s a time when people are worried, and that’s a time when a government should show leadership. It’s time for a courageous government to say that we are going to do things differently. We’re not going to stay the same course. We’re not going to just timidly tweak things and fear that if we dare talk about bigger issues — things like taxes, about using public money for the public good — people will be upset.

A Speech from the Throne for 2015 should have been brave. It should have talked about how a government can help create a new economy, how a government can work with industry to make a real shift to that green economy which everyone intimates. It should have looked at how it was going to invest — invest in people, invest in industry, invest in research and development, engage in our universities and our institutes of technology.

We have bright minds who want to do this. We have groups, we have organizations, and we have people who want to get engaged. They should have been looking at ways of engaging communities of academics, of business, of industry in what is a very vital debate. If we are seriously wanting to have a diverse economy and seriously wanting to be economic competitors in the future, now is the time to start grasping those opportunities.

[1715]

Instead of applauding the fact that exports from our forests are at an all-time high…. I think my colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke said it quite clearly. Those exports are raw logs, those logs that barrel down the highways and come down in the log barges and log ships. I see them coming out of my constituency very regularly. It’s hell for leather there at the moment.

Instead of celebrating that and saying, “Isn’t it fantastic? All those exports,” why isn’t the government saying: “We’re going to do things differently"? "We’re going to keep those logs here. We’re going to do something with them. We are going to create our own industry here in B.C. We can do it. We can add that value to those logs. We can train people, not just to work in LNG but to be craftsmen, to be working with our lumber, building things here in B.C.” That’s what this government should have been doing. That’s what people wanted to hear.

Instead of turning to what I believe is an unattainable privately provided satellite service to get broadband Internet to our rural communities…. And I’ve got to say with a wait-list just to connect onto the Internet in some of the communities that I represent or in others where the service is so achingly slow that it’s almost a hindrance even to bother connecting to the Internet…. It’s driving away business. It’s driving away people from settling in the communities.

A visionary government would treat Internet connectivity with the weight that was given to electrification years ago. They would treat it like the utility that it is and make sure that every community had access to broadband, to high-speed Internet, with equal ability, with equal cost. That would be a visionary action. That would be a brave action. That’s what the people in my constituency would be hoping for from a Speech from the Throne in 2015.

Brave governments in the past have taken on public services. It was W.A.C. Bennett, the Socreds, that created B.C. Ferries for the good of the province, to open up the economy and ensure an effective and efficient and affordable marine highway.

A visionary government today would again take responsibility for B.C. Ferries. It would make them affordable. A simple thing — make the ferries affordable. It would have a real conversation with coastal communities about what the future should look like. How will our marine highways best serve those many communities who depend on it?

Communities need families. Communities need businesses. Communities need an economy. Where will the new vessels that we do so sorely need be built? Why aren’t they being built in B.C.? Why are they being shipped to Germany and to Poland? Again, a brave government would have said: “We can build them here. We’ve done it in the past, and we can do it again.” It’s easy. It’s visionary. But instead, we’re just going to tinker around the edges.

Instead of ignoring the elephant in the room, which hasn’t been referred to much by the government side at all — the $8.8 billion white elephant of Site C — a really brave government would inspire people by regenerating B.C. Hydro, making it the public utility it once was and looking, as well, at our legacy dams.

We have some in my own constituency that are being repaired and are being seismically upgraded. We’ve got the new John Hart generating station. Investment is going in there. But regenerating, B.C. Hydro is looking at geothermal, looking at wind energy, looking at solar power — looking at these alternatives through B.C. Hydro.

Instead of ignoring the elephant in the room, a visionary government, as well as doing these things, would also launch a retrofit and energy conservation program. Cut costs. Help people to cut costs. It doesn’t have to say yes to Site C. Say no to Site C and build up alternatives.

Instead of simply referring to the carbon tax, the model, which it might have been at one time…. But since it’s been neither expanding nor invested in fighting climate change through investment in transit or other offsetting, it should perhaps be described as the Potemkin model.
[ Page 5692 ]
Instead of referring to the carbon tax as a model, a brave government would find ways to use it for its real purpose and have the courage to increase it.

What I’ve described in the past in my many previous responses to the many throne speeches — annual, semi-annual…. Maybe we’ll start having them every month just to fill the time if the government’s got a light agenda or if it doesn’t have anything to do.

[1720]

Instead of talking about the neo-liberal platitudes about one taxpayer, a visionary government would say it was going to tackle taxation. I like taxes. Taxes are good. Taxes are very good for us as the public.

A visionary government would say it was going to tackle taxation by rebuilding a progressive tax system in which those who earn more, who get paid more, pay more in taxes. Simple redistribution of wealth. Very good for our society that those who earn a lot more, put more in so we can get services for everyone.

A government that really wanted to inspire would tackle the regressive and damaging flat taxes. That does mean rolling MSP into the tax system, as is does in all other provinces. It does mean cutting those fees and hikes that we are paying for ferries, for hydro, for ICBC, for parks, for camping and for all those other services that used to be provided by the government that we suddenly seem to have to be paying for. Like getting textbooks into our schools rather than having fundraisers to do it — if we had a healthy tax system that might not be necessary. People would pay a fair share.

It would be inspirational and, I think, brave if the government recognized that there is not just one taxpayer. We are a society. We are a community. We pay taxes for the betterment of all of us. Corporations pay taxes, individuals pay taxes, and those who are using our resources pay royalties. This is for the betterment of all of us. We aren’t taxpayers; we are citizens. That is what people need to hear to give them courage and confidence for the future.

A brave and inspirational government would also make sure that the people of B.C. got the real benefit from those resources, whether it is the logs that are being harvested at a rapid rate, whether it is the gas that may or may not be liquefied and exported. We’ve had that debate recently. It’s — what? — 1½ percent, the tax regime. Whether or not it is the coal or the copper, we are a resource-rich province. We have a huge amount of minerals here.

We should be able to benefit. We should benefit from stumpage, we should benefit from resource royalties, and we should benefit from taxation regimes on our natural resources. That is there. That’s how you ensure that we have those services that we really need, and it takes a brave government to stand up and say: “We’re going to do it.”

Instead, we have what we had, that half-hour speech. The first 15 to 20 minutes of it was really going through past — I would say achievements — actions by the government. The last ten minutes or so was just saying some of the things that may or may not be happening. I say that it confirmed the course that we’ve seen for the last 14 years, the same neoliberal course — 14 years of it. It’s not brave. It’s not inspirational. I would simply say it’s mean.

We never know who is going to come into our constituency offices, who that person is who comes through the door. Last year a man was directed to my office by AIDS Vancouver Island. His friend and partner, who had AIDS, bled to death on the toilet. The gentleman was looking for assistance. He wanted help both for a personal tragedy and a serious health hazard.

He was in no emotional or physical state to deal with it, but he had gone to the Ministry of Social Development. They offered him a crisis grant of $25, a bottle of bleach and some gloves. That was one of the most shocking instances that our office has dealt with. We deal with some nasty instances. That was one of the most shocking.

[1725]

Luckily, we called public health. We went straight to the top of public health, and they acted immediately and worked for several days. But that is a mean government.

My office also gets, we’ve been told, the highest number of people coming through because of B.C. Hydro disconnections. High costs — going up 28 percent.

I do think, though, in my office — and I apologize to other MLAs — we got all the kits that were available, the quick kits for retrofitting — door jams and window sealers and a few useful things. These little box of goodies we’ve been able to hand out to people who really need them.

They help, but they are not the program for retrofit. Households in the North Island have two primary sources of heat. They have wood heat. A lot of people have wood stoves — we heat with a woodstove — or they have electricity.

It’s a damp climate. We live in a temperate rainforest. People quickly get to that second tier and end up with massive bills. Because they are nickel-and-dimed, because they have no money for their basic expenses, they are often trapped to choose between hydro and food — or MSP, their health payments, and hydro or food.

This is the reality for many people. I think that’s what the government misses when they talk their platitudes. This is the reality. They face massive bills. They cannot afford them. They face disconnection.

They come into our office as a last resort. We talk to B.C. Hydro. Sometimes we can get things adjusted; sometimes we can’t. There are disconnections in winter. People in winter…. Yes, we don’t get the real frigid cold of the Interior, but people get disconnected in winter.

There are fixes. If the government was engaged, it could look at how to fix it. We could be investing in retrofitting and have a program of retrofitting. Help households deal
[ Page 5693 ]
with their homes that have wind blowing through the single-pane windows. We built with wood. Help them find ways to insulate.

Do things that are going to ensure that they aren’t using as much electricity but also look at the billing system. Look at a way that can ensure that those areas that have no option but to heat with Hydro, have a fairer way of being billed, because people are choosing between eating and paying their hydro bills.

Of course, it wouldn’t be a speech from myself if I didn’t refer to B.C. Ferries several times. The cost of a trip continues to go up, another 4 percent in a month’s time. There’s another 4 percent in April.

People haven’t given up. I talk to people all the time about ferries, and I’m very aware of the issues. Some people still hope that the government are going to acknowledge they made a huge mistake in what they did in 2002 by privatizing B.C. Ferries. They still hope that the government, the Minister of Transportation, will tear up the Coastal Ferry Act and put it back under the Ministry of Transportation.

But with a government that is neither brave nor inspirational, that cares not a whit about coastal communities and cares even less about our marine highway, I do not hold my breath for that.

That will take a change of government when we on this side can once again take charge of B.C. Ferries and make sure that it is run in the public interest, run in the interest of all of B.C. Our economy needs it, our communities need it, our families need it, and that is a commitment from this side of the House.

But it’s extraordinary. This government cares so little about the transportation infrastructure as a whole, despite in the Speech from the Throne we heard that transportation is crucial, but there is nothing in the government’s plan which actually addresses transportation.

My colleague from Columbia River–Revelstoke mentioned the Trans-Canada Highway, the vital need to be investing in that. Not a reference to it. We did hear that the government will work with Saskatchewan and Alberta to deal with a “bottleneck” to trade. That is the reference to what this government is going to do for transportation this year.

This is essential. I’m not just talking about the big projects that have been made a mess of. I mean the overcost of the Port Mann Bridge that is supposed to be paid for with tolls, which aren’t paying for it. I’m not just talking about the Trans-Canada. We’ve got crumbling highways. We have a huge amount of things that need to be done now. This is our infrastructure.

[1730]

We need to be investing, not just in building new bridges like the vanity projects that the Premier is suggesting — the second crossing over Okanagan Lake, despite the first one just being opened less than ten years ago, despite this massive replacement to the Massey Tunnel that suddenly we’re having. We need a serious investment in our infrastructure, in our roadways and the building of our roadways. We need a government that’s going to invest in transit.

We need a government to realize that this investment is good for us all. Investment in our infrastructure, our physical infrastructure and our social infrastructure, is important for us as a province. We need to see that commitment from a government.

We are citizens of Canada and B.C. We have a wealthy province. We have ideas, and we have resources, but over the last 14 years our communities have been diminished. It doesn’t have to be this way. We can work together and rebuild what we’ve lost. We can rediscover bravery, imagination and vision, but not with this speech.

I so often stand in this place and say how disappointed I am in what’s being presented. This time I’m not. I expect nothing from this government or from this Premier, and that was what was delivered.

S. Hamilton: I have to start my remarks with a little chuckle across the aisle because I find it difficult to understand why the member for North Island would hold us in such contempt for having three whole throne speeches in one year. First, they complain that we never meet, and now I guess they’re complaining that we’re meeting too much. I can’t quite keep up.

But nevertheless, we’re here again, and I’m certainly glad we are. It’s an honour to have a few moments to speak to this government’s reaffirmation and commitment to creating jobs and opportunity across British Columbia while maintaining strong fiscal discipline.

Before I get started, please indulge me. I want to have a few moments to thank a few of the people that have helped me get here today. I want to start by acknowledging my family — my wife, Kristen; our daughters, Paige and Lauren — who support me constantly and tolerate my many absences from home. Also, please allow me the opportunity to thank my two constituency assistants, Kim Kendall and Debbie Ward, for their hard work on behalf of both myself and my constituency.

In the Lieutenant-Governor’s speech she reminded us that the global economy is fragile. We know that. We read the business press. We know that the economy is still coming back. We see what’s happening in Ottawa and in Alberta, but our government, our enterprising government, is taking the steps needed to position itself for future growth. I think we should all be excited about that.

When people are working, they’re contributing. Families are more successful and more content when there are jobs and when there’s economic growth. There’s a profound, palpable vibrancy — and people can feel that vibrancy — as the economy begins to turn around, both nationally and internationally.

But provincially, here at home, specifically, we’re well ahead of that curve. The tough decisions we’ve had to
[ Page 5694 ]
make over the last year now allow us to be in a place where we’re able to invest in the province’s future and make it a place worthy of our children and honour those who came before us.

British Columbia is the second-largest producer of natural gas in this country and responsible for 26 percent of Canada’s natural gas industry. Currently the sector employs around 13,000 people, and B.C. produced 1.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas over the last 12 months, the energy equivalent of 273 million barrels of oil. B.C. is serious about becoming a stable and reliable source of energy on the global stage. This is one of our classic commitments and, I think, a defining moment for the government in many ways. LNG will diversify our economy and provide a significant source of public revenue for decades to come.

LNG is also specifically affecting growth in my community. This is due in part to the Tilbury LNG facility expansion. In my last response to the throne speech, I spoke about the construction that had begun on FortisBC’s $400 million expansion in the Tilbury LNG site, which will significantly increase natural gas liquefication and storage capacity to support growing demand for B.C. LNG — as you know, we’re adding 1.1 million gigajoules of liquefied natural gas to storage and 34,000 gigajoules per day of liquefaction capacity — and how the expansion will provide LNG to the transportation market, remote communities and the marketplace.

[1735]

Just last week FortisBC finalized a supply agreement with B.C. Ferries to power new ferries with LNG. Under the deal, FortisBC will provide up to 300,000 gigajoules of liquefied natural gas per year — the energy equivalent of 7.8 million litres of diesel fuel for the next ten years — to help fuel B.C. Ferries’ three new intermediate-class ships.

As the operator of the only two LNG facilities on the west coast, out of five in all of Canada — the Mt. Hayes facility near Ladysmith and the Tilbury Island facility in Delta — these facilities will be equipped to meet the demands of B.C.’s transportation sector, remote communities, industrial customers and the international marketplace.

We’re committed to ensuring that B.C.’s LNG facilities are the cleanest in the world. Natural gas is the cleanest-burning fossil fuel. By producing and exporting LNG, B.C. will help communities avoid the higher greenhouse-gas-producing fuels.

There have been many positive impacts to our province. One major factor that it has impacted is the transportation sector. To promote a clean-burning fuel that’s abundant in the province, FortisBC has offered an incentive program since 2012 to help the B.C. transportation sector convert its diesel engines to natural gas. Fleet operators have made the switch because natural gas as a vehicle fuel has historically been 25 to 50 percent less expensive than diesel or gasoline — a clear cost benefit and a competitive advantage for B.C. industry.

British Columbians will see the number of natural gas vehicles increasing as remaining incentive funds are allocated. LNG is already being successfully used to power remote northern communities. For example, the town of Inuvik in the Northwest Territories has successfully converted their primary power-generating facility from diesel to LNG.

We’re recognizing how fast-growing this industry is, and we’re working with our Asian trading partners to make sure that we’re ready for their investments in the industry. But we have to make sure that we’re getting it right. The economic benefits in British Columbia are immense. We will reward all British Columbians in every region with new jobs, with procurement opportunities and with increased government revenues to invest in hospitals, schools and transportation infrastructure. That’s how it works. We earn it. Then we invest it.

Stewardship and the environment responsibilities will make B.C. global leaders in the energy market. By being responsible suppliers through strict emission requirements and First Nation involvements, our buyers will realize that producing and purchasing B.C. LNG is truly a sensible choice. We are seeing these opportunities in our communities already because of the LNG industry, with hundreds of millions of dollars already being spent and invested.

At this time, I also want to mention the Annacis Island industrial area. Annacis and the Tilbury Industrial Park jointly give Delta its strength and allow for unhindered industrial and manufacturing development. Manufacturing drives all sectors of the B.C. jobs plan in forestry, agrifoods, technology, mining and natural gas. With investment and growth in the export and domestic market, it’s anticipated that demand for our province’s manufactured goods and services will grow, particularly in Asia.

This is why this government has taken steps to meet the challenge of more than a million job openings by 2022. We need to provide B.C. students with modern training facilities.

The new Motive Power Centre of Excellence will prepare students to enter the workforce and fill in-demand jobs, including those in the liquefied natural gas and related industries. The new 13,192-square-metre, or 142,000-square-foot, Motive Power Centre of Excellence replaces smaller, outdated facilities at the B.C. Institute of Technology and Vancouver Community College. Heavy-duty mechanics, transport trailer mechanics, diesel mechanics and commercial transport mechanics, as well as railway conductors and forklift operators, will be trained at this new centre.

As well as providing more training spaces, the Annacis Island facility is home to a 109-tonne — that’s 120-ton — MAN engine that provides students in a number of
[ Page 5695 ]
programs with relevant hands-on learning experiences. This project supports B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint commitment to make sure that British Columbians have the skills and training needed to be first in line for the jobs.

As part of the blueprint, over the next three years government will invest $185 million in trades and skills infrastructure. The majority of manufacturing jobs are permanent. They’re full-time, with a higher wage, 15 percent above the provincial average. Students from this new school will be in demand, and it’s estimated that 43 percent of the one million jobs expected to be created by 2020 will require trades and technical training.

[1740]

An estimated 13,000 people are already employed in B.C. in the field of heavy-duty commercial transportation as diesel technicians and transport-trailer technicians. When the new motive power centre opened last year, it truly marked a new chapter in the economic security of British Columbia and in my riding of Delta North. Manufacturing is a part of our community and supports families and businesses in it.

Another area important to my constituents is what this government is doing for small business. This coming year our government will look at how citizens interact with government services to reduce red tape for real people. Step by step, we will propose changes to ease unnecessary burdens, save time and make things more efficient.

Small business makes up 98 percent of all businesses in this province and employs over one million people. Small business provides nearly 55 percent of all private sector jobs in British Columbia, the highest rate in the country.

There were approximately 385,900 small businesses operating in the province in 2012. British Columbia ranks first in Canada for the number of small businesses per capita with 83.5 businesses per 1,000 people.

Women make up more than 38 percent of self-employed people in British Columbia. That’s well above the national average.

Small business accounts for 26 percent of British Columbia’s GDP, higher than the Canadian average of 25 percent. British Columbia’s share of self-employed workers was the highest in the country, accounting for 18.1 percent of total employment. Between 2011 and 2012 small business employment in the province rose by 0.4 percent. However, small businesses have fared relatively well since 2009, increasing employment by 1.2 percent overall.

Small businesses in British Columbia ship about $12 billion worth of merchandise to international destinations — that was in 2011 — and 42 percent of the total value of goods exported by the province. In 2012 small businesses provided 31 percent of all wages paid to workers in British Columbia, well above the national average of 26 percent.

This is why this government has made it such a priority to make B.C. the most small business–friendly province in Canada. Government supports the following actions to make it easier for business to do business.

We’ve implemented the B.C. small business accord to guide government interactions with small businesses. We’ve developed, after consultations with the small business community…. The accord outlines six key principles that guide government interactions with small business owners to reduce the complexity small businesses can face when dealing with government.

Government delivered on key action items resulting from the accord consultation work, including the MentorshipBC mentoring portal, work on building small business awareness of government programs and initiatives, increasing procurement opportunities for small businesses, developing a mobile trainer succession program and advising on key training opportunities such as the Canada-B.C. job grant.

Also, we ensure that small businesses have access to the information, tools and resources they need to thrive. We help to fund Small Business B.C., British Columbia’s premier resource for business information and services relating to starting, growing and even exiting a small business.

Small Business B.C. also has a partnership agreement with Community Futures to ensure all areas of the province can access their services. Funded by the provincial and federal governments, Small Business B.C. exemplifies governments working together to provide small businesses with seamless, coordinated access to information, services and tools.

We continue to streamline and simplify government process to reduce the regulatory burden on small businesses. We’ve overseen a 42 percent reduction in the number of regulatory requirements since 2001. B.C.’s leadership in regulatory reform has widely been recognized, including just receiving again the highest provincial mark, an A, from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. That’s the fourth year in a row.

We’re committed to continuing to reduce taxes for small businesses as well. We’ve reduced the small business corporate tax rate to 2.5 percent from 4.5 percent since 2001 and have increased the threshold at which the small business rate applies to $500,000 from $300,000. We’re giving small business owners a further 40 percent tax cut by lowering the small business rate from 2.5 percent to 1.5 percent, no later than the 2017-2018 fiscal year, with at least a 0.5 percent reduction in 2015-2016.

[1745]

We are encouraging individuals and companies to invest in small business through increased access to venture capital. We’re providing small business access to early-stage venture capital through the expansion of the small business venture capital tax program, with additional funding of $5 million in 2015-2016.

We will continue to improve on-line access to the licensing information from three levels of government,
[ Page 5696 ]
through an enhanced BizPaL service. BizPaL is a web-based service that makes it easier and faster for businesses to identify federal, provincial and local government permit and licensing requirements to start a business. BizPaL is available in 115 local governments throughout B.C.

The province will continue to work with Industry Canada, all partners and local governments to continue to expand the service and improve BizPaL with service innovation and integration efforts.

We will continue to work with our local government partners to expand the mobile business licence program. The program is an intermunicipal licence that reduces red tape by allowing mobile businesses to operate in more than one municipality by purchasing one add-on licence rather than obtaining non-resident licences in each municipality in which they operate. Currently there are ten agreements in place covering 69 municipalities. British Columbia is one of the first provinces in Canada with a mobile business licence program.

We provide small business with a voice to government through the Small Business Roundtable. The round table brings together small business owners and industry association leaders to provide advice and recommendations to government and to improve the small business environment in British Columbia.

Round-table members would like local government to adopt mobile business licence agreements. They’d like us to continue to expand BizPaL to reduce the complexity of doing business in their regions. They’d like increased awareness of resources available to small businesses and new programs or initiatives that operate in the spirit of the B.C. small business accord.

We will manage and track government activities supporting small businesses in this province. We’ll track key action items and support the small business accord and make sure they’re consistent with the B.C. jobs plan, support B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint and reflect government responses.

On the issue of transportation, we have a world-class transportation network, and it’s vital to the future of our communities. It supplies us with goods from around the world that we use every day. It enables growing exports that create new jobs and opportunities in B.C.

Two pillars of the B.C. jobs plan are to expand markets for B.C. products, particularly in Asia, and to strengthen our infrastructure to get our goods to market. Under this plan, we’re making investment to provincial infrastructure to capitalize on our ideal location as a gateway to the Asia-Pacific.

Finally, I’d like to talk a little bit — I’ll mention the throne speech — regarding violence against women. Violence against women isn’t just a women’s issue. It’s everyone’s issue. It affects every family and every community.

Our “Violence-free B.C.” strategy is a long-term commitment to end violence against women in British Columbia. The strategy is our road map going forward, combining immediate actions with long-term vision to end the violence and to support women whose lives and well-being have been impacted by violence.

Our focus over the next decade will be on priorities that prevent violence by changing behaviours — ensuring services are responsive, innovative and coordinated and support women to rebuild their lives, address violence against aboriginal women and foster strong relationships and new partnerships. For government, our action in 2015 starts with up to $3 million in civil forfeiture funding to support anti-violence and prevention initiatives, with a priority focus on violence against women, of course.

Moving forward, we’re making an ongoing commitment to dedicate a portion of civil forfeiture funds to support the “Violence-free B.C.” strategy in future years. The government will also launch a public awareness campaign to encourage British Columbians to take action to stop violence against women.

Last week we celebrated the official opening of the newly integrated Surrey domestic violence unit, which is supported through civil forfeiture grants, to assist the development of new and existing DVUs across this province.

Finally, with regard to the Medal of Good Citizenship, I just want to finish by saying: what’s wrong with acknowledging the selfless contributions of people in our community? Although I’m sure the member for Cowichan Valley may not be nominating any member from his local chamber of commerce anytime soon, I think it’s good to acknowledge the fact that people build our communities. They’re the soul, they’re the fabric, and our communities would not exist without them.

[1750]

With my constituents in mind, I’m pleased to speak in support of the Speech from the Throne. The Speech from the Throne and its government’s mandate is about building a better British Columbia and preparing its citizens for a better, more prosperous future. I look forward to being a member of this House and helping deliver it.

L. Krog: There’s always a certain pressure on members of the opposition, in responding to the Speech from the Throne, to try and be incredibly critical, to be witty — to persuade, perhaps. That kind of inspiration — the kind of inspiration necessary to respond in a way that a good throne speech deserves — unfortunately, with this particular throne speech, I can say with complete confidence is rather lacking.

I feel today much like the drunk who’s had at least a dozen beer. I have responded to well over a dozen throne speeches in my time, both from the government benches and from the opposition benches. I can’t remember the exact number. But I can certainly recognize the thinnest, the most vacuous throne speech that I have had to listen
[ Page 5697 ]
to, and that was yesterday.

Some members have suggested that three throne speeches in one year is too much, and in terms of numbers, that may be true. But I must say, in terms of quality, it is most certainly true.

I had the pleasure of listening to the Lieutenant-Governor speak in Nanaimo just a couple of weeks ago. She spoke at graduation ceremonies from Vancouver Island University, my old alma mater. She spoke with authenticity and passion about a subject that is dear to her, about soils and the year of the soil. It’s the International Year of Soils, I gather. She had something profound to say.

Unfortunately, what the government gave her to deliver yesterday was a great deal less inspiring. You can tell there’s a time in a government’s life when it gets to the stage where it’s not sure what it wants to do anymore — if it wants to do anything, if it has any great scheme or vision or plan available to it. I think the throne speech yesterday certainly reflected that.

If I was in doubt about that conclusion, looking up into the galleries of this chamber as I often do, it was proved by the number of vacant seats. This government can’t even fill this place with its own supporters anymore. This government, if this throne speech is the best it can do, clearly has become disengaged from the leadership of the province that it should be, frankly, leading.

I suppose, perhaps, maybe that’s the Liberal scheme, that disengagement from the political process would be seen as a good thing because then you can get away with pretty much anything. If people aren’t paying attention and there isn’t criticism, if you’re not held to account, you can do pretty much whatever you want. If there is no one to police your behaviour, if you lack a certain sense of morality or a sense of duty or a sense of responsibility, you’re going to undertake all kinds of things.

I can’t help but think that I’ve been given the timely spot here tonight. It’s what we used to call zero hour at our house many years ago when the children were young. You’ve arrived home from work. The children need feeding. Everybody’s tired. It’s been another long day.

Interjection.

L. Krog: I can’t help but think, despite the encouragement from the member for Kootenay East, I believe it is — my brother’s former town-mate, actually…. What does the average British Columbian feel when they’re coming home this evening?

[1755]

Interjections.

L. Krog: I am so flattered by the interjections from the members opposite. I always know when they’re listening, and that’s a good thing. Nothing is more flattering to a member of the opposition.

What are they coming home to? Well, they’re coming home to a province where the gap between the rich and the poor is getting higher. They’re coming home to a province, if they’re on social assistance, where they haven’t seen any significant increase in rates in 14 long years.

They’re coming home to a province where they’re paying more for hydroelectricity than they’ve ever paid in the past in this province; seeing a greater and greater proportion of their income spent on fees and licences; a greater and greater proportion of their income spent on MSP premiums; a greater and greater proportion of their income spent to be able to operate an automobile, for car insurance.

The only good news on the horizon is the collapse of the price of gas.

An Hon. Member: Did you do that?

L. Krog: The member just said: “Did you do that?” No, but I’m surprised the government didn’t take credit for that. When I listen to the throne speech, it seemed to be a recitation of everything positive they could possibly say about British Columbia. I have never heard so much credit being sought by a single government in a single throne speech. They talked about everything so positive.

I actually want to review a little of the throne speech. I do want to recognize, in all seriousness, the recognition that is paid annually to those who’ve passed who’ve enjoyed some position in public life. One of them was Allen Hustwick.

Allen Hustwick was the mayor of Parksville for a number of years. He was the manager of the Bank of Commerce there. He was a hard-working, decent citizen. But in an interesting historical twist, he and his wife were also two of the main victims of a vicious letter-writing campaign undertaken by the former member for Parksville-Qualicum, Mr. Paul Reitsma.

It was somewhat with mixed feelings that I heard the announcement of Allen’s death, knowing that he was a fine example of what good public service is all about and that Mr. Reitsma, a former member of the Liberal caucus, was the prime example of what good public service was not about.

Hon. B. Bennett: You go back a long ways there.

L. Krog: Ah, the member says I go back a long ways. I go back so far, I can remember the ’80s.

Let’s talk a little bit about the throne speech. Now, let’s commence with the initial words, this profound grasp of the obvious: “Members, we live in uncertain times.” It reminds me of Snoopy: “It was a dark and stormy night.” We haven’t seen this kind of writing since that great Victorian novelist ceased to write for us.

Then it says: “We are fortunate that we do not rely on
[ Page 5698 ]
one commodity.” Oh gosh, oh gee, maybe the members could wander out into the rotunda, as I always point out, and look up and see that in fact we’ve never relied on one commodity in British Columbia. Indeed, we’ve always recognized this was a fairly diverse province. Even in the days of killing the seals for pelts, pursuing the beaver for pelts and fishing, we still had a number of activities undergoing.

It doesn’t stop there. What I love best is always when they talk about the B.C. jobs plan. It’s like The Scarlet Pimpernel. You seek it here, you seek it there, you seek it everywhere, but can you actually find the B.C. jobs plan articulated in a document — legible, readable, comprehensible and available to the B.C. public anywhere?

Hon. B. Bennett: Yes.

L. Krog: I doubt that very much. If the member for Kootenay East believes it’s available, I’d love him to send me over a copy as quickly as he possibly can.

No one knows what the B.C. jobs plan is, but we’ve certainly heard a great deal about it. We continue to hear about it during the course of every throne speech.

As I said, the government takes credit for all kinds of things and certainly attempts to. It says: “In forestry your government has focused on forging relationships with new markets and expanding our client base. This strategy has paid off. In just five years forest product exports have increased by 63 percent.”

[1800]

The member who spoke previously today, and spoke so eloquently, reminded us we’ve gone from several hundred thousand cubic metres of raw log exports to something approaching — what? — seven million or more. It’s a shocking statistic.

I don’t wish to be critical, but let’s see. Five years would take us back — let’s be fair — really, to about 2009, which would be a year after the economic collapse. I suppose the government is going to take credit for the fact now that the Canadian dollar is at the lowest point it has been in several years and that the U.S. housing market is in recovery.

Because this government hesitates always to take credit for anything that it doesn’t deserve to take credit for, I am sure they wouldn’t even accept for a moment any criticism of the suggestion that the 63 percent increase has things to do with forces beyond their control and certainly beyond their abilities.

The member was teasing me about being here a long time and remembering so much. I can’t help but note on page 5…. I’m sure the members read the throne speech. The members opposite took it to bed last night and tried to seek solace in its comforting words. There it is on the top of page 5: “To help farmers and food processors promote their products, your government expanded the Buy Local program.” Could they ever just bring themselves once to call it the Buy B.C. program?

I won’t mention which minister just smiled across the way at me, acknowledging full well, as he did, coming out of the agriculture sector, that that was possibly one of the most successful government programs of any government in the history of this province when it came to encouraging the purchase of B.C. homegrown products.

But this government — in the same fit of pique, in the same sense of mischief, in the same mean-spiritedness which led it to get rid of the CCF plate, for heaven’s sake, in the legislative dining room — would never, ever, ever, ever acknowledge the existence of the Buy B.C. program.

But I don’t want to talk about agriculture all the time, as proud as I am of British Columbia’s farmers and the new young farmers who are coming up and creating all sorts of employment and producing new products and enhancing the viability of our economy. I want to talk about what follows in the throne speech, five short sentences. Five short sentences — and wait for it, Members. The first one is: “Perhaps no sector has attracted more excitement and investment than natural gas.”

Now, hon. Speaker, you remember the 2013 election. That’s when we were promised a debt-free B.C. and jobs, jobs, jobs. Now, I am a person who tries to rely on the language that is used. Words do actually have meaning. The next sentence is, “Liquefied natural gas could create 100,000 jobs and the revenues to eliminate our debt” — could. We’ve gone from 100,000 solid jobs and the elimination of British Columbia’s debt to now that it could.

Then it goes on to say that “LNG is a generational opportunity.” So the benefit is not going to be like this year, I guess, or not next year. It’s in fact going to be a generational opportunity. Now, I do note that the government has not, with the kind of specificity that one would have liked, designated which generation. Our generation? My children’s generation? My grandchildren’s generation? My potentially great-grandchildren’s generation? Or is this like some sort of biblical twist, that it will last even unto the seventh generation? Which generation is going to get the benefit of liquid natural gas?

[1805]

It reminds me of what I believe is available at Burger King. Isn’t it called the Whopper? The Whopper. Yeah, the Whopper that’s available at Burger King.

I’m not going to suggest for a moment that the Premier and the B.C. Liberals in the 2013 campaign were going around telling whoppers. I would not suggest that, hon. Speaker. But there has been a slight modification here of the great promise.

With Gordon Campbell, when he was Premier, it was at least a golden promise, and it had some substance to it, I suppose — the whole concept of gold. But now we’ve got a lot of gas, an awful lot of gas, and I don’t see the delivery occurring. I think it’s fairly safe to say that we’re not going to get a liquefied natural gas plant this year.

I say this in all seriousness. I’m sorry that we’re not, because even though the employment opportunities once
[ Page 5699 ]
the plant is built will not be substantial, it would still be another source of revenue for the province of British Columbia. That would have been a good thing.

What we know, simply, is this. In a 15-page speech, the greatest promise of the B.C. Liberal Party and the Premier of this province has been reduced to five sentences, and we’re talking about could, not will. We’re talking about could.

Carrying on in the theme of the burger here for a moment, on page 7 it says: “Your government is committed to eliminating the provincial debt but will continue to make affordable investments in our future, especially those that help us grow our economy and the jobs that come with them.” Now, I recall the B.C. Liberals telling us that debt in the ’90s was a really bad thing. Debt was a really bad thing — a really, really bad thing — and the NDP were guilty of it. They practically had horns growing out of their heads.

I just want to quote a couple of statistics here this evening. March 31, 2011 — under the leadership of the present Premier, actually — B.C’s debt was $45.2 billion. That’s a pretty big number, but not nearly as bad as many other provinces. It reflected B.C.’s historic, generally fairly sound fiscal framework under NDP governments with Dave Barrett and Mike Harcourt, as well, and Glen Clark — although the government would never wish to admit that.

But the estimate by March 31, 2015, is that the provincial debt, which was $45.2 billion four years ago, is going to be — wait for it — $63.4 billion. For those math whizzes over there, if you actually do the number, it’s just shy of 40 percent in four years — just shy of 40 percent.

I want to come back to my remark about the Whopper: “Your government is committed to eliminating the provincial debt.” Now, I don’t have the best sense of direction. I think north is sort of over that way, and I think south is kind of that way, and east is kind of that way, and west is kind of that way. It doesn’t really matter. What I do know is that when the number is going up by 40 percent in four years, directionally speaking, that’s not moving towards elimination. No, that’s what we call an increase.

And even where I come from, in these low inflationary times 40 percent in four years is a very big increase.

Interjection.

L. Krog: That’s a whopper of an increase, as my friend from Alberni–Pacific Rim has pointed out. It’s a real whopper.

Hon. Speaker, what have we learned from this throne speech?

Interjection.

[1810]

L. Krog: Oh, look. The members opposite have sent over the progress update on the B.C. jobs plan. You notice it’s the progress update, which means they still don’t have the plan, because they don’t know what the figures really mean. It is, as Churchill so eloquently put it, three kinds: “Lies, damned lies and statistics.” But don’t worry. British Columbia is going to be fine because we finish up with the Medal of Good Citizenship.

In a cynical world some might believe that, in fact, this would just be an opportunity for the Premier or, in the absence of the Premier, perhaps a cabinet minister or, in the absence of a cabinet minister, perhaps a government MLA or two or three, to be out there, as they say in the military, flinging medals. Some cynical people might think that.

I don’t know. I’m not quite convinced. One must look at the evidence. We have the Order of British Columbia, and what an honour it is for any British Columbian to receive that. We have the B.C. Community Achievement Awards — likewise, an honour to receive that. I’m just not quite sure what we’re going to get when we’re going to go with “the extra mile, volunteering their time, money and talents to build stronger communities.”

Now, would a heavy donation to the B.C. Liberal Party be considered donating or volunteering? Would that be important? Some members are suggesting that might be criteria.

My concept of the Medal of Good Citizenship is to perhaps give the medal to all the British Columbians who have had to live for 14 years under the B.C. Liberals. All those folks who I mentioned earlier tonight are going home, trying to get dinner on the table and recover from a day at work. They’re paying increased fees in licences and costs and looking at a public school system that is underfunded substantially in comparison to the rest of this country.

All those heroic families and British Columbians who are doing their best, day in, day out, to handle an economy that has delivered overwhelmingly to a small percentage at the top and, in fact, reduced the share of income for those at the bottom and squeezed out the middle class in a way we haven’t seen in decades. Maybe those folks should get the Medal of Good Citizenship in recognition of that. Maybe those seniors struggling on fixed incomes in our province should get the Medal of Good Citizenship. Maybe those people are the ones who deserve it.

I want to talk a little bit about what we’ve seen in this throne speech. And by its absence — that is what I really want to talk about. You know, at least with Gordon Campbell, you knew what he’d read on holiday when he came to the throne speech.

Interjection.

L. Krog: Oh, the member for Kootenay East couldn’t resist laughing at that one. I think I just sunk a political battleship across the way.

Absolutely, the latest book was reflected in the throne speech. Does the fact that there is nothing in this throne speech of substance indicate that somebody is not reading anything on their holidays?

An Hon. Member: It’s a literacy problem.

L. Krog: “It’s a literacy problem,” my friend says. It’s a literacy problem.

Well now, in fairness, I’ve got to admire the cheek of the government though. You’ve got to admire it. You know, they still talk about liquid natural gas, even though it’s fairly clear it’s not going to come to fruition. They talk about all the wonderful things in the province that they observe, that they’re trying take credit for, but we don’t hear much about all sorts of other things.

Well, let’s talk about the numbers of food banks. In my community the local food bank was asking for a significant contribution from the city of Nanaimo so it could expand its facilities. I didn’t hear that mentioned in the throne speech.

I didn’t hear any suggestion that the $230 million, which this government could easily continue to make available by not letting that special little, tiny — and it is tiny — surtax on high-income earners lapse…. I haven’t heard anything about what they might want to do with that.

[1815]

In all the fundamentals of life, particularly for those of us on Vancouver Island, the cost of ferries, the hydro — all of those things are up substantially. All of us in this chamber can afford that stuff. We can afford it. We’re well paid in comparison to many British Columbians. We work hard. I’m not going not pretend for a moment that the people in this chamber don’t work hard. But there are lots of people who work just as hard and, indeed, harder, and every day they’re the people who deserve that medal.

They’re the people who try and keep it together, who try and meet their mortgage payments if they’re lucky enough to own a home or who get their money together for rent, who get their kids ready for school and who look after their aging parents. Those are the people that this government has forgotten.

I’ll tell you who hasn’t been forgotten. It’s the B.C. Liberals themselves. If you’re a friend of the B.C. Liberal Party, you’re in good shape. You’re a friend of the Premier’s? You get 350,000 bucks for playing in the ether — 350,000 bucks. In a $40 billion budget, it’s nothing. You give $350,000 to somebody living in Surrey or Terrace or Port Alberni, they’ll think they’ve died and gone to heaven.

I’m conscious of the fact that a caucus, in order to sustain itself, is a bit like a church or a denomination. It has to have faith, it has to be performing, and it has to do things. It has to have a sense of community. And what I’m sensing is this. When that faith is gone, when that belief, when that vision, when that sense of direction is gone, when you’re not sure why you’re here, when you’ve run out of energy, as is so clearly demonstrated in this vacuous throne speech….

If you’re still in it and you’re still hanging around and you’re still professing enthusiasm for it…. I must say, some of the members today worked themselves up into a…. I won’t say a lather. That would be unkind. But they demonstrated a certain enthusiasm for the throne speech and the performance of the government.

They may have made that transition. You see, the transition I’m talking about is this. A caucus is one thing; a cult is another. When you’ve got nothing left except a blind belief in the righteousness of your cause and no evidence to support it, then you’ve moved from being a caucus to a cult.

What we have here in British Columbia today is a government that can’t point to much apart from the fact it has balanced the budget. Now, we’ve got to give the government credit.

Interjection.

L. Krog: Oh, it is a little thing. The member says it’s just a little thing. Let’s not be too cheeky about this. The reality is that balancing a budget simply means this: you either cut expenditures to meet your income, or you increase income to meet your expenditures.

But the responsibility of government is to ensure some fundamental fairness in society, and that is what is exactly missing from this. There is no better reflection than the fact you’re going to give $230 million back to the top 2 percent of income earners in this province instead of giving an increase to the people on social assistance, to the students who need public education, to the seniors who need housing, or to fix some of the dangerous roads in this province that place at risk the lives of hard-working British Columbians transporting goods across this province. That’s what the difference is.

It is this government’s utter and complete contempt for people that allows it to continue to brag about the balanced budget as it continues to grind the faces of the poor in this province, as it has done for 14 years. Maybe it’s time they got some better thinking across the way and accepted the fact that their responsibility is not to their friends and insiders. It’s not to put 350,000 bucks in somebody’s pocket for playing in the ether. It’s their responsibility to make this province a decent place to live for the most vulnerable and the poorest amongst us. When they start doing that, then I’ll applaud the throne speech.

[1820]

Hon. T. Stone: It is always an honour to stand in this House and speak to the throne speech. The throne speech was not flashy. It was not glamourous, but it’s a throne
[ Page 5701 ]
speech that is focused on providing good, reliable government. It was a throne speech not based on political posturing. We’ve certainly heard no end of political innuendo and bravado from the other side of the House. It was a throne speech that’s focused on strong leadership direction, a strong direction for a better future in this province.

Indeed, that’s a philosophy and an approach which I bring to the riding of Kamloops–South Thompson, which I’m so proud to represent in this Legislature.

I want to take a moment at the outset of my remarks here to pay tribute to my wife, Chantelle, and my three little girls, Hannah, Sydney and Caitlin. It’s been almost two years since I’ve been elected. I know many members in this House have been here at lot longer than that. It’s hard to believe it’s been almost two years. It’s been an incredible journey and an incredible experience to this point. But I certainly wouldn’t be here and I wouldn’t be able to continue to be here if it wasn’t for the support that I have at the home front.

I also want to acknowledge and thank the hard work of my constituency assistants. I am very well served back in Kamloops. Maryanne, Pat and Shauna take very good care of me, and they’re an incredibly strong and confident face and voice of our office, so thank you to their hard work.

In Kamloops there are many projects in the works that will improve the safety and reliability of our local roads for both commercial and local traffic. I’m going to highlight some of the exciting things that are happening in Kamloops, starting with transportation.

This coming spring work will get underway on the second and final phase of the Pritchard to Hoffman’s Bluff project on the Trans-Canada Highway. This will widen more than three kilometres of Highway 1 from two to four lanes. It will improve one of the most challenging sections of this most important east-west trade corridor in the province.

I want to acknowledge that this project could not have moved forward without extensive consultations and engagement and support with First Nations in the area as well as our partnership with the federal government on this $61 million project. The work is expected to be complete by the fall of 2016, and it’s part of a commitment by this government to invest $650 million over the next ten years into the Trans-Canada Highway between Kamloops and the Alberta border.

What’s more, the Highway 1 Kamloops to Alberta four-laning program will create 3,300 direct jobs over ten years. That’s an important injection of economic opportunity in that part of the province.

The next local transportation project that I’d like to highlight is the new commercial vehicle safety and enforcement pullout, which is open on Highway 5A. It’s about 12 kilometres south of Kamloops. This was a $950,000 project, which further improves safety for all motorists, in addition to other initiatives along this corridor — like LED curve-warning signs, resurfacing projects and the installation of concrete roadside barrier and centre-line rumble strips.

In addition, increased enforcement levels have brought speeds down through this corridor, which was a significant concern of people who live along Highway 5A. In fact, we’ve seen a 60 percent reduction in the number of accidents over the last couple of years, accidents involving commercial trucks — a 60 percent reduction in speeding violations by commercial truck operators.

We’ve also completed a four-part, $7.8 million paving project in Kamloops and the surrounding region. This has improved the safety and comfort for motorists travelling along about 42 kilometres of road, whether they be residential, recreational or commercial. The work was completed on Highway 1, from Vicars Road to Grand Boulevard, as well as 20 kilometres of paving on Lac Le Jeune Road.

I’m pleased to report that Kamloops’ very own Dawson Construction Ltd., which completed this work, actually won a Deputy Minister’s Contractor of the Year Award last year in the paving category. They have been recognized as one of the best roadbuilders in British Columbia and are just one of the great companies that call Kamloops home.

[1825]

We’re also building excellence in Kamloops health care. In October construction began on the Royal Inland Hospital surgical services building. This will create a new operating room and related support areas that will provide patients with enhanced access to surgical services. Meantime, construction continues on the hospital’s clinical services building. It will provide space for several out-patient programs, provide teaching space for the UBC medical school program and create a new lecture theatre. These are just some of the projects that are building on the fantastic services already being offered by our talented and compassionate health care professionals that we’re so lucky to have in Kamloops.

In fact, there are numerous individuals worthy of recognition in our community, and I’d like to highlight a few of them. Last year Dr. Roger Barnsley and the hon. Len Marchand were awarded the highest honour, the Order of British Columbia.

As the founding president of Thompson Rivers University, Roger Barnsley was an outstanding leader. As president of the University College of the Cariboo from 1998 to 2004, he effectively and passionately communicated the importance of a university for Kamloops and the entire Thompson region. Today TRU is recognized as a progressive leader in forging partnership opportunities with business and industry to support the education and training needs of the region and the province.

Meantime, Len Marchand, a member of the Okanagan Indian band, had a distinguished career in parliament,
[ Page 5702 ]
in cabinet and in the Senate prior to his retirement in 1998. He advocated for a stronger role for First Nations, Inuit and Métis in Canadian political life. He is the first and only First Nations person to be elected to the House of Commons from British Columbia, and was elected three times.

Both of these men have helped build Kamloops into the place we know and so love today.

So, too, has the Canadian Home Builders Association Central Interior, which will celebrate its 50th anniversary in this March. Its 200 members include builders, developers, trades and suppliers, regulators and other professionals. It’s grown tremendously from the small networking venue founded by Frank Hewlett and Gene Allgaier in 1965. I certainly congratulate them on this milestone.

Kamloops’ physical landscape has also been shaped by other great organizations. In September of last year Sun Rivers resort community won an award from Communities in Bloom in the edible gardening category. The year previous Kenna Cartwright nature park earned Communities in Bloom recognition in the management category. Congratulations to them for their efforts to beautify our city, to make it more sustainable and to create a tremendous sense of civic pride.

As a city, we also take great pride in our vibrant arts scene. I recently had the pleasure of attending the annual Mayor’s Gala for the Arts, and what a tremendous celebration it was. There some very deserving individuals were honoured, including Lea Bucknell, who won the emerging artist award; Noran Printing, which took home the business in the arts award; and Richard Wagamese, who took home the literacy arts award. I’m proud to say that you can find a number of Richard’s works in our own Legislative Library here. I encourage the members to check them out.

Moving on, you can’t talk about Canada’s tournament capital without talking about sport. In Kamloops we actively seek out opportunities to bring the rest of the world to our great city for successful and memorable events. Whether it’s our first-class sporting facilities or the dedicated people that live in Kamloops, whether it’s a grass-roots event or an international one, Kamloops is always proud to be a great host and to be a temporary home for participants from all around the world.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Here is a sampling of some of the world-class sporting events that we’ve hosted recently in Kamloops: the 2014 Tim Hortons Brier, the 4 Nations Cup, the 47th Annual Kamloops International Bantam Ice Hockey tournament, the Canadian masters cross-country ski championships at Stake Lake, the Special Olympics B.C. Winter Games and the International Ice Hockey Federation’s women’s ice hockey world championships.

Kamloops has played host to all of these athletes and their families as well as many spectators, and they certainly contribute as much to our city as we give to them as hosts. They make use of our facilities. They stay in our hotels. They eat at our restaurants. They give our local economy a tremendous boost. In return, we welcome them with a community spirit that is warm and friendly and helpful.

Our own athletes shine on the world stage they share with athletes from all over the globe. One of those great local athletes is Dylan Armstrong. This talented shot putter will receive his long-awaited Olympic bronze medal next month. At the 2008 Beijing games, Armstrong finished fourth in the shot put competition, less than one centimetre behind the third-place finisher, who was later handed a lifetime ban for doping.

[1830]

Armstrong will be formally presented with the bronze medal during a special ceremony on February 15, and the entire city is thrilled for him. His hard work and sportsmanship has earned him a spot among the world’s best.

Dylan is just one of the Kamloopsians who serves as a role model for many. Some of these people aren’t in the public spotlight. They’re not receiving medals or awards, and they’re not the ones that we see on the evening news, but they’re the ones who do the small things behind the scenes, that don’t always get noticed or publicized.

One group that comes to mind in Kamloops is a chapter of 100 Women Who Care — a new charity initiative that was started just this last November. I’m particularly proud of the organization because it was co-founded by my own constituency assistant, Maryanne Bower, along with her good friends Shannon Wallis of the city of Kamloops and Bobbie Harrison, who recently retired from her work with the city of Kamloops.

The goal of this organization is to give back to the community by donating to non-profit and charitable organizations that work at the grass-roots level. The group meets four times per year. Each member provides a $100 donation per meeting. At the meeting they hear presentations from different organizations in the community, and they pick an organization to receive their award that evening.

In November, more than $7,000 was raised and presented to the Family Tree Family Resources Society. Earlier this month about $8,500 was pledged to the Kamloops Sexual Assault Centre. I’d really like to thank this group of women for stepping up proactively to support individuals and families in our region.

This is why I love Kamloops so much. It’s about the people. It’s the people who build our roads and help us get our kids home safely. It’s about the people who win Olympic medals. It’s about the people who start new organizations that are about giving back to the community. It’s people who, no matter how busy, always find a little bit more time to help the others around them. It’s people with the vision and leadership to take us from what’s easy and comfortable to what’s going to change our city for the
[ Page 5703 ]
better and in a lasting manner.

Sometimes those changes and advances require tough decisions, like the way we’ve managed our provincial budget in the last number of years during challenging times. People said we couldn’t achieve one balanced budget. We’re going to be so proud next week when we table our third consecutive balanced budget. They said we’d never reach a long-term deal with teachers, and we achieved an affordable six-year agreement.

It doesn’t end there; 2014 was an exciting time for the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. I want to take an opportunity to acknowledge the hard-working men and women in the Ministry of Transportation. It is a true privilege to be the minister of a ministry that has such incredibly hard-working people within it.

Starting from Grant Main, the deputy minister, through all of the assistant deputies and the directors, right down to all of the folks that I am always so pleased to meet at the local level in our regional offices across the province, these are the people that keep our highways open, that keep our highways safe for us. They are the people that are working 24-7 to ensure that we can move safely and efficiently around our province. So I thank the hard-working men and women of the ministry.

Through 2014 we celebrated many impressive achievements in the ministry, including the launch of our safety and speed review and the recent completion of the engagement component of the consultation process for B.C. on the Move, our new ten-year transportation plan. We received almost 12,000 submissions from British Columbians on our transportation plan. From every corner of this province, every community that you can think of, British Columbians weighed in with their ideas.

Work continued around the province to increase the safety and the reliability of our transportation network, including the ongoing widening of the Cariboo connector, improvements along the Trans-Canada Highway between Kamloops and the Alberta border, and the opening of the South Fraser Perimeter Road.

Meanwhile, we also worked collaboratively over the last year with the Mayors Council on Regional Transportation, again, something that no one thought was possible. We worked with the mayors. The mayors were challenged to develop a plan. They developed a plan. We challenged the mayors to come up with a question. They came up with a question.

I’m very confident, this government is very confident, that the people of Metro Vancouver are going to support this plebiscite in the coming months. It will be incumbent upon the mayors to get out and sell their plan, but I see them doing that, and I want to applaud their efforts on that front.

[1835]

We also made extraordinary efforts at providing long-term stability at Canada’s largest and most important port, the port of Metro Vancouver, in late 2014. We kept the port open, and, as importantly, we also took the initiative to ensure that truckers will be paid fair compensation well into the future. That’s very, very important.

We will continue to see investments through this year and coming years as we execute on our $650 million plan for the four-laning of the Trans-Canada Highway, continued investments on the Cariboo connector, continued investments on the Pacific gateway.

I’m so very proud to be the chair of the Pacific Gateway Alliance this year, which is the alliance of the three western provinces along with a number of private sector interests, as we map out and implement a coordinated approach to strategic investments in our supply chain infrastructure to ensure the continued efficient movement of goods and people in and out of our great province.

I truly believe that I have the best job in government being the Minister of Transportation. As I say many, many times, transportation is a key economic enabler. It’s all about the safe movement of goods and people. It’s about growing the economy, expanding markets and creating jobs.

Over the last 12 years we’ve spent over $17 billion on strategic transportation infrastructure in every corner of this province. We’re going to see over $3 billion more spent on infrastructure improvements in the forthcoming three years. While often members on the opposite side dismiss the priorities as we lay them out, what we take comfort in is knowing that British Columbians are telling us that we’re getting those priorities right.

You talk to folks who live in Surrey and south of the Fraser. You talk to them about what the experience used to be, their daily experience to get to work north of the Fraser, crossing the old Port Mann Bridge, and what the experience is like today. I’ll tell you that when you’ve got kids at home, repatriating an extra hour in your day, on the front end and the back end of your day combined, means more quality time with your family. It means less time sitting, idling in your car.

Those are very real improvements. That’s why the Port Mann project was so important. It was the largest bottleneck in this province. It’s why it’s so important that we get on with the George Massey replacement project. That’s the next-largest bottleneck in the province.

There are three overriding themes that really demonstrate progress in the ministry that I want to touch on really quickly as well. First and foremost is the increasing number of very strong, meaningful and lasting partnerships that we have with First Nations. The ministry fosters these relationships with First Nations in order to continue safe and secure access to the transportation system for First Nations and for the broader travelling public.

The ministry regularly consults with First Nations on the actions and the outcomes of major initiatives such as the Pacific gateway strategy, to ensure that First Nations are full and active participants and beneficiaries of a globally competitive provincial economy. The ministry
[ Page 5704 ]
engages with First Nations in a number of areas, including employment and training opportunities, business development opportunities, fisheries opportunities, archaeology, access provisions, cultural recognition, community development funding and monitoring.

The second overriding theme that represents, I think, significant progress worth mentioning here today is the emphasis on environmental protection as we continue to invest and build strategic infrastructure around the province. The ministry works with a range of partners to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the impacts of climate change. This work includes improving highway efficiencies and providing for alternative modes of transportation such as cycling investments and transit investments.

The ministry also works to restore, protect and enhance the province’s environmental resources such as fish, wildlife, vegetation and habitat that may be impacted by provincial highway infrastructure, construction projects or highway maintenance, for that matter. The ministry focuses on a number of areas, including alternative transportation, alternative fuels, transportation efficiencies, protecting environmental resources and climate change adaptation.

The third and final theme of progress in the ministry really relates to our number one priority and everything that we do in transportation, and that’s safety. Moving goods and people safely within British Columbia is critical. It’s critical that it be at the forefront of everything that we do.

[1840]

The ministry works to improve safety by investing in major projects and initiatives. The ministry monitors highway safety daily — hourly, in many cases — and improves high-risk locations in consultation with local and regional authorities as well as stakeholders.

The ministry focuses on a number of areas, including safety programs and improvements, rockfall hazard reduction, pedestrian and cycling safety, highway improvement safety, new interchange and intersection improvements, new bridge crossings and upgrades the emphasis of the commercial vehicle safety enforcement branch and information management systems.

Recently, or certainly over the last year and a half as minister, I have been very proud to shepherd through a number of additional and very specific safety initiatives. We had our safety and speed review last year, as I mentioned earlier in my remarks, where we had almost 2,000 British Columbians participate.

We are tightening up the definition of “Keep right except to pass.” We are tightening up the definition of “winter tires.” We amended the regulations just before Christmas to expand the definition of “Slow down, move over.”

This year we’re going to be installing three variable speed zones: one on the Trans-Canada Highway west of Revelstoke, one on the Coquihalla where the snow shed is to where the toll plaza used to be and one on the Sea to Sky Highway. These variable speed zones are state-of-the-art technology — not inexpensive, but proven to save lives. Through the use of technology and monitoring sensors in the roads, and blended with weather conditions, we will be able to dynamically change the speed limit on those signs to ensure that the speed limit is most appropriate for the conditions at that time.

We will be installing a number of wildlife detection systems, which, again, is another technological innovation that has proven to reduce collisions and save lives where they have been installed in other jurisdictions in the world.

We’re focusing every day on safety. While there’s always more that can be done, I always believe it’s important to take stock of where you were and where you are today. Are you making progress or not? I’m really proud to say that through the wide array of safety initiatives, many of which I’ve spoken about here — and others, including immediate roadside prohibition, vehicle impoundment for excessive speeding, recently increased penalties for distracted driving — over the last ten years we have seen an almost 50 percent decrease provincewide in collisions. And that is saving countless lives.

In conclusion, I’d like to say this. We’re getting a lot done. Much of our work, as I said at the outset of my remarks, is not glamourous or headline-worthy. It’s about delivering on our commitments, about growing British Columbia’s economy and improving the lives of British Columbians. I really believe that the throne speech highlights those themes. That’s why I am so pleased to support it.

Hon. Speaker, as I say at the end of every speech I deliver as the minister responsible for transportation — wherever I happen to be — it is my great privilege to represent the people of Kamloops–South Thompson. And it’s a great privilege to be here in this chamber this evening.

S. Fraser: It is always an honour to rise in this chamber. It’s good to be back in the House this week, the start the spring session.

I’d like to especially thank the people of Alberni–Pacific Rim who have their trust in me and elected me multiple times now to take their issues forward in this place. I will try to reflect that as accurately as possible today in this response to the throne.

Before I begin with that, I’d also like to acknowledge my wife, Dolores, and the time and effort she puts in with putting up with me in this job. It’s challenging, as we all know, and I could not do this job without her. So I want to thank Dolores for that.

Of course, in my constituency office, I am so blessed to have two great partners, if you will. I don’t like calling them constituency assistants — constituency managers, maybe.

[1845]

Brenda McLean and Patty Edwards have been with me since I began this job almost ten years ago. They have done much to help so many people in my constituency and actually in other places too, as a need comes up. I want to acknowledge them, and thank them so much.

Anne Paxton, legislative manager, makes sure I’m where I’m supposed to be and helps me do a job that I wouldn’t be able to do without her also. I just want to make those acknowledgements.

As I begin my comments today on my response to the throne, I just like to comment that I have witnessed many speeches from the throne. This debate that I’ve been following either in the House or on the monitor in my office…. The responses to the throne have been more interesting and more substantial than the throne speech itself.

The throne speech was devoid of any real ideas of substance and devoid of any idea of what British Columbians are going through, what they’re facing in the way of hardship and challenges. That is what a throne speech should be focused on.

I can’t imagine that Liberal MLAs are not hearing the same concerns and challenges from their constituencies and constituents as we are, as I am in Alberni–Pacific Rim.

The reality for most is, really, a growing inequality in this province, where the middle class — the economic engine that runs the economy — is getting squeezed and squeezed beyond their tipping point with a never-ending barrage of ever-increasing fees. Getting less and paying more — that’s the reality.

We have a growing poverty class. We’ve had the highest child poverty rate in the country for, I believe, this is year 9 — either the highest or second highest. This is not a statistic that any of us should be proud of, and all of us should be working to change…. The throne speech does not even make mention of that reality.

If a government is unwilling or unable to acknowledge the realities like child poverty, then the solutions will be even more elusive or not at all. That’s unacceptable.

B.C. families are falling behind. They’re paying more. Their wages aren’t keeping up. The future is uncertain. MSP premiums have doubled under this government. Hydro rates are well on their way to an 80 percent hike. That’s 28 percent in three years. It’s causing huge hardships. We hear it every day in our constituency offices. Liberals members must too.

Hydro rates. I mentioned an 80 percent hike. ICBC rates continue to rise. Ferry fares have doubled on some routes. Even camping fees have gone up.

I’m going to touch on the ferry fee increases and the management of that, as the minister who was just speaking before me, the Minister of Transportation, was responsible. The costs of bad Liberal ferry management to my constituency, to the businesses and the social fabric in Alberni–Pacific Rim — indeed, all over Vancouver Island, all of the islands, all of the coast and some of the Interior…. The social costs are incalculable on how this government is handling B.C. Ferries.

Reduction of services and increases of fees have been the only two tools in the chest from this government. None of it is serving the public interest. The worst part of that is that this strategy…. I think it was the B.C. Ferry Commissioner several years ago now who highlighted that B.C. Ferries had reached and exceeded that tipping point, the price point, causing ridership to decline.

The only response in governance has been to increase those fees yet again, and again and again, driving ridership down. Then the response is to cut services on some routes, causing, actually, an economic cataclysm for coastal communities.

[1850]

Now, the problem is that the government and the minister — who just spoke before me, the Minister of Transportation — did no cost-benefit analysis on these damaging strategies with B.C. Hydro. The cost to the economy was highlighted and quantified by the Union of B.C. Municipalities, who in the vacuum of leadership here, undertook a study. It was over $2 billion in recent years — a hit to the economies of the coast and the islands and, indeed, the Interior.

Poor decisions based on no information is a legacy of this government, and it’s hurting the bottom line for the province — not just individuals, which it certainly is; and individual businesses, which it certainly is; and in some cases, the social and cultural fabric of our communities, which it certainly is. But it’s hurting the bottom line of the province. These are bad decisions.

I would hope in a throne speech to see acknowledgment that past mistakes have been made, that others have come up with solutions, like the Union of B.C. Municipalities, which is all mayors, councillors and regional district directors from the entire province. Not just those directly reliant on the ferry system — from the entire province. They have filled that vacuum of leadership. The government has done nothing. They are going to continue as though the facts don’t exist. They are certainly not part of that solution.

It would have been preventable. It’s not like people — on the coast in Alberni–Pacific Rim; in Victoria, the capital city; in Nanaimo; on all the Gulf Islands; on the Sunshine Coast — are getting some kind of a deal because they live on the island. The ferries have been considered an essential part of the transportation system of this province, and the throne speech is absent of any acknowledgment of the problems that have been created by poor management — and even by the studies and the information that has been brought forward by the Ferry Commissioner and bodies that know this stuff.

Families are getting less. People can’t find family doctors. Seniors care is inadequate — and I have a lot of seniors in my constituency. Our schools are underfunded.

Our schools are underfunded compared to the rest of Canada, in other jurisdictions. We’re $1,000 less per student per year than anywhere else in the country, than the average in the country, and it shows. You hear it when you go into the classrooms — which I will be on Friday. I’ll be attending an elementary school class. I do see the kids as our future, and we need to give them every leg up.

Whether it’s directly through the Ministry of Transportation or whether it’s for helping kids that have some disabilities, some developmental disabilities…. The Minister of Children and Family Development is here. I’ll refer to a case several weeks ago, which I received through my office. A mother called. Her second son was assessed with severe autism, definitely fitting the criteria for accessing supported child development supports. It’s a good program.

What she was told after the assessment, as she was preparing to have her son enter preschool, was: “There’s no money. Yes, your son needs the supported child development funding because without it, the child cannot attend preschool.” The outcomes, we know…. Anyone who has done any reading on this…. This is essential.

[1855]

Early intervention, time in preschool and in schools that require trained assistants for these kids, has a huge beneficial outcome in later life. It’s an investment, again, in our children.

I brought this to the attention of the…. I came to Victoria, knocked on the minister’s door — we weren’t sitting — and beseeched her assistant to please bring this to the attention of the minister. I want to thank the minister, because a week later the mother received a phone call from the ministry saying that the funds would be in place.

I thank you, Minister, for that.

I know of others that are not getting the supports. There are many others that are not getting…. They maybe do not have the wherewithal, the capacity, the energy to try to fight the system when they’re told no. This mother did.

There is more work to be done. I think I saw the minister nodding. I will be raising this in the House.

Noting the time, the hour, I would like to reserve my place to continue this debate and the response to the throne speech. I will take my seat.

S. Fraser moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Polak moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: This House, at its rising, stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 6:56 p.m.

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.

Copyright © 2015: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada