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)

Monday, February 16, 2015

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 19, Number 6

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

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2015

The House met at 1:32 p.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Hon. R. Coleman: I’m pleased today to introduce a couple of people who are joining us in the members’ gallery this afternoon: Mr. Mohammad Tariq, the newly appointed consul general of Pakistan, and he is accompanied by vice-consul Fahad Amjad. I met with the consul general and Mr. Amjad earlier, and they’ve met a couple of other ministers today. Would the House please extend them a warm welcome to Canada.

N. Macdonald: Dr. Jeff Dolinsky is here from Golden to celebrate, I believe, his mother’s 80th birthday. He has decades of volunteer duty in Golden. To choose just one, he and his wife, Joan, have done an incredible job with the Golden Nordic Centre and Nordic skiing in Golden in general. Please join me in making Jeff Dolinsky welcome.

Hon. M. Stilwell: I want to acknowledge and welcome to the House a core team member from Community Living B.C., Doug Woollard, currently vice-president of organizational development, as well as Doug’s wife, Sheila, his son Stephen and daughter-in-law Jessica.

As many of you know, Doug was the interim CEO from September 2011 to August 2014. He has done an absolutely amazing job. As interim CEO, Doug was instrumental in winning the confidence of community living self-advocates and families by returning CLBC to a person-centred approach.

He supported the launch of the community action employment plan to better respond to an increased number of people that CLBC serves who are seeking work. During his time at CLBC Doug worked to establish individualized funding as a way for families and self-advocates to have greater control over the services they received.

[1335]

Doug has been with CLBC every step of the way, even before Community Living B.C. was established as a Crown corporation a decade ago. Though we haven’t had the chance to work together, Doug’s reputation precedes him. I found the news of his retirement at the end of this month raising some disappointment for me and, apparently, in almost everyone that he has worked with. Clearly, Doug will be missed.

For all of his tireless service to the community living sector and, in particular, with CLBC as interim CEO, will you please join me in welcoming and thanking Doug Woollard and his family for sharing him so generously with our province.

G. Heyman: Last week the member for Vancouver-Hastings introduced a very remarkable teacher from Vancouver Technical Secondary School, who is a constituent of mine. Mark Reid is joining us today in the House. He’s over here in Victoria with the arts 10-to-12 curriculum development team. Mark has been director of bands and choirs at Van Tech since 2006, and he has 600 students enrolled in his program.

In 2013 Mark was recognized nationally as the MusiCounts Teacher of the Year for his commitment to inclusive classrooms comprised of students with a variety of cognitive, psychosocial and emotional challenges.

This year, as the member for Vancouver-Hastings told us, Mark has been nominated and made the final 50 shortlist for the Global teacher of the year prize. Mark is one of only three Canadians and the only British Columbian on the list.

Mark also volunteers his time in numerous ways in the music and education communities, including as a conductor at Saint James Music Academy, teaching classical music at no cost to children living in Vancouver in Canada’s lowest-income urban neighbourhood. He shows his commitment day in and day out to motivating and empowering children through music, and it’s well known that band and orchestra activity spurs both intellectual learning and teamwork capacity in kids.

Mark has told me today that he did not make the final ten shortlist, but I know, from listening to the Global interview with his students, that they already think he’s the number one teacher in the world.

Please, I ask all members to join me today in giving Mark a very warm welcome to this House.

Hon. T. Lake: On behalf of the Minister of Transportation and from me, it’s a pleasure to welcome two very good friends and supporters, Len and Daryl Bosch, into the Legislature today to view question period. Len and Daryl are former Kamloopsians who now reside in a city in the Okanagan that shall go unnamed but does not have a three-time Memorial Cup championship hockey team.

It’s great to see Len and Daryl here in the Legislature. Would the House please make them very welcome.

G. Holman: I’d like to introduce and welcome to the House today a number of Girl Guides and Scouts from the south Vancouver Island area, including the 5th Tsartlip Scout Troop from my constituency. Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

J. Thornthwaite: I’d like to introduce to the precinct the crowd of colour up there, full of Cubs, Beavers, Cub
[ Page 5784 ]
Scouters, Beaver Scouters, group commissioners, parents, volunteers, Sea Scouters and Girl Guides.

I’d like to go through the list of the Scouts as well as the Guides: Carol Anne Welsh, Adam Grosser, Finn McLennan, Trevor Ell, Ronan McElroy, Alex Papaloukas, Robert Hallsor, Connor Steves, Tobin Broome, Jasper McLennan, Greg Steves, Aaron Broome, Brian McLennan, Brian Carr-Harris, Barb Carr-Harris, Marvalee Papaloukas, Payton Cameron, Jennifer Sail, Liam Adair, Teresa Adair, Dan Adair, Colin Evans, Maya Kanstrup, Margaret Krawciw, Micia Kanstrup, Sheila Finnigan, Jesse Carr, Gillian Hurwood, Teresa Howden, Hailey Finnigan, Jeannie Cosgrove, Marina Ell, Valerie Boyer, Monet Thurbide, Bronte Thurbide — all under the guidance of Alamin Pirani and Bruce Hallsor.

[1340]

Thank you very much, Scouts and Guides, for coming, and I hope that the precinct will let them know how welcome they are to us.

J. Shin: Joining us in the gallery today is a very special group of 20 bright young students all the way from the city of Jinju in South Korea. They have flown all this way to visit us with their city officials, led by director Kei Sung Koo Lee and his staff at Global College in Vancouver, who have been doing a tremendous job in promoting education and cultural exchange between Chunsangdo in South Korea and, of course, British Columbia.

Would the members please welcome Kim Kyujin, Kim Yunseo, Park Taeheon, Baek Jaemin, Lee Donghyeon, Seo Jenny, Jeon Eunsoo, Jung Yujin, Hur Jiwon, Heo Jina, Kim Jaehui, Park Yeonbin, Park Junggyeong, Sung Jaehyeon, Shin Mingyeong, Shin Seongjun, Shin Yongbin, Jung Goun, Jung Myeongjun, Lee Seunghyeon, Ku Hongsun, Pak Jihyun, Kim Suhlki, Wi Inbok, Kim Donam and Hwang Daeyoun. I hope I got all of that right.

Hon. N. Yamamoto: I have three guests to introduce today. Jeff McCarthy is the president of my riding association, North Vancouver–Lonsdale. He has brought his two in-laws, Peter and Halyna Carpenter, who are visiting British Columbia and have been here for the past three weeks. They are from Montreal. As they depart on Wednesday, back to Montreal, to minus 20 degrees and snow, we are obviously entertaining them with cherry blossoms.

Would the House please make them feel welcome.

A. Weaver: It gives me great pleasure to welcome Rory Hills to the Legislature today. Rory is a fine young gentleman, a recent graduate from Oak Bay High School in my riding, and one of British Columbia’s top debaters, having recently qualified for the Canadian nationals last year. He’s volunteering down at my office, and I would urge the House to welcome him warmly to his first day in the Legislature.

J. Tegart: I know that the legislative interns were introduced last week, but I would like to welcome the five interns who have been assigned to the B.C. government caucus. From our research department, we have Mark Levesque, and from our communications department, joining us today are Emily Barner, Katie Bowers, Corinne Brosz and Alissa Wrean.

Could the House, and especially my caucus colleagues, please make them welcome.

L. Reimer: I also wanted to introduce one of the legislative interns who has been a great support to me. I am so pleased that he is joining our B.C. Liberal caucus. Would the House please make welcome Mr. Mark Levesque.

J. Kwan: I don’t often have a visitor in the Legislature, but today not only do I have a constituent visiting us but also somebody who is a member of our caucus staff as well. I’m very happy to welcome Benjamin Alldritt on behalf of our caucus this afternoon.

Ben was born and raised in the city of Vancouver, where lives with his partner, Jessica. He worked for many years in the construction industry before attending journalism school at Langara College. Since then he has worked for CBC radio news as well as for newspapers in the Lower Mainland, Fraser Valley and Cariboo-Chilcotin regions. Outside of work you can find him hiking, gardening and cycling.

Please help me welcome Ben to this House.

D. Horne: It’s with great pleasure today that I introduce David Mutka, who is visiting the precinct. David and his two young children worked tirelessly during the last campaign knocking on doors for me, and I truly appreciate their support. In his spare time, when he isn’t working for me, he also is a financial planner with Customplan Financial Advisors.

I hope the House will make him truly welcome today.

J. Darcy: It gives me great pleasure to welcome an intern from my constituency of New Westminster, Kevin Sage, who comes from a long-established family in our community, is a great community volunteer, an excellent student, and we’re very pleased to have him working as an intern during this session. Welcome, please, Kevin Sage.

[1345]

D. Barnett: I’m really pleased today to have a member of my constituency here. They don’t come very often. Tom Hoffman is the manager of external and stakeholder relationships for Tolko Industries out of Williams Lake. With him is Bob Fleet, the vice-president of forestry and environment from Vernon, B.C. I ask the House to make them welcome.
[ Page 5785 ]

A. Dix: I want to introduce today, from Calgary, George and Margaret Dixon and their friends Joan and Jim Fargey. George is my mom’s cousin, and his dad is no stranger to legislatures. His dad was a long-time Speaker of the Alberta Legislature back in the day. In his last election to the Legislature he defeated a young Joe Clark, who went on, nonetheless, to be Prime Minister of Canada, which is pretty good. We want to wish them all welcome today.

L. Throness: Last but not least, I’d like to introduce John and Cathy Van Laerhoven. John is mayor of the district of Kent. He and Cathy are visiting for a few days in Victoria. Would the House please make them welcome.

D. Donaldson: Visiting today are Alex Merrell and Glenn Morrison. They’re visiting from Winnipeg, but they’re old friends from Hazelton days.

I’d just like to say that Glenn was instrumental in creating the shuttle bus service that services communities around Hazelton. I know he’s going to be eager to finally hear when a public transit system becomes a reality for Highway 16, the Highway of Tears. Would the House please join me in making them welcome.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 12 — FEDERAL PORT
DEVELOPMENT ACT

Hon. R. Coleman presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Federal Port Development Act.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. R. Coleman: I am pleased to introduce Bill 12, the Federal Port Development Act. This act builds on changes made to the Canada Marine Act by the federal government last year. The act would allow British Columbia to enter into agreements with Canada and port authorities to clarify regulatory oversight.

Specifically, these arrangements would extend the role of the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission in the construction, operations and permitting of LNG facilities on federal port lands. Marine traffic and LNG shipping operations are not affected by this bill.

The Federal Port Development Act will help ensure that LNG facilities are consistently regulated in all of British Columbia and that LNG proponents can move forward with investments, knowing that provincial oversight is clear.

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.
[ Page 5786 ]

Bill 12, Federal Port Development 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 M201 — TOBACCO CONTROL
AMENDMENT ACT, 2015

J. Darcy presented a bill intituled Tobacco Control Amendment Act, 2015.

J. Darcy: I move that the bill intituled the Tobacco Control Amendment Act, of which notice has been given in my name in the order paper, be introduced and read for a first time now.

Motion approved.

J. Darcy: Today I am reintroducing a bill which prohibits the sale of flavoured cigarillos and other flavoured tobacco products. The Canadian Cancer Society describes flavoured tobacco as “tobacco with training wheels” for good reasons. These products look like candy or cosmetics and come in flavours like chocolate, mint, cherry and peach. They produce a sweet-smelling smoke, not the usual harsh tobacco taste and smell. They’re sold in single sizes for as little as a loonie, making it easier for youth to become addicted.

When I introduced this same bill last year, the Health Minister promised that if the federal government did not act, he would. Well, the federal government has now enacted regulations that fall far short of the mark. Disappointingly, despite the call of the Canadian Cancer Society that B.C. needs to act now to ban flavoured tobacco, including menthol, there was no indication in last week’s throne speech that this government will finally act.

[1350]

Alberta has already passed a law. Legislation has been introduced in Manitoba and Ontario. All 28 European Union countries are banning flavoured menthol cigarettes — and still no action here in B.C.

The tobacco companies’ marketing strategy that targets youth is very slick and very effective, and 53 percent of young people in B.C. who smoke start with flavoured tobacco. That’s over 30,000 students.

Tobacco, as we know, is the leading cause of preventable death, causing the deaths of 6,000 British Columbians each year, and the majority of new smokers are under 18. We can’t afford to wait any longer to get these products off our shelves.

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

Bill M201, Tobacco Control 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.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE

D. Barnett: This week we celebrate B.C. Chamber of Commerce Week, February 16 to 20, 2015, with the theme “Strengthening business, building communities.” The B.C. Chamber of Commerce is an important and respected voice of our province’s business community, representing the strength of more than 36,000 businesses of every size and building on the diversity of every sector.

Small businesses are the grass roots and unwavering support of our communities, and 98 percent of all businesses in British Columbia are small businesses employing fewer than 50 people. It is because of their hard work that our neighbours have jobs, our municipalities have tax bases, our children’s sport teams are sponsored and communities thrive.

In the Cariboo-Chilcotin region, the South Cariboo and Williams Lake chambers of commerce play an important role in creating jobs and contributing in so many positive ways, such as by supporting businesses through benefit programs and providing services and education to our communities. Our government recognizes the leadership and significant volunteer hours put in by the chambers of commerce throughout our province as they continue to support local business.

One of the many other ways to celebrate the success of small businesses is through the Williams Lake and District Chamber of Commerce and South Cariboo Chamber of Commerce Annual Business Excellence awards. Congratulations to each of those who have been nominated, and congratulations to chambers all over our province for your continued success and for the role you play, which we greatly appreciate, in supporting our communities and wider global economy.

35th ANNIVERSARY OF CARNEGIE
COMMUNITY CENTRE IN VANCOUVER

J. Kwan: On January 20 our community celebrated the 35th anniversary of the Carnegie Community Centre.

The Carnegie, at the corner of Main and East Hastings, is known as the living room of the neighbourhood. It houses recreational facilities, a low-cost cafeteria, a Vancouver Public Library branch and a variety of services and programs.

The Carnegie is a drug- and alcohol-free area. It’s open every day of the year. It’s a place of learning. It’s a place for community performances. It’s a place for community dialogue. It’s a place for nourishment — food for the stomach and food for the soul. It’s a place where everyone is welcomed and feels a sense of belonging.

On the evening of the 20th we gathered to share stories that we remembered from the last 35 years. We honoured some of the people that contributed to the success of the Carnegie, people like the late Bruce Eriksen, who fought to have the Downtown Eastside recognized as a community; MP Libby Davies, who has served the community for 40 years — she and Bruce were part of the original campaign that founded the Carnegie; Muggs Sigurgeirson, a former president of Carnegie and a tireless advocate for the neighbourhood; Bob Sarti, who volunteered and helped animate the Carnegie with theatre and cultural events. Who, of course, could forget Bob’s chili?

There was Richard Tetrault, whose beautiful mural makes the room dance with life; the late Sandy Cameron, a dedicated volunteer and accomplished poet, chronicler of life in the Downtown Eastside; and Jean Swanson, a lifelong anti-poverty activist and a strong advocate for Raise the Rates.

The late Margaret Prevost, fondly known as “Princess” Margaret, was one of the longest-serving presidents of the Carnegie, who just brightened up the room with her very presence. Paul Taylor is the volunteer editor for the Carnegie Newsletter, who speaks the truth about all things in our community. Of course, there were the executive directors — Diane McKenzie, Donald McPherson, Michael Clague, Dan Tetrault, Ethel Whitty and many others — who made the Carnegie what it is today.

[1355]

The evening ended with everyone enjoying coconut cake topped with a large slab of chocolate made specially for Libby Davies in appreciation of her exemplary service and contributions.

ACCESS TO HEALTH SERVICES AND
HEALTH PROFESSIONAL RECRUITMENT
IN FORT ST. JOHN

P. Pimm: I rise today to speak of a very important issue in my community of Fort St. John. We’ve been enduring a drastic shortage of doctors in our fabulous city, as you may have heard. The community has been working tirelessly to come up with solutions over this past year.

First, we met March 17 with our professional community to figure out some solutions. Secondly, in September of 2014 we had a public meeting where a group called Concerned Citizens for Health Care, Northern Health, doctors and myself — as well as the opposition critic, I might add — heard our local public concerns.

In October I formed a committee called the short-term health solutions committee, consisting of myself as chair, Northern Health division of family practitioners, the mayor of Fort St. John, the mayor of Taylor, Peace River
[ Page 5787 ]
regional district directors, chamber of commerce, industry and Concerned Citizens for Health Care.

To date, here are some of the changes that have been made to address our problems. We now have a Northern Health clinic for unattached patients that opened in July of last year, with one doctor, one nurse practitioner and two more nurse practitioner positions that we’re trying desperately to recruit. We have a new Northern Health walk-in clinic that opened in January of this year for unattached patients, serviced by all of our local physicians. We still have two primary clinics that offer regular appointments and walk-in service for their attached patients.

We have successfully recruited and signed five more new doctors to join us in July and September of this year. Once our new recruits join us, we’ll then start attaching patients to our new doctors. We are one of the few communities that can offer fee-for-service opportunities as well as alternate payment plans for our doctors.

We’re currently doing a study and a report how to make a sustainable, long-term campus of care for Fort St. John. This report will be ready by March 31, 2015. We’re waiting for those results.

I want to thank our Health Minister for supplying the additional funding for the two new nurse practitioner positions that we’re trying to fill, and I want to especially give this group of people who have donated most Saturday mornings for the last three months a great big thank-you. They have much more to do, but we’ve come a long way in a very short time.

UNIVERSITY NEIGHBOURHOODS
ASSOCIATION MULTICULTURAL COMMITTEE

D. Eby: Even though I was almost eaten by a dancing lion this year, it was again my pleasure to attend the University Neighbourhoods Association’s lunar new year festival at the Old Barn Community Centre in my constituency. Florence Luo, chair of the multicultural committee that hosts the event every year with the help of the Old Barn Community Centre staff, told me that she remembers when the first lunar new year event was hosted at the UNA years ago. It was much smaller, just a single room. Now the event draws hundreds of attendees and has outgrown the full Red Barn Community Centre.

The success of the event is due in large part to the hard work of the University Neighbourhoods Association’s multicultural committee. To my knowledge, the UNA welcomes more newcomers to Canada than any other neighbourhood in my constituency. Given that role, neighbours there have taken on the challenge of providing a welcoming environment that celebrates diversity and makes everyone feel welcome.

The multicultural committee’s goal is fighting isolation and celebrating diversity, and that’s why they’ve introduced several exciting and well-attended events that occur regularly throughout the year.

Connection night creates an opportunity for new Canadian residents to connect with their neighbours through the discussion of topics that help them learn about Canadian culture and traditions. The Let’s Cook Club encourages community members to share their cooking skills, resulting in delicious feasts that everyone enjoys.

The Community Youth Band creates beautiful orchestral music, thanks to their 30 members aged 13 to 17. The band regularly brightens UNA community events with their remarkable talents. The seniors and friends program promotes events targeted at reaching out to and engaging seniors in the community.

The multicultural community’s members are Florence Luo, Sabrina Zhang, Jim Taylor, Reihaneh Noorbakhsh, Keri Zhang, Shaohong Wu, Eustina Na, Grant Hoyme, Jade Zhang, Qiuning Wang, Ying Zhou and Katy Short. I’d like to thank all the members of the multicultural committee and the UNA executive for their work in building such a welcoming community for newcomers.

SCOUT-GUIDE WEEK

J. Thornthwaite: February 15 to 22 is Scout-Guide Week in Canada. This annual event provides an opportunity for Scouts Canada and the Girl Guides of Canada to come together to recognize their shared heritage and celebrate the invaluable work both groups do to prepare today’s youth for future success.

[1400]

For more than 100 years Scouts Canada has brought a world of excitement, adventure and friendship to more than 17 million youth. Their programs instil important life skills and principles, such as leadership, cooperation, teamwork and public service. More than half of Canada’s current leaders took part in Scouting and Guiding in their youth, and it was with these organizations that they learned how to strive for excellence and committed to building a better world by giving back to the community.

These values and life experiences are developed through a variety of fun and challenging outdoor programs that empower youth to build a solid foundation of skills and find their inner strength. Through exciting adventures, Scouts and Guides develop into capable, confident, well-rounded individuals who are better prepared to take on the world.

All Scouts programs are co-ed, and everyone is welcome to take part regardless of race, gender, religious belief, sexual orientation or economic circumstance. It is because of this that Scouts Canada is widely recognized as an open, diverse organization that is committed to providing a safe, secure environment for youth to learn and develop.

Scout-Guide programs are developed and maintained by energetic, dedicated volunteers who give selflessly of
[ Page 5788 ]
their time. I ask the House to join me in recognizing Scouts Canada and the Girl Guides of Canada for the great work that they do in communities across the province. I wish them all the best as they celebrate Scout-Guide Week 2015.

LITERACY AND
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNING

J. Shin: There is a group of good folks who regularly gather in the meeting room at Tommy Douglas Library — the usual suspects from Burnaby Family Life, community and continuing education, multicultural society, neighbourhood house, public library and city of Burnaby as well as provincewide partners like Decoda Literacy Solutions, Literacy Now, ISS B.C., MOSAIC, Neil Squire Society, SUCCESS and Purpose Society. My fellow Burnaby MLAs and our staff also attend, and it is because all of us believe there is a growing difficulty in our community, and that is literacy and English learning.

Literacy is the ability to understand and use written information as well as numerical for daily activities at home, at work and in our community, be it using a computer to send e-mails at work or knowing how much to budget for savings every month for retirement.

There are four literacy levels, ranging from level 1 where individuals have great trouble reading. For example, they may be unable to determine the correct dosage of medicine to give to their child from the information that’s available on the package. At level 2 people have limited skills. They are not able to deal with material that’s presented in a manner that’s not simple or clearly laid out. At level 3 one would be considered to have just the bare minimum of skills to cope with the basic demands of everyday living.

Unfortunately, over 75 percent of Canadians fit into levels 1, 2 and 3, with more than 40 percent of us falling below level 2, and the numbers are growing. In our current economic climate where jobs can’t find people and people can’t find jobs, it’s more crucial now than ever to prioritize literacy and English language learning.

Thankfully, our community leaders, volunteers and organizations are stepping up. We just wrapped up the Family Literacy Week campaign last month, and I encourage all of us in doing our share to raise a reader in our community.

Oral Questions

HUNTING ALLOCATION POLICY CHANGES
AND RULES FOR GUIDE-OUTFITTERS

J. Horgan: It’s been a couple of weeks since the government’s most recent decision on the allocation of wildlife resources between resident hunters and non-resident hunters. Despite claims by the government that the numbers are small, the expectations in the community are quite different. In fact, the consultation that stakeholders expected did not take place.

The minister said in this place last week that, again, it was a matter of a few animals. But to most hunters and to most British Columbians, this common resource should not be privatized, and it should be available to British Columbians first.

My question to the minister is: why are you putting foreign hunters ahead of resident hunters?

[1405]

Hon. S. Thomson: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. As I indicated last week in response to a question on this issue, sustainable hunting in British Columbia brings $230 million in economic activity to the province. That’s about $230 million from resident hunters, $120 million from the guide-outfitting industry.

We recognize that both sectors of the utilization of this resource provide that important economic activity. It’s about finding a balance that recognizes that contribution from both sectors and ensuring that they have access to those resources, providing viability for the guide-outfitting industry but also ensuring that the principle of resident hunter priority is maintained. That’s what the decision does.

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

J. Horgan: Again to the minister, the allocation proportions are not equitable in the eyes of resident hunters. They’ve made that abundantly clear to the minister. There was a consultation that took place, and arbitrary decisions came from that — not a consensus, not a collaborative approach but arbitrary decisions on behalf of the government and the member from Cranbrook.

But it’s not just the allocation that’s a concern. Let me read….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: Let me read a March 22, 2013…. People will remember. That was weeks before the last provincial election. An order-in-council was passed: the Wildlife Act General Regulation. It reads as follows: “A guide-outfitter does not commit an offence if the guide-outfitter...allows his or her clients to kill game to the extent that the number killed exceeds” — exceeds — “the quota assigned to the guide-outfitter.” End of the regulation change. Now not only do non-resident hunters get more access to our common resource, but they don’t have to abide by the same laws that resident hunters do.

Again my question is to the minister. You’re giving
[ Page 5789 ]
more animals away to foreign hunters, you’re allowing foreign hunters to exceed what are conservation quotas, ultimately, and you’re doing both of those by claiming that you’re backing British Columbians. It doesn’t appear to be the case, hon. Minister. How do you justify that?

Madame Speaker: Comments through the Chair.

Hon. S. Thomson: Again, of 45,700 animals harvested in British Columbia, only 3,700 of those are in allocation. That’s less than 8 percent of the total.

The greatest majority of wildlife harvesting in British Columbia is on general open season. That’s what provides the meat for the freezers for resident hunters. Again, 30,000 of that 45,700 are deer — general open season across the province. Moose allocation — 8,515 across the province.

The decision is based on a number of principles. One is First Nations considerations. Second is conservation as a key principle. Third is resident hunter priority.

The decisions and the allocation here of the resource — a total of 60 animals involved, about a few hundred opportunities that arise out of that in order to provide that balance. That was the basis of the decision.

Again, it maintains those core principles of resident hunter priority but ensures also that there’s an opportunity for guide-outfitters to continue their important economic contribution to the province and maintains resident hunter priority.

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

J. Horgan: Thank you, hon. Speaker. Well — through you to the minister — giving more access to foreign hunters than you are giving to resident hunters is disproportional. It’s disproportional regardless of what the numbers are.

More important than the botched consultation on the allocations is an order-in-council exempting prosecution for non-resident hunters. How does the minister, how does this government, justify saying to foreign hunters: “You don’t have to abide by the same rules as British Columbians”? How do you justify that?

Hon. S. Thomson: I know the members opposite have latched onto some of the misinformation and the numbers that are out there and that are being communicated by the resident hunters.

The member opposite, just to point how deep…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

[1410]

Hon. S. Thomson: …the research goes, in comments on CKNW on January 29, 2015, said this. “Also, the ability for local folks to fill their freezer with a couple of venison” — first of all, this decision does not affect venison at all — “and perhaps a moose, if they’re lucky enough to get a tag....”

Again, the allocation with the general open season and allocation formulas around moose and the general open season on deer — this does not take opportunities away from resident hunters. This provides for that balance and ensures we have a viable guide-outfitting industry in British Columbia — $120 million in economic contribution to the province — and supports hunting as a sustainable occupation for resident hunters, who do make a very, very important contribution. That’s recognized. Resident hunter priority, $230 million in economic activity. We recognize that and then make sure that it provides that balance.

K. Conroy: Resident hunters also know that if they went out and hunted over their quota, they would have the book thrown at them. They could have their rifle taken away, their car, their truck, their ATV. They could be thrown in jail.

Let’s be clear about what this OIC says here. It explicitly exempts guide-outfitters or their clients who kill more game than they are permitted under their individual quota from prosecution under the Wildlife Act.

So to the minister, why did he create special rules for wealthy foreign hunters and guide-outfitters that don’t apply to B.C. resident hunters?

Hon. S. Thomson: Again, recognizing here that in making this decision, there were a number of other factors that were taken into the decision. One of those — and it has been a longstanding part of the allocation formula — was to remove the capacity for success factors for the guide-outfitting industry. This is where they could go well over their quotas. They could harvest more.

What we recognized was that we needed to provide a management tool that allowed them to manage their quota within an allocation period, within that five-year period. We didn’t want to incur huge fines for being slightly over it in one year. Guide-outfitters are still required to manage their quota within that five-year allocation period, and if they go over that, their quota is reduced.

Madame Speaker: The member for Kootenay West on a supplemental.

K. Conroy: So they’re only allowed to break the law within a five-year ramification? There are no timelines. There are no timelines in the OIC, and local hunters know that this stinks. They believe that this OIC actually is a “get out of jail free” card, and it’s just for foreign hunters
[ Page 5790 ]
and guide-outfitters.

I think this is worse. I think it could be known as legalized poaching. I think that’s what this OIC has done.

To the minister, what made him decide that the key rule of hunting, the very key rule that all hunters abide by, at least all resident hunters abide by in this province…? Don’t harvest more animals than you are allowed to — why shouldn’t that apply to foreign hunters or guide-outfitters?

Hon. S. Thomson: Just to be clear, it does apply. Those rules do apply. What we did provide was a management tool that allowed the opportunity, if they were slightly over in one year, to be managed within that five-year quota period. If they don’t manage within their quota, if they don’t manage within that quota allocation, administrative penalties…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Thomson: …can be applied, and quota can be reduced. So guide-outfitters understand they need to strictly adhere to their quota. But this provides for that flexibility to ensure that if they’re slightly over in one year, they’re not assessed a huge administrative penalty while we manage the overall quota over the five-year period. Penalties still apply if they’re well over that, and they also can have quota reduced and administrative penalties applied.

[1415]

OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION
OF MINING INDUSTRY

N. Macdonald: This government’s lax approach to mining oversight is bad for industry and worse for families that depend on mining jobs. We know that government regulators didn’t tell the minister about serious engineering concerns at Mount Polley, even after the tailings dam failed. The minister said as much during a whole host of media interviews. Now the minister wants to rely on industry-controlled review panels to assess tailings ponds in the province. Just to be clear, the companies hire the panels, the companies pay for them, and the companies control the information.

To the Minister of Mines: isn’t it time to get back in the business of government oversight so that mining families can have some confidence in their future?

Hon. B. Bennett: I am glad to hear that the hon. member actually cares about mining families, like we do on this side of the House.

The member made reference to some e-mails that either he or the Leader of the Opposition read out last week between engineers and made reference today to the fact that the minister, myself, didn’t know about them. Those e-mails were between the engineers of record. They were not between the engineers and Ministry of Energy and Mines staff. Ministry of Energy and Mines staff knew nothing about those e-mails.

Interjection.

Hon. B. Bennett: The member is actually making the point.

As the panel has said in numerous places in the report, in our western world the regulator depends on the engineer of record to do a design knowing what is under the foundation of whatever it is that’s being built. That would be true of an apartment building. It would be true of a mine, a tailings storage facility, and it would be true of almost anything that is built in today’s western world.

If you have engineers that are exchanging e-mails indicating that they know something that the regulator doesn’t know, I would say that there is more to come from the two investigations that are being done. Eventually, the responsibility for this will be affixed to someone, but the report has made very, very clear that that someone is not the regulator.

N. Macdonald: You know, the system has failed completely. That’s what’s outrageous about this answer from the minister. We’ve had ten years of this. Has there ever been a company that was actually charged and had to pay a significant fine? Never. It has never worked. And the complete and absolute failure at Mount Polley speaks for itself. This government’s neglect and its reliance on third-party oversight is what has led to this sorry place.

In May 2014 third-party engineers at Amec were terrified that the tailings dam at Mount Polley might fail — 2014 May. They were worried about losing the dam and the mine. Did the minister tell Imperial Metals to stop operating in the danger zone? No. If the minister is to be believed, by what he’s just said, then, his own staff didn’t even tell him that there were problems even after the dam failed.

To the minister: surely, a responsible government would take this opportunity to learn from the mistakes of the past and fix this regulatory system so that the mining families can again have confidence about their future.

Hon. B. Bennett: Well, we do, on this side of the House, want all British Columbians to have faith in the mining industry. We acknowledge quite readily…. And I’ve done it often, and so have other members of this government. This accident was unprecedented, but it was a terrible environmental disaster that we cannot allow to happen again. But the opposition — and I said this in my very first answer last week — is insisting upon blaming the government for the accident itself. So I feel I have no other….
[ Page 5791 ]

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

[1420]

Hon. B. Bennett: I have no other choice but to try to answer the member’s question, so I’ll read from the report for him. “The root cause of the breach was the undrained failure of the upper GLU.” Another quotation: “The dominant contribution to the failure resides in its design.” Another quotation: “The breach was caused by a shear failure of the dam foundations.”

Here’s what it wasn’t. This is what the panel says.

Interjection.

Hon. B. Bennett: The hon. member doesn’t actually like to hear what the panel states. But the panel states very clearly that inspections “would not have prevented failure,” that overtopping was not the cause and that piping or cracking or internal erosion also were not the cause of the accident.

BAN ON SALE OF FLAVOURED TOBACCO

J. Darcy: Last year the Health Minister promised in this House that there would be significant action to restrict the sales of flavoured tobacco products. He said he was waiting to see what steps the federal government would take.

The federal government’s new regulations fall far short of what’s needed, and the Canadian Cancer Society is calling on provinces to act now to protect our young people from the negative effect of flavoured tobacco. Will the minister be keeping his promise to take real action on flavoured tobacco?

Hon. T. Lake: The Premier was very clear and gave our ministry a mandate to work with the federal government, which is something that we do quite effectively, particularly on the health file.

The federal government has made changes that we think will have a very positive impact on protecting youth from flavoured tobacco. All of us want to ensure that youth are not enticed into a habit that is the single largest preventable cause of death to the people of British Columbia.

The federal government has been very good, has moved on this file. We want to continue to work with the federal government to ensure that youth in British Columbia are protected.

Madame Speaker: The member for New Westminster on a supplemental.

J. Darcy: Here’s exactly what the Canadian Cancer Society said about the federal government’s new regulations. They “fail to give our kids the protection they deserve. The government should have done more.” That’s the Canadian Cancer Society, not the official opposition.

Thirty thousand more young people begin smoking in British Columbia every year, and more than half of them start with flavoured tobacco. The bright colours, the candy flavours, including menthol, are all part of the tobacco companies’ marketing strategy to try and pitch these products to young people as if they were harmless. But tobacco kills.

It kills 6,000 British Columbians every year. It’s a public health issue, and this government cannot afford to wait any longer. Manitoba, Alberta and Ontario have all taken action on flavoured tobacco. Will the minister follow the lead of these other provinces and commit to acting now to take these dangerous products for our young people off the shelves in British Columbia?

Hon. T. Lake: The member opposite doesn’t have to lecture me on the dangers of tobacco that killed my mom and has made my dad quite ill. All of us have been touched, I’m sure, in our families by the tobacco industry.

We don’t want youth to be enticed into smoking at all. We’ve worked with the federal government, and we’re working with the Canadian Cancer Society. We have a very good working relationship and have supported the Canadian Cancer Society in many of their initiatives, and we’ll continue to do so.

We are working cooperatively with the federal government. We’re also moving on e-cigarettes, and we’ll be introducing safeguards to protect youth from what many consider a gateway into tobacco use.

On this side of the House we are going to protect youth from exposure to tobacco, and we’ll continue to do that each and every day.

[1425]

NURSING SERVICES ON
MAYNE AND GALIANO ISLANDS

G. Holman: The B.C. Liberals recently cut funding for weekend on-call nursing coverage on Mayne and Galiano islands. These cuts put the health and safety of my constituents at risk and could even mean higher costs if they result in emergency situations. Will the Minister of Health reverse these cuts today?

Hon. T. Lake: It is important that we make sure that people have access to health care, whether it’s with family practitioners or nurses. In the previous model on those islands, nurses were the front line. Since that time physicians have located to those communities and are providing primary care in a very effective way on those islands.

Madame Speaker: Saanich North and the Islands on a supplemental.
[ Page 5792 ]

G. Holman: I think the minister knows that the Galiano Health Care Society, for example, the group that the minister or Island Health did not notify of these changes, indicates that the minister’s response to them has been incomplete and is misleading and that the Galiano community strongly opposes these cuts.

Madame Speaker: Member, kindly withdraw that remark.

G. Holman: So done, Madame Speaker.

People on the southern Gulf Islands pay the same health care premiums as other British Columbians, premiums which have doubled under this government. As in many small communities across the province, people on Mayne and Galiano are paying more and getting less.

Again to the Health Minister, will he reinstate the essential nursing coverage in these communities?

Hon. T. Lake: There’s no question that nurses provide tremendous service. In the history of British Columbia, in rural and remote areas nurses have often been the front line of health care. We really appreciate and value the service they provide. The reality is that there’s a permanent physician that’s been recruited for Galiano. Two nurse practitioners have been hired — one on Galiano and one serving Mayne and Saturna.

So there is a change of service. I would argue that with a physician and two nurse practitioners, the service has been elevated — as well as on-call services available for the residents of those islands.

FERRY FARES AND RIDERSHIP LEVELS

N. Simons: Well, pay more and get less. That seems to be this government’s approach to the public. Nowhere is it more apparent than in they way they’ve managed ferries. Fares have gone up over 100 percent on some routes since this government took office, took the helm. We’ve seen report after report, including one this past Friday that shows that ridership is down. It’s down to the lowest point in 20 years.

To address the losses associated with a drop in ridership, fares go up even more and services get cut. What is the minister going to do to stop this downward spiral?

Hon. T. Stone: For the almost two years that I have been the minister responsible — I have spoken many times in this House and many times outside of this chamber — I’ve articulated the vision that this government has for ferries. It’s a vision that’s focused, first and foremost, on doing everything that we can — working with the corporation, working with the Ferry Commissioner and, indeed, working with coastal communities to ensure that Ferries is affordable and sustainable for the long term.

I’ll say to the member opposite that one important point he often glosses over…. Members opposite often gloss over this point. It’s the fact that this government has invested a record-level $180 million in B.C. Ferries in the last fiscal year alone.

I would encourage the member opposite to actually take a look at the vision that I announced a year ago. There was a wide range of other initiatives, including converting three vessels and two new vessels to LNG propulsion, which will save $12 million per year for 27 years.

[1430]

Madame Speaker: Powell River–Sunshine Coast on a supplemental.

N. Simons: I’m glad he didn’t suggest we just all start rowing.

B.C. Ferries’ third-quarter report on Friday shows a $6.1 million loss recorded in the last three months of 2014. The CEO said the losses would even be greater if it weren’t for the fare hikes helping offset the drop in ridership. Now, this minister knows fares are going to go up another 3.9 percent on April 1, even though sailings were cut by about 10 percent over the last year.

The minister has already admitted fares are past the tipping point. Will he stop the fare increase of April 1 that will inevitably lead to a further drop in ridership and in revenue?

Hon. T. Stone: What I can assure the members opposite is that this government is not going to stop in our unwavering commitment to doing everything we can to drive downward pressure on the fares at B.C. Ferries in this province.

What’s most telling on this file is that the members opposite pay no attention whatsoever to the myriad of ideas and initiatives which we have announced, which B.C. Ferries has announced. Every idea that is floated with the intention of driving down the pressure on fares, the opposition opposes. We’re looking at a feasibility study for the potential of a fixed link to Gabriola Island. We are investing in alternative technologies. The cable ferry that will serve Denman Island will save $2 million per year.

I encourage the members opposite to pick up that vision that we announced a year ago. We are making substantial progress in our efforts to drive down fares at B.C. Ferries.

M. Karagianis: I guess the deal is if you’re a bridge, the B.C. Liberals are right there for you, but if you’re a ferry rider, a ferry-dependent community, too bad, so sad. That’s what we hear.

Now the reality is 50,000 fewer passengers sailed on B.C. Ferries compared to the same period last year, 12,000 fewer vehicles. The minister himself has admitted that we are beyond the tipping point. Yet what does the government do? Well, cuts the services and raises the
[ Page 5793 ]
fares. Cuts the services and raises the fares, and so the spiral goes on and on and on.

That’s not a solution. That is a formula for disaster, and this government…. Since they quasi-privatized this ferry system, it has been nothing but a dismal failure.

Now will the government admit that this is part of the highway system, it should be treated that way, and get on with running this back into the red instead of into the rocks?

Hon. T. Stone: Part of the great challenge that has weighed down B.C. Ferries for a good number of years was the fact that from 1991 to 2000, B.C. Ferries debt increased 1,800 percent. Most of that debt related to a number of fast ferries, which were actually never used by any ferry users in the province of British Columbia.

On this side of the House we’re investing a record amount in B.C. Ferries. We are unrelenting in our efforts to embrace every initiative that we possibly can, all in an effort to drive down the pressure on fares and ensure that B.C. Ferries is there for the long term to serve British Columbians.

[End of question period.]

Ministerial Statements

50th ANNIVERSARY OF CANADIAN FLAG

Hon. S. Anton: On Sunday, February 15, 2015, the national flag of Canada turned 50. Our red-and-white Maple Leaf flag was selected in 1964 for its easily recognizable design, the use of Canada’s national colours and the prominence of the maple leaf, a national symbol of pride and identity. This is a significant and special milestone as Canadians prepare for the 150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017.

At the inauguration of the new flag, the Speaker of the Senate said: “The flag is the symbol of the nation’s unity, for it, beyond any doubt, represents all the citizens of Canada without distinction of race, language, belief or opinion.” Those words still ring true today.

[1435]

As our national flag is hung above government buildings, businesses, schools and homes, above us here at B.C.’s Legislative Assembly and above parliament in our nation’s capital, it serves as a symbol of peace and acceptance, our Canadian values and our future as a nation.

As British Columbians, the anniversary of our national flag is an opportunity to reflect on what it means to be Canadian. Our national flag speaks to what we have accomplished together, to the historical moments that have served to define us and to the promising future of this great country.

Looking at the images from Prince George over the last day or two, there are quite a few flying in Prince George. Congratulations to them and the Canada Winter Games.

I encourage all British Columbians to celebrate the 50th anniversary of our Canadian flag.

Madame Speaker: In response to the ministerial statement, the Leader of the Official Opposition.

J. Horgan: I thank the Attorney for her remarks celebrating the 50th year of the red maple leaf on the white background with the red bars. We’ll remember, some of us…. I was a baby at the time, but there was a fairly acrimonious debate that carried on in Canada at that time. It went on. It was the great flag debate of its day. We’ve had some tepid debates in this place compared to what happened in our national parliament when it came time to change from the old ensign to what now all of us recognize as a pure symbol of what it means to be Canadian.

I’ve studied abroad. I’ve travelled abroad. I know I’ve seen other Canadians with proud Maple Leafs on their backpacks. I recall vividly being in Dieppe one August, celebrating the anniversary of the tragic events at Dieppe. A Frenchman came up to me — I had a Canadian flag on my hat — and he embraced me. It startled me because I’m not accustomed to small people coming up and embracing me, walking down the street. It shocked me, but it really, really shocked my kids. They said: “Daddy, what was that all about?”

This French gentleman told me about his annual setup of a Canadian display in the town square of Dieppe to acknowledge what Canada and Canadians had done and what sacrifices were made on the beaches of Dieppe so long ago, so long before the national ensign, the Canadian red maple leaf, was adopted.

It’s a symbol for us today. It’s a symbol for us into our future, our proud future — a country united not just by our flag but by our common values. The debate that we had about accepting the maple leaf as our national symbol, I believe, is the foundation of what makes Canada so spectacular. We debated vigorously 50 years ago in our national parliament. Today, regardless of political stripe, regardless of province, we celebrate the raising of the flag, particularly when it comes to hockey games and Canadian national championships, as we’re having in Prince George.

Reports from Committees

M. Bernier: I have the honour to present the report of the Special Committee to Review the Personal Information Protection Act. This report covers the committee’s work in relation to its review of the Personal Information Protection Act.

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

Motion approved.
[ Page 5794 ]

M. Bernier: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

M. Bernier: In moving adoption of the report, I’d like to make a few brief comments. This report summarizes the results of the committee’s review of the Personal Information Protection Act, which governs how private sector organizations can collect, how they can use and how they disclose personal information. It requires organizations to protect and secure personal information against unauthorized use or disclosure. The act also grants individuals the right to access their own personal information.

The committee conducted public consultations from June to October, 2014. I’m pleased to say that the committee worked cooperatively throughout the review and unanimously agreed to the report’s 15 recommendations to strengthen privacy protection for British Columbians. The recommendations include proposed amendments to the Personal Information Protection Act that will improve accountability, address challenges related to new information technologies and respond to the changes in the legal landscape.

[1440]

The committee has also recommended that the provincial government report publicly on its response to the committee’s recommendations and its implementation plans in a timely manner.

I’d like to express the committee’s sincere appreciation to all the British Columbians for their input and who took time to participate with us. I’d also like to give a big thank-you to the Clerk’s office, who supported the committee throughout the entire process.

In closing, I’d like to thank my fellow committee members, including the Deputy Chair, the member for Vancouver-Fairview, for their hard work on this committee.

With that, I move adoption of the report.

G. Heyman: I would like to join the member, the Chair of the committee, in speaking to adoption of this report. I would also like to thank the staff from the Clerk’s office; the many presenters from around British Columbia, particularly interested parties; members of the committee, who worked very cooperatively to reach a consensus report; and, in particular, the Information and Privacy Commissioner, who repeatedly took time to clarify issues for us and answer questions.

In the end result, I think we have a set of recommendations that will, if implemented, make the act more current. They will give the commissioner some additional powers that she will need. They will deal with issues related to breaches and mandatory notification. They give, in short, the act more teeth than it currently has, while at the same time being responsible and being responsive to the size of organizations, as well as the sensitivity of the information in question, by making these policies scalable to both those issues.

Finally, I would note, as the Chair has, that one of the concerns of the committee was that in the seven years since the last report and recommendations there has still been no public response from the government or the ministry — which is, of course, of particular interest to those people who took the time to pay attention to this act and make presentations. Therefore, we did recommend that the government respond in a timely manner to these recommendations, as well as outlining what implementations the government and the ministry have, if any.

Motion approved.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: Continued debate on the throne speech.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

On the subamendment (continued).

D. Donaldson: Firstly, in my time that I have to respond to the government’s throne speech, I’m going to take time to say thanks to those here in the Legislature that I work most closely with in my role as official opposition spokesperson on Children and Family Development. That’s researcher James Harada-Down, communications officer Jennifer Jones and legislative assistant Teresa Scambler; also, to the Stikine MLA staff in my Hazelton and Smithers offices, who keep in constant touch with constituents as we work towards our mutual goals as the Stikine team: Shelley Worthington and Michelle Larstone in Smithers and Julie Maitland in Hazelton.

Thank you to all of you for your commitment to fairness and justice — and especially to my wife, Anne Docherty, for her strong, articulate and never-wavering determination to work for social justice.

The throne speech is this B.C. Liberal government’s vision for the coming year. It was widely criticized as lacking substance. In fact, one long-established provincial mainstream media journalist wrote on February 10, 2015: “On this day in provincial history the B.C. Liberals admitted they had pretty much run out of new ideas.”

[D. Horne in the chair.]

I don’t really blame the Premier for the lack of substance or not laying out a vision in the throne speech. That’s because she has said that she tries to avoid working at the Legislature because “there are no real people in
[ Page 5795 ]
Victoria,” and “the sick culture” is unhealthy.

Given that is where her values lie, why would one expect her to use this democratic institution to actually honour the more than 1.8 million people who cast a vote with what her government’s vision is for the coming year? Given the attitude of neglect by the Premier, we will have to look elsewhere for what the B.C. Liberals’ vision is for 2015 and, since nature abhors a vacuum, to fill the void with what I would see as a positive course for a responsible government.

[1445]

I had some time to reflect on this recently. Friday I attended the opening of the Canada Winter Games in Prince George, and Saturday I had to be back in the constituency. I had a five-and-a-half-hour drive from Prince George to Hazelton to consider the comments the Premier made at those opening ceremonies.

The Premier correctly thanked the more than 2,400 athletes competing in the games from 800 communities for being “strivers,” as she said, and compared them to those who first settled in B.C. “Who built the province up with nothing,” is what she said. Those who built the province up from nothing.

I had to think about those words. What struck me is how great it is that, for the first time ever for a Canada Winter Games, there’s an official host First Nation: the Lheidli T’enneh, on whose territory Prince George sits, at the confluence of the Nechako and Fraser rivers.

In fact, in Lheidli T’enneh, in the Carrier language, it translates into English as “where the two rivers flow together” and “the people.” Chief Dominic Frederick was in attendance, sharing the stage and listening to the Premier’s words that Friday night.

As I left Lheidli T’enneh territory, drove west along Highway 16 and entered the provincial constituency boundaries of Stikine, on Wet’suwet’en territory, and then on to Gitxsan territory, I thought about that statement from the Premier.

“Those who built the province up from nothing.” It’s not refutable that settlers worked very hard at what they did and that it took much to establish the institutions they brought with them, based in European culture. Institutions like this Legislature.

But what the Premier did in framing her statement was perpetuate an outdated point of view that what we call B.C. was just a vast frontier before the arrival of the Europeans, that there wasn’t anything here — no governance systems, no laws, no economies, no social structures, no institutions and basically no people.

“Built the province up from nothing.” That reveals an egocentric mindset that demeans, devalues and ignores the pre-existence of sophisticated cultures and societies in what we now call B.C., long before the arrival of settlers.

As I pulled in from my five-and-a-half-hour drive home, after once again witnessing the beauty of the northwest — the land, the animals, the clean air, the clean water — I just wanted to say thank you to First Nations. Thank you to the Wet’suwet’en. Thank you to the Gitxsan. Thank you to the Kaska, to the Tlingit, to the Tahltan, the Gitanyow, all of whose traditional territories and aboriginal title are within the boundaries of the constituency of Stikine.

Thank you to the Lheidli T’enneh and all other First Nations in B.C. Thank you for your strong governance and social and economic systems that for 10,000 or more years enabled you to live in close connection to the land in a sustainable way.

Thank you for being stewards of the land and waters so that when settlers did arrive in this province there wasn’t “nothing,” but intact and healthy ecosystems upon which we could depend for our spiritual, mental, emotional and physical well-being — then and, I hope, into the future.

I had the good fortune of hearing Dr. Cindy Blackstock speak recently in Victoria, in the fall. For those of you who know, she’s the executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada, and she’s Gitxsan. She has a case in front of the Canadian Human Rights Act alleging Canada discriminates against First Nations children by consistently underfunding child welfare on reserves. I believe we’re expecting a ruling from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal later this spring, perhaps in April or May.

For her work as an activist for child welfare, she’s been under surveillance by the federal government. Dr. Blackstock says that our children are our greatest natural resource, and I couldn’t agree more.

The Wet’suwet’en have their own child-wellness strategy and practice based on their spiritual, cultural, mental and physical belief system. Its acronym is ANABIP.

[1450]

The Wet’suwet’en recently conducted an external, independent audit, a formative evaluation conducted by a provincially recognized evaluator, SPARC B.C., which stands for the Social Planning and Research Council of B.C., and a nationally recognized non-profit, Storytellers Foundation.

SPARC B.C. says it’s the first of its kind where a First Nation has contracted an outside, independent evaluation of an initiative that is founded on a traditional governance approach. Think about it — an independent, third-party, formative evaluation in order to gauge success. Given the lack of progress this government has achieved for children in their care, perhaps it’s a practice that the Ministry of Children and Family Development should adopt for its own programs.

What came across from interviewing participants in this participatory approach to evaluation is the deep-rooted connection to land and culture that is at the heart of children being our greatest natural resource. Belonging and connection. Land and cultural connection. Respect for land and women. Appreciation for the
[ Page 5796 ]
land. Connecting the land, family and ancestors. All of those were major, common themes expressed by those participating in ANABIP.

Deep connection to each other and the land; understanding that we are part of the ecosystems in which we live, not apart from them; and an acute awareness that diversity is fundamental to strengthen resilience in society — diversity of species, diversity of thought, diversity of culture, diversity of perspectives. This is what we have inherited as settlers to this province. It wasn’t and isn’t nothing. It remains a substantive world view, a world view that is different from the dominant world view, the values of which we are bombarded with on a daily basis — how we judge success, what we value, what it means to make it.

But imagine for a moment what it would be like to have a government in power whose vision is founded in “We are all in this together,” rather than “Every person for themselves;” a government who believes in reciprocity, that every person has a gift to give as well as to receive; a vision that recognizes that we are part of the ecosystems in which we live, not apart from them; the understanding of the importance of diversity of thought that this is based on, that the depth and quality and breadth of relationships one has in their life are what ultimately matter over everything else; a government that recognizes that people are at the heart of a thriving society — not businesses, not corporations, not the economy, but people.

How would a government that holds this vision, this frame, this lens work? How would the public policy decisions unfold? What would it mean to people? Well, we heard nothing about that in the throne speech, so I’m going to try to give a few examples.

In the Ministry of Children and Family Development we would see a lack of properly preparing children in care for a productive adult life as a failure of relationship-building. We would see the fact that children in care graduate high school at a 27 percent rate, compared to an 84 percent rate for the provincial average, as something that needs to be addressed long before the child ages out of care at 19. We would see resources and attention focused at a young age on trauma therapy, on attachment issues, on love, on building the ability to have a relationship with oneself and then others.

In the Ministry of Health we would see more emphasis on the mental, spiritual, physical and emotional factors in what amounts to well-being as well as in our well-developed system of acute and emergency care. It would recognize that belonging and connectedness are essential for good health and resilience to illness. After all, where is the basis for the saying in our culture of “She died of a broken heart” if not in the recognition that emotional and spiritual health can be as important to survival as physical health?

In attempting to address violence perpetuated against women….

Interjection.

D. Donaldson: Perhaps the member opposite has something to scream about that. I invite him, when he has his chance, to actually say something meaningful.

[1455]

You know, hon. Speaker, you would think, from a Rhodes Scholar, that he would understand holistic approaches and something other than one aspect of one part of society. But he’s a member of the cabinet, so perhaps he has to put that aside and have one vision.

In attempting to address the violence perpetuated against women, we would see from the government that we are all in this together, that 99 percent of the violence against women is perpetuated by men. Men who seek support to try to address their behaviours before they’re criminalized would be able to get help, not just those men who have been already in jail, as is the case now.

With this vision, we would see a government who actively seeks to provide opportunities for people to strengthen their connection to the land, not by raising provincial park fees, for instance, but by making parks even more accessible than they are now and reinstituting, for instance, the interpretive programs at these commonly held jewels of the province.

The most important connection to the land and the waters, the connection that that is where our food comes from, would be reflected as a top priority in government.

In mining and forestry we would see a government that recognizes how important these activities are for the people and the province. Therefore, we would see the oversight that is necessary to instil confidence amongst the public and investors, flowing from the knowledge that we are part of the ecosystems in which we live, not apart from them.

In economic endeavours we would see a government that understands that diversity equates to resilience, and an overreliance on one sector is not in the best interests of the people in this province.

We would have a meaningful relationship with First Nations based on government-to-government understanding, not a one-off agreement basis. This means beginning with the acceptance that aboriginal title is real and exists, and then beginning the dialogue on government-to-government basis from there.

I was up in Prince George not too long ago, in mid-January. It was at the Premier’s Natural Resource Forum. A former cabinet minister from this B.C. Liberal government gave an address there — Geoff Plant. It was a very good address. He said a few things.

I want to quote from part of his speech and his remarks during the evening, because it really tells a lot about this government’s approach, or lack of it, to aboriginal relationships. Mr. Geoff Plant said:
[ Page 5797 ]

“Aboriginal title is not just the right to be consulted about government land and resource decisions. It’s the right of the aboriginal owners to decide for themselves how the land will be used and to occupy, enjoy, possess and manage it.

“There are important limits. Aboriginal land is held communally, not individually. It cannot be sold except by way of surrender to the Crown, and it cannot be used in a way that would prevent future generations from using and enjoying it. But aboriginal owners are entitled to the economic benefits of their land, and they can use it, as the court said, ‘in modern ways, if that’s their choice.’”

These are the words of Geoff Plant in light of the Tsilhqot’in decision. He goes on to say: “Equally important, the Supreme Court of Canada has made it clear that aboriginal title lands are not enclaves.”

Interjection.

D. Donaldson: Perhaps the member opposite still believes they’re enclaves, but he’s been proven wrong by the Supreme Court of Canada. They’re not enclaves immune from provincial legislative authority. “Provincial laws can apply. Governments also have the power to infringe aboriginal title, but such infringements must satisfy rigorous tests of justification. Justification requires consultation with the aboriginal titleholder. Governments must act honourably. Infringement must be minimized, and justification requires ‘a compelling and substantial objective.’”

These are the words of Geoff Plant. They’re words where…. Perhaps this government hasn’t come to the realization that Mr. Plant has. Mr. Plant was representing on the government’s behalf during the initial stages of the Delgamuukw case.

He actually argued on behalf of the government the day that there was extinguishment of aboriginal rights — extinguishment the first time that the European settlers set foot on what is now called B.C. The government of the day’s policy was that aboriginal rights and title were extinguished.

[1500]

He’s come to the realization that that was wrong. I’ll quote some more from his comments, from that evening in Prince George.

His comments were in the ilk of: “This government has a few options. One of the options is to do nothing.” We’ve seen this government do that before — to just hold on to the status quo. That’s one option.

Another option is for this government to let the private sector deal with this issue entirely on their own. I think Mr. Plant is right to point out that this is not a good strategy, although it’s the strategy that this government is pursuing — right up until the past and right up till the Tsilhqot’in decision and, in effect, since then. He says that that is a dangerous practice. I’ll quote again:

“It’s wrong in principle, because fundamentally, the constitutional imperatives of recognition and affirmation are the responsibility of governments.” He goes on to say: “It’s also dangerous in practice because to default to the business community as the problem-solvers in the absence of government leadership is simply to license ad hockery. And while it may work for one company in one place dealing with one First Nation in respect of one project, the cumulative effect of hundreds of privately negotiated, self-ordered transactions is not certainty but uncertainty.”

You know, he couldn’t have been better describing the approach of this government over the last 14 years they’ve been in power than that — a one-off approach to dealing with First Nations, not a government-to-government approach, not a productive approach of respect, but a one-off that will lead to further uncertainty.

Finally, I would like to say that Mr. Plant has had an epiphany since he represented the kind of attitudes this government currently projects.

He says in his speech to the Premier’s Natural Resource Forum: “Random, ad hoc arrangements, one private deal at a time, are a recipe for uncertainty. Governments simply must take the lead here.”

Well, there are the marching orders, but what do we see in practice? We see in practice something absolutely opposite to what Mr. Plant is recommending. We see over 230 one-off agreements that this government has negotiated. I don’t blame the First Nations. They’re trying to negotiate the best deals they can. But it leads to further uncertainty. It leads to one-offs all over the province, and it doesn’t lead to a productive basis on a government-to-government basis.

Here would be the vision of a government that actually cares. It would be a vision where the provincial government shows its understanding of diversity by recognizing the legitimacy of First Nations traditional government systems in this province and, from that, act in true partnerships, not ones that hinge on hereditary chiefs having to agree with whatever the project of the day is according to the provincial party in government. That’s a true vision for the future.

Interjection.

D. Donaldson: I can tell why the member on the opposite side is upset with my comments. It’s because his Premier did not provide any vision in a throne speech. Of course you’d be upset if you’re a cabinet minister and your leader provides no vision in a throne speech. Therefore, he has to react to the vision I’m providing. I think he actually, with deeper thought, would react in a more favourable way than he is now.

I’ll also like to comment a little bit more on the ANABIP program, the program of child welfare and wellness that the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs have been working on and are working on. Of course, it’s an acknowledgment that the approach from this government through the Ministry of Children and Family Development isn’t working.

I mean, we have 8,000 kids in care in this province. Over 50 percent of them are of aboriginal ancestry, First Nations, whereas in the general population in the province the demographic of First Nations is anywhere from 5
[ Page 5798 ]
to 8 percent. So on one hand we have 5 to 8 percent representation of First Nations in this province; kids in care, over 50 percent. Over 50 percent of those 8,000 kids in care are First Nations.

[1505]

Something isn’t working. Doing more of the same is not working. That’s this government’s approach.

By the way, in the throne speech there was no vision on the fact of child welfare, on the mention of child welfare. No vision. I think that’s a terrible, terrible oversight.

Let’s look at the ANABIP program. The ANABIP program is the Wet’suwet’en approach to child welfare. They’re trying to use the traditional governance systems to put forward a better, more positive solution than what they’re getting from the government at this stage.

After the Tsilhqot’in decision on aboriginal title, the starting point should be, one would expect, to say that aboriginal title is a given. It’s not needed to be proven in every corner of this province. Let’s start from that. Let’s start from that starting point. Aboriginal title is a given. This government has not done that, and it’s leading to further uncertainty.

Rather than waste time in courts, the Tsilhqot’in decision has shown that aboriginal title exists. Delgamuukw said there was such a thing as aboriginal title. The Tsilhqot’in decision, the William case, says it exists, so let’s start from that. It actually exists in reality on the ground. Let’s start with that. That would be a government that actually cared, that actually had a vision — starting from that point.

What happened? The Tsilhqot’in decision was in June and early July of 2014. In the fall the Wet’suwet’en were hosted at a presentation by the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, from this government. They were given a presentation about what the provincial government has to offer in relation to natural gas pipelines. On the third slide the bullet point was “funding for child welfare, children’s wellness programming.”

Well, this is funding that is part of the Ministry of Children and Family Development’s natural budget — $100,000 a year, year after year. It should not hinge on approval of a government megaproject. It should not hinge on the approval of hereditary chiefs, who have aboriginal title on their territory, endorsing whatever plans the government has on a project-by-project basis. This was an insult to the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs. It was using their children as bargaining chips in a desperate effort for the government to put its own agenda down the throats of the Wet’suwet’en chiefs.

I would like to go back to the ANABIP program and something that was said, something that was part of the formative evaluation that was conducted. The formative evaluation would be a good idea for the government’s own programming in the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It was under one of the areas called social responsibility. This was one of the participants in the ANABIP program, a woman. I’m going to quote from what she felt about her testimony around social responsibility in the ANABIP program.

“I feel in me the real spiritual connection to our grandmothers and grandfathers. I’ve always known this but never acknowledged it: to know that wherever I go, whatever I do, my ancestors are standing right there beside me, guiding me and supporting me, giving me the foundation and a centre I know is solid. My experiences from my past sometimes leave me with feelings of loneliness or, periodically, as an island unto myself. Because of my upbringing and my education, I’m the person family and the public go to for direction and answers. Now I know I’m not alone. The challenge for me is how I can help to create capacity in my clan and family so we all feel connected and loved and not so disconnected.”

That’s the essence of a spiritually healthy human being. That’s the essence of why people have to be at the centre of this province and why the vision this government outlined was lacking — in fact, was absent.

[1510]

I’m going to begin wrapping up my comments with this. When it comes down to it, taking care of oneself, your children and grandchildren, your family and those you love, is what gives meaning for most of us living in this beautiful, resource-rich province.

A government that has a vision that is based on “We’re all in this together,” not everyone for themselves; that is based on reciprocity; that is based on behaving as legislators that we are part of the ecosystems in which we live, not apart from them; that is based on embracing diversity in action, not just in words; that is based on the fundamental belief that the breadth and depth of relationships we build in our lives is the basis for reaching our full potential individually and as a society — that will be a government that helps create the conditions for B.C. and all who live here to be all they can be.

I didn’t see, hear or read that type of vision in this government’s throne speech, and that is a disappointment for the people of Stikine and many in this great province. But we will persevere, because we are resilient, based on the breadth and depth of the relationships we have with each other as families, as neighbours, as community members, and our connection to the land that sustains us as a place-based people.

L. Reimer: It is an honour to rise in the House and represent my beautiful riding of Anmore, Belcarra, Port Moody and Coquitlam.

Before I begin, I would like to thank my incredible family for all their support and sacrifice — my husband, Les; my sons, Gord and Bill; my mother, Norma — and the outstanding staff at my constituency office: Mary Sanzovo, my full-time CA who works very long hours for me; Vicki Collins and Barbara Spitz; as well as my legislative staff Suneil Karod, who supports me immensely over here in Victoria; and Fatima Seddiqui, my wonderful communications officer who supports me both in Victoria and in my constituency office.

The throne speech delivered on Tuesday reaffirms our
[ Page 5799 ]
clear direction in building a stronger economy, a stronger society and a stronger British Columbia. In order to do that, we must remain steadfast and we must stick to our plan. Our B.C. jobs plan has created more than 70,000 jobs since its inception. We live in very fragile economic times, and I believe that any diversion from our plan could result in hardship for our citizens.

Having said that, let me echo the remarks delivered by my colleagues that our province is in an enviable position in the world. When the budget was introduced last year at this time, we were one of two jurisdictions in Canada to balance our books.

Now, as we move towards an unprecedented third balanced budget, our government has reaffirmed its steadfast commitment to control spending, to diversify and create jobs, to grow the economy and to increase our relationship with emerging economic interests. Through our dedication to balancing the budget, we have the foundation we need to grow our diverse economy with our B.C. jobs plan.

I have many young families in my riding. They appreciate our working towards a secure tomorrow by building a stronger economy. Many of them are employed in Vancouver and have jobs created as a result of our resource sector. Our cell phones, our clothing and our at-home gadgets are also a result of resource development. So many of our residents benefit from things that are happening in other parts of our province as well as things in their own community.

My riding of Anmore, Belcarra, Port Moody and Coquitlam is blessed with an abundance of green trees, mountains and water and a history that is never forgotten, through our very active arts and heritage community.

This past Friday, February 13, marked the birthday of Col. Richard Moody. The year before last we were able to present a plaque to commemorate both his birthday and the beginnings of Port Moody. Dr. David Spence and his wife, Donna, spent the year of 2013 at many different events playing the parts of Colonel Moody and his wife, Mary. Their dedication and commitment to this is a tribute to the many real people in our community that add heart and soul to our beautiful landscape.

[1515]

In my constituency and across British Columbia these real people can also be small business owners. That is why this government has put such a special focus on small business across the different sectors.

Small business employs more than one million people across our province. B.C. has led the country in supporting small businesses by cutting red tape, and in 2015 your government will continue to lead by further reducing the cost and burden of needless regulations, making it easier to do business with the provincial government.

I had the pleasure in late 2014 to visit some small businesses in my riding to thank them for their contributions to our provincial economy. We’re the first government in Canada to enshrine in law the requirement to publish annual reports about regulatory reform. We’ve reduced regulatory requirements by over 42 percent since 2001. That’s more than 154,000 regulatory requirements off the books, and we’ve committed to holding the line right through to 2015.

Our hard work is being acknowledged. This year the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, the CFIB, awarded B.C. an A for reducing red tape for the third year in a row. As the only province in the country to receive an A grade, we appreciate being a national leader in regulatory reform.

We were also nominated for a national Golden Scissors Award by CFIB for our work on the mobile business licence program, which allows business to operate across multiple municipalities with a single licence rather than needing one in each community.

As a former city councillor in Coquitlam, I was pleased to advocate for and support this program in the Tri-Cities, including Port Moody, Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam. Our end goal is to ensure that every single regulatory requirement in British Columbia is necessary, meaningful and serves a purpose.

Apart from small business owners, this government is working hard continually to seek new ways to grow our economy and support job creation. By 2022 we are expecting a million job openings in B.C. Those jobs will be two-thirds through replacement as workers retire and then new jobs generated by new industries such as LNG and others. More than 78 percent of them will require some form of post-secondary education, and 43 percent of these jobs will be in trades and technical occupations.

Filling those job openings, providing the right workers with the right skills in the right place, is an enormous challenge. This challenge demands fundamental changes to how we do things now. To meet our province’s future demand for skilled workers, we need to maximize the potential of the young people about to enter the workforce, current workers who need to upgrade skills and people in underserved communities who face unique challenges to employment.

Our plan, B.C.’s Skills for Jobs Blueprint: Re-engineering, Education and Training, charts a seamless path for young people, from elementary to high school, through post-secondary education and right into the workforce.

Our blueprint calls for a more targeted focus on training for high-demand jobs. It encourages innovation in how we provide education and training to better meet the needs of British Columbians, and it gives employers and industry a stronger role in shaping and evaluating our skills and training funding and program delivery.

Our blueprint lays out a major shift to a data-driven system where training dollars and programs are targeted to jobs in demand. This system will also be outcome-focused. We will measure our success and adjust funding
[ Page 5800 ]
of programs as the economy evolves.

The blueprint includes refocusing the Industry Training Authority so that B.C.’s trades-training system is ready to meet the growing demand for workers. Already we’re bringing training closer to people through innovative learning solutions and making worksites the classrooms of the future, with mobile interactive training facilities that we are using to train students in remote locations where there are jobs available and specific skills in demand.

We’re also taking innovative measures to reach out to aboriginal youth and work with them to make sure that they have the education, training and support they need to find a place in our economic future. We will set achievable targets for increasing aboriginal workforce participation. The minimum goal will be to increase aboriginal workforce participation to 15,000 new aboriginal workers over the next ten years.

All British Columbians deserve the opportunity to access education and skills training. Our blueprint is all about B.C. training for B.C. jobs for all British Columbians. It’s about helping British Columbians to find their fit in this growing economy.

Our government has also worked very hard to seek out other financial opportunities for our province, as British Columbia is dependent on trade and investment for economic growth and job generation. It wasn’t long ago that we relied solely on the U.S. as a trading partner.

[1520]

Our government had the foresight to look beyond what was just next door and put into place a strategy to expand trade outside of traditional markets, attract international investment to B.C. and develop a demand for the B.C. brand overseas.

One of the industries we worked hard to expand into new territories was forestry. More than 58,000 families rely on that industry for their livelihood. When lumber exports to the U.S. slowed, we looked to the Asia-Pacific to pick up the slack. All that hard work paid off, and in 2010 annual sales of B.C. lumber to China exceeded sales to Japan, traditionally our No. 2 customer after the U.S.

Shortly thereafter, wood sales to China surpassed sales to the U.S. for the first time in our province’s history. Our total exports to China have grown by more than 600 percent in the last decade, and we are now the least dependent on trade with the U.S. than any other province in the country. That accomplishment is a direct result of this government working diligently to create growth, expand our markets and build mutually rewarding relationships with new customers.

Another area that our government is working hard to forge a strong relationship in is South Korea. Today South Korea is Canada’s seventh-largest trading partner and British Columbia’s fourth-largest, with more than 50 percent of Canada’s exports to Korea originating here in British Columbia. A government of Canada study shows that the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement, which went into force on the first of this year, could increase B.C. and Canadian exports to South Korea by 56 percent, which would translate into $1 billion a year for B.C.

South Korea is one of the priority markets identified in the B.C.jobs plan. In 2013 South Korea was British Columbia’s fourth-largest export destination, with $1.8 billion in goods being exported, behind the U.S., China and Japan. In 2013 over 50 percent of Canada’s exports to South Korea originated here in British Columbia. South Korea is Canada’s seventh-largest trading partner. As Canada’s Pacific Gateway, we are uniquely positioned to take advantage of this vast opportunity in the high-growth, emerging markets of the Asia-Pacific. South Korea is one of these emerging markets.

According to the government of Canada assessments, elimination of tariffs through the free trade agreement could boost our B.C. exports to South Korea by 32 percent. The CKFTA is good for business in every industry and region in the province. This includes the natural gas industries in the north, the forest industries in the Interior, seafood industries on the coast and agrifoods in the Fraser Valley and the Interior. The Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement has eliminated tariffs on almost all of B.C.’s key exports and provides access to new opportunities in the South Korean market.

The greatest advantage of having a financially responsible government and one that seeks out other opportunities for economic growth is having the fiscal freedom to make strategic investments in social services that help B.C. families.

The Ministry of Children and Family Development will invest $292 million on child care in 2014-15 — a 38 percent increase since 2000-2001. MCFD is moving forward with the B.C. early-years strategy to improve access, affordability and the quality of early-years programs in B.C. This is in addition to the $1 billion a year we currently invest in a range of early childhood services.

As part of the strategy, MCFD is investing $32 million over two years, 2014 to 2016, through the major child care capital program, to create 2,000 new licensed child care spaces throughout the province, with the goal of opening 13,000 new spaces over the eight years of the strategy.

Child care providers throughout B.C. can now apply for the second phase of major capital funding that will create 1,000 new child care spaces in 2015-2016. Providers may submit applications from January 23 to March 20, 2015, this year. This is on top of the roughly 107 licensed child care spaces currently funded by MCFD in communities throughout the province. MCFD also provides child care subsidies to help low-income families afford child care, and we’re helping approximately 45,000 children each year.

Our province is also continuing to develop strong global relationships with strategic international partners.
[ Page 5801 ]
Activities such as programs to support the learning of new languages, cultural exchanges and scholarship opportunities increase internationalization within B.C. and international travel opportunities for B.C. students.

[1525]

B.C. has a growing international education program, both onshore and offshore. We have seen this firsthand in the Tri-Cities. Our school district has experienced a huge influx of international students at the beginning of this school year, where 30 percent more international students enrolled than were expected this year. School district 43’s international education program is one that is highly regarded and has been a love of its former district principal and now current superintendent, Patricia Gartland.

In 2013-14 there were 14,135 international students enrolled in school districts and independent schools. In 2014-15 there are 16,957 international students enrolled in B.C. K-to-12 public and independent schools. This represents a 20 percent growth.

In 2014-15 there are 43 offshore schools and more than 11,000 offshore school students enrolled in B.C. education programs in countries such as China, Korea, Colombia, Qatar, Thailand and Egypt. This year three new B.C. offshore schools will open in Japan, India and Paris, France. A new offshore school application process will be implemented this year to support strong, viable new schools in established and emerging markets.

B.C.’s international education sector provides valuable social and cultural opportunities for educational institutions, students and communities throughout the province. It also generates significant economic growth and local job opportunities, while fostering research and innovation.

This government is also celebrating exceptional British Columbians who contribute to our social fabric, and we want to recognize that contribution publicly. Awards and decorations are an important way to reward excellence, achievement and service. Beginning in 2016, British Columbians can be awarded the Medal of Good Citizenship, recognizing those who are working on changing their community and who have acted in a particularly generous, kind or self-sacrificing manner for the common good.

The British Columbia Medal of Good Citizenship will be an additional form of recognition bestowed by the province, along with the Order of British Columbia. Recipients of the B.C. Medal of Good Citizenship will have made exceptional contributions to the well-being of their communities through long-term efforts without expectation of reward. I know many people in my community that are deserving of such a reward.

These are just a few examples of how this government continues to celebrate and invest in British Columbians and just a few examples of why I’m honoured to stand in support of the Speech from the Throne.

H. Bains: It is always a privilege and a great honour just to be here to represent your constituents and the families and all those workers. Very few, as you know, over the history of this place have that privilege. I feel so humble that my constituents put faith in me to be here a third time. I want to thank them so much from the bottom of my heart for putting their faith in me. I try to represent them to the best of my ability.

They themselves are very, very engaged in their own community. I’m talking about people in Surrey-Newton. I want to thank them for what they do to improve the community.

But I want to begin by saying thank you to my staff, Emily Zimmerman and Simrit Chhabra. Both of them have been with me from day one. With so much care and a respectful manner, they take care of those who come through those doors with issues that they’re facing and the concerns that they have with government regulations, the policies, or their frustration with those who are applying those regulations. I want to thank them so much. They are the heart and soul of Surrey-Newton, I would say, because they do care so much about all those people that are represented by the Surrey-Newton constituency.

[1530]

We also have Janis McDonald, who comes in without a break every day for full days as a volunteer for a number of years now. She answers the phones, and she tries to navigate through some difficult government files and tries to help many people who come through our doors. I just want to thank them.

Amber Armstrong is another one who comes in on a part-time basis. I’m so blessed to have such a talented and caring and hard-working staff. I just say thank you so much.

Outside of my office, there’s so much that goes on. This past Saturday I attended a Mardi Gras celebration by the Goan community. What a vibrant community. I mean, you would think that when you talk about the South Asian community or the Indian community in B.C., largely speaking, you talk about Sikhs. You talk about Pakistanis. You talk about a number of those who are clearly in big numbers. But there are many other communities within that community, and the community from Goa is another one.

It was such a tremendous opportunity to be with them and celebrate in their celebration. I want to say thank you to Edwina Nazareth, Shauna Lobo, Heather Martin and Avril Martin for putting such a remarkable show of talent and bringing their community festivities, all the traditions, the dances, the songs that they have there, the singing. I say thank you very much. I really, really loved it. My colleague from Surrey-Whalley was also with me, and he tells me that he enjoyed it just as much.

There’s another fundraiser coming up. There is so much that goes on. Basant Motors, one of the key businesses in our community…. They do so much, raising
[ Page 5802 ]
money for those who are in need. At the debate for the throne speech I just want to say there is so much that goes on in the community.

They are raising money for diabetes — Dine Against Diabetes. Baldev Bath, who I know from my previous life when he was working in a sawmill — very active in the union — and I was with the union office, does so much for the community. I want to say thank you to him as well.

Soraya VanBuskirk also. There was an annual walk for the homeless — again, very successful — trying to bring awareness about the issues of homelessness.

Then we had Tim Baillie, a retired firefighter. He started what we call Toque Tuesday. It is, again, to bring awareness about homelessness. This is where different groups play floor hockey against each other. I must say, it was all the MLAs from Surrey. The member from Panorama was there. The Minister of Technology — he was there. A member from White Rock was there. Members from Whalley and Green Timbers. They all played against the city councillors, and I think we came out a 2-2 tie. It was a great game, but a lot of fun.

I just can’t say enough about Surrey-Newton. There’s so much that goes on there. We have heard all kinds of negatives in Surrey. You’ve, I’m sure, heard about the crime in Surrey, especially in the Newton area. The business improvement association, led by Philip Aguirre and Nasrin Baji. It’s just a very new organization, put together only months ago, and they are already making a difference by bringing awareness. I had an opportunity to walk with them in Newton. They do it on a monthly basis — pick up garbage and bring awareness.

[1535]

Also, they were celebrating on Groundhog Day by the Newton Arena. It’s a great community to be in and always an honour to be their voice here.

I also want to thank, from Frank Hurt Secondary, the principal, Ms. Gloria Sarmento. There were a number of students who invited me to their school, gave me a tour of the school and then showed me exactly what goes on in the school — these students who are involved in different activities.

I just want to say that when you have students like those involved in their own school and engaged in their own communities, I can proudly say, and with a certain amount of certainty, that our future looks very bright and I think this country, this province, will be in very good hands. I want to say thank you to Frank Hurt Secondary, Ms. Sarmento and all those students.

Nothing would have been achieved in the Newton area to improve the image and also to fight crime without some very, very dedicated and committed individuals that have come forward. Rather than complaining from the sidelines, they have stepped forward and said: “We will turn this thing around, and we will fight crime whether anybody else comes and helps us or not.”

I want to say thank you to Jude Hannah, Doug Elford, Naida Robinson, Liz Walker, Laila Yuile…. These are the people that, day in and day out, are out there looking out for everyone else in the community. I want to say thank you to them so much.

We see, as a result of those dedicated individuals, some results already. We have a long ways to go. We still have a lot of crime in Surrey and in the Newton area. That’s why my colleagues, three of us — myself and the MLAs from Whalley and from Green Timbers — put together what we call the Surrey accord to combat crime in Surrey.

I think people from all sides actually looked at that and said: “Hey, that makes sense. We need to take that route. That’s the one way of fighting crime in the city and making our neighbourhoods safer.” We propose that we need a specialized court to deal with the chronic offenders. We say that we also need resources to have more police officers on the street with a different modelling of policing — bike patrol, foot patrol.

We also said that we need to have a comprehensive plan to combat mental illness in our community. Vancouver made a very good case, and this government went to them and provided them with resources to put together a mental health plan. That’s what we are proposing in Surrey — that we need it, along with the other issues that we talked about in the Surrey accord.

We also talk about regulating our recovery homes. Right now there are only 45 to 50 homes that are registered. The rest of them? They’re out there. There’s no oversight. There’s no enforcement. Those people who go there don’t get the support and the help that they need in order to deal with the issues that they have, but it seems like some people have found a way to make money off of these very, very vulnerable people. We say that those recovery homes should be regulated, and we also say that there has to be a strategy for affordable housing.

Those are some of the things that we are proposing. These are individuals that are coming forward and saying: “Yes, we will work with you. We want to turn this around and make Surrey a safe community to live. You must feel safe not only in your own homes but in your neighbourhood and also your neighbourhood parks and the public facilities that you go and use with your children.”

I also want to say I had the opportunity this past Saturday to attend a forum by the B.C. Muslim Association. I just can’t say thank you enough to Imam Mufti Aasim Rashid and the president of BCMA, Musa Ismail, who put this together.

[1540]

This is the second or third that they have done. There was a good turnout. We had RCMP there. We had the federal MP from the area. And the community activists were there trying to fight the image of that community and trying to educate people — what they call the CAVE program, which is campaign against violent extremism. They are saying that they care about Canada just as much as anybody else. They want to make sure that the mem-
[ Page 5803 ]
bers in their community and other communities feel that all of us must make Canada a safer place.

We always look out to make sure that where that radicalism or extremism may exist in parts of the community, they need to educate them through their religious beliefs, which are the true reflection of Islam. I want to say thank you to them. They have done such a great job in bringing that awareness.

Also, the same day my good friend Avtar Bains was raising funds for Variety, for children. For both Saturday and Sunday $5 of every meal at Ricky’s in Central City will go towards Variety and raise money for the children. I want to say thank you to him as well.

I think there’s so much that goes on. That’s the community, and that’s what the people are doing themselves. There are a number of different other issues that I could mention that go on here, and activities by the community.

I need to get back to here, the expectations people in Surrey and Surrey-Newton have of this government and whether this government is coming close to those expectations through the throne speech. I must say that they are disappointed, as I am.

Through throne speeches, governments set their agenda for the coming year. You would think they would have a clear vision and clear direction that this government wants to take on a variety of issues that affect ordinary working people, the middle class in this province, and you see nothing.

Mr. Speaker, what do you see? You see once again this government coming to the aid of their friends, who are doing well, thank you very much. They’re not even asking for any help. Just before the throne speech, the government announced a $230 million tax break to the top 2 percent of British Columbians who are earning over $150,000-plus. That’s what the government has chosen to do.

But when you look, what is there for the working people? What is there for the middle class? Nothing.

Interjection.

H. Bains: The lowest tax rate, the minister says, in Canada. For who? Yes, for your friends, Mr. Minister, the lowest taxes, and you continue to work to give them more — the top 2 percent, $230 million.

At the same time when they’re giving away the $230 million tax break to those who don’t need it — the top 2 percent — the government is forcing on people south of the Fraser and Lower Mainland a referendum that will raise $250 million.

So there you go. They had money, but they chose to give it to their friends again, those who don’t need it. But if you need to improve your public transportation, you pay out of your own pocket with more taxes. This is on top of B.C. Hydro rates — 29 percent increase. MSP premiums — 80 percent over the time that this government has taken over. Then you take a look at the ferry fares, always going up. If you choose to take your kids to a provincial park, you have to pay more. If you want to renew your driver’s licence, you pay more.

[1545]

Eye tests for glasses — you pay more. You name anything for working people and the middle class…. They are always asked to pay more by this government. In the meantime, they have chosen to give $230 million to their friends who don’t need it. They are at the top of wage earners.

I think that’s the problem. The families are paying more. They are working longer, but they are getting less. People can’t even find a family doctor. They are struggling to get adequate senior care. The schools and hospitals they depend on are underfunded. In the meantime, the wages are stagnant.

They’re working harder, they’re working longer, and they’re getting less from this government. That seems to be the pattern. That’s the story.

It’s sadly revealing that while middle-class families are facing these tremendous challenges, the Premier’s priority is to choose B.C.’s top 2 percent of income earners for a tax break. That’s the story here in this year and in the throne speech.

It’s so sad a state of affairs. We are a province of huge potential, with hard-working people, a bounty of natural resources and a location that is strategically important in the global economy, so why are so many British Columbians living paycheque to paycheque? Because our potential is being squandered by this Premier and this government, who put their friends first. That’s the story here, and it’s a sad story for so many British Columbians.

You can’t take this Premier at her word. The speech carried on with the same empty promises about the LNG industry that she said is a central preoccupation of her government. But so far all we have seen is promises of jobs for temporary foreign workers and environmental standards that don’t cover 70 percent of the emissions.

The Premier placed all her bets on LNG at the expense of industries such as forestry and mining. We need a government — this is what the people are saying — whose focus is on helping build an economy that creates good jobs for British Columbians first, high-paying jobs in sustainable industries. This speech offered no prospect of good, long-term jobs, no solutions for the problems people face every day and no security for families. That’s the problem here.

I just want to move on to some of the other areas. There’s so much to talk about here. The Premier continued to talk about — and you see speaker after speaker continue to stand up and talk about — the balanced budget, but they don’t talk about the debt that they’re incurring at the same time. The fastest growth in debt in the history of this province happened in the last two years.

When this Premier took office, the provincial debt was
[ Page 5804 ]
$45 billion. It is sitting around $62 billion now, and soon, by the time this fiscal cycle is over, it will be $69 billion.

Can you imagine $24 billion in two years in an increase in debt? How do you justify…? On one hand, they’re patting themselves for balancing the budget, while at the same time they have the debt that our children and their children will be paying for years to come. That’s the story of this government. No one will stand up here and deny that — no one on that side — because those are the facts.

When you talk about different industries that this government has been neglecting…. Let’s talk about forestry.

Interjection.

H. Bains: The member talked about a hospital in Surrey. Let’s talk about a hospital in Surrey. I invite every one of them — I don’t know if they ever come to Surrey — to go there to that hospital today. Yes, we have buildings after so much pressure by the local community and fundraised by the local community in millions, multimillions.

[1550]

Yes, we have buildings there. Come and talk to RedFM. How much money have they raised to help build that building? The community is doing their part. Yes, finally, under pressure, we have those buildings. But God forbid, if any one of your loved ones ever have to go to Surrey Memorial emergency, you will be lucky if you are seen by a doctor, by a professional, in about three, four, five, six, eight hours. Eight hours, nine hours — that’s the norm.

Many times there is only one doctor. There is only one doctor.

Interjections.

H. Bains: They live in those glass houses. The minister and the rest of them live in glass houses. They know nothing about what goes on in reality.

Come with me and visit Surrey Memorial Hospital. Come and visit with me any given day. Let’s go to the emergency ward. Let’s see what goes on in that hospital, Mr. Speaker.

That’s the hospital part. We have so much to talk about. I know they want me to continue to talk. Let’s talk about the schools in Surrey and the 7,000 students that are in portables today.

Interjection.

H. Bains: The Minister of Environment said: “What were you doing?” The government of 1990 built one school every 19 days. That is on record. And the portables they inherited from the previous government came down to 160. Today there are 270, and soon there will be 350. That’s according to Surrey school board numbers — not my numbers, Surrey school board numbers. They will tell you they will be going up because there is no funding coming.

When they put together capital funding for schools, the minister might want to know…. When the Surrey school board put together a capital funding request, they said, “We need $273 million just to keep up what we have there today,” just to get rid of all those portables today. At the same time, they are saying, 1,000 new students are added to the enrolment every year.

So what do they do? This government, since 2006…. It took them until 2012, when this government came in and announced some capital funding. Six years they ignored all those people, and the portables continue to come up. The last capital approval was 2006, and then 2012.

What happened in 2012 with a request of $273 million? They got about one-third of it. Expansion of some schools, building a couple, three new schools, but still for the coming year, year after year, there is nothing. No more money is coming there.

I have seen nothing from the Minister of Education. You would think, with three ministers from Surrey, that they would have some pull, that they would have some convincing powers at the cabinet table. Obviously, they have nothing, zero power.

I urge these ministers who are from Surrey and the other MLAs who are from Surrey to come on. Come on. Start speaking at that cabinet table on behalf of Surrey school board, on behalf of Surrey parents, on behalf of those children. Start speaking on behalf of those patients that end up going to the Surrey Memorial Hospital.

Interjection.

H. Bains: I understand the member from Panorama. He says he’s just a lowly MLA. He doesn’t have a pull. He is not on the cabinet. I get that. I agree with him that there are those three ministers. Their job is to convince their cabinet colleagues, but they have failed — miserably so far, I might add. They have failed.

I am so disappointed in this throne speech again. There is hardly anything in it for Surrey schools or Surrey Memorial Hospital. Nothing for forestry, no vision for the forests.

[1555]

Then we have a recent issue with Port Metro Vancouver. When there was a photo op opportunity, they were tripping over each other to get in front of the camera — tripping over each other and trying to beat the Premier, actually, to see if they could get ahead of the Premier. No way. She will never let them do that. She’s a pro in that, and they should know better by now.

Guess what happened. Six hundred of them out there rallying every day, demonstrating, trying to get the ear of the same people who were in front of the camera trying to tell them how great they are and how sympathetic they are to those truckers, and now they’re nowhere to
[ Page 5805 ]
be seen. Nowhere to be seen right now.

They are asking them to come and meet with them and deal with their issues. Nothing. They said they had a very good solution for how to reduce trucks. They’re not saying that they don’t agree with it. They said you can reduce those trucks by sitting down with them. They have answers. They talked about it. There were, as they call it, JTPs, joint temporary permits — 130 of them. Also, there were those trucks that were hired during the strike — 150 of them.

There is a solution to it. If this government ever learned to listen to people who will be affected by the decisions that they make, the only way that is going to happen is to have everyone at the table.

They think they know the best. These are small businesses. This government professes that they are so much in favour of business. There are companies after companies. They have good records, and they have been there, providing good service at Port Metro. All those companies now…. With businesses, they are told, “Go home; there’s no more job for you,” because they were denied the right to be at that table, to suggest what is practical and what could work, with commonsense solutions.

Mr. Speaker, you talked about mining. You talked about the forest industry. This government had no vision. Either they send our natural resources outside, or they bring the temporary foreign workers to do jobs here, leaving our B.C. workers behind in the lineup. Who are you governing for, the foreign nationals or the temporary foreign workers?

Those temporary foreign workers, by the way…. When they are here, they are exploited. They are abused. This government has nothing in place, as far as policy is concerned, to protect them. You know what? They’re repeating the mistakes that were made 150 years ago, 100 years ago, when these people came in at that time and were exploited.

I say that this government has lost their way. They are so far away from the reality. They need to do some reality check and get to serve the people that elect them.

D. Plecas: On behalf of my constituents of Abbotsford South, it is a pleasure to respond to the throne speech for this fourth session of the 40th parliament. I’d like to begin by wishing all of the members of the House a very successful and rewarding sitting during this spring session. In that, of course, I include all of those who appear to be working from another planet sometimes.

We’ve accomplished a lot during the last session, and I look forward to a productive session this spring.

As some members may recall, prior to this session and during my former role as Parliamentary Secretary for Crime Reduction to the Minister of Justice, I had the privilege of chairing the Blue Ribbon Panel for Crime Reduction in British Columbia. The purpose of the panel was to examine how we in British Columbia can go further to reduce crime in the province.

I say “further” because, as members may already be aware, in the decade leading up to the creation of the panel, British Columbia already had an impressive record of reducing crime. In fact, if you look at this window of time, that decade, and consider any jurisdiction in the western world — including Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., any state in the United States or any province in Canada — nowhere have they reduced crime as much as we have here in British Columbia.

[1600]

Having said that, I’m also proud to say that this track record wasn’t good enough for our Premier or Minister of Justice. Concerned that B.C. cannot yet claim to have the lowest crime rates in Canada, they assigned the panel the responsibility of examining what we can do to reduce crime yet further and move us to becoming the safest province in Canada.

With a panel comprised of five very prominent criminal justice leaders, volunteering countless hours of their time over a year-plus period, we met that responsibility in a number of ways. Most significant among them was our criss-crossing the province and meeting with more than 600 stakeholders in 14 different communities to learn of the challenges they face as criminal justice stakeholders and to obtain their perspectives on what we need to do to reduce crime further.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

The primary result of the panel’s work is the report Getting Serious About Crime Reduction, which makes six broad recommendations, focused on, one, managing prolific and priority offenders — because we all know that that’s the group of people that gobble up the most resources in the system and cause the most victimization — and secondly, making quality mental health and addiction services more accessible. We all know that timeliness is important in working with people with mental illnesses, particularly as they come in conflict with the law, and we all know what the association is with addictions and crime — a significant association.

Thirdly, we recommended a greater use of restorative justice, knowing that restorative justice is a very, very powerful way to bring about change in offenders and bring greater satisfaction to victims of crime.

We also recommended supporting an increase in emphasizing designing out crime, knowing how important it is to prevent crime from being able to happen in the first instance. We need to do more of this.

Fifthly, we recommended a strengthening of interagency collaboration. That is respecting, of course, the reality that crime is a function of a multiplicity of different things going on in people’s lives, requiring an approach by a multiplicity of different agencies.

Finally, we recommended a re-examining of fund-
[ Page 5806 ]
ing approaches to provide better outcomes for crime — doing more for less, more effective things for less.

In response, the government will consider a regional, integrated community safety partnership pilot project. This will bring together local relevant government and non-government agencies to identify and prioritize community safety goals and focus resource allocations and programs accordingly.

I’m extremely grateful to all of those who participated in this valuable exercise, and I’m extremely proud of the fact that the government, once again, delivered on a key promise to the people of British Columbia.

Moving forward to January 29 of this year, I have been assigned an entirely new role as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, responsible for seniors. I’m honoured to have been asked to fulfil this important job, because it also delivers on a promise to place a particular emphasis on seniors in this province.

Here in British Columbia we are truly privileged. Our climate is the envy of all who live outside the province. As you are well aware, our geography is, quite frankly, simply stunning. We have a quality of life that is unmatched in the world, and yet, more importantly, our approach to aging is more progressive than any other province in Canada.

People in British Columbia live longer and better than in any other province. Part of that can be attributed to the healthy lifestyle that the west coast seems to encourage, but a significant portion is due to the services we provide.

One of the things people were asking for before the last election was a dedicated seniors advocate. I’m proud to report that our government has delivered on that promise by appointing Isobel Mackenzie on March 19, 2014. For those of you who are not familiar with Ms. Mackenzie’s background, she led B.C.’s largest not-for-profit seniors agency, serving over 6,000 seniors annually. She led the implementation of a new model of dementia care that has become a national best practice, and then led the first safety accreditation for home care workers.

[1605]

The advocate is responsible for monitoring seniors services in areas of health, personal services, housing, transportation and income supports. Although this is a relatively new office, we are still trail-blazing new territory. I would be interested in hearing from British Columbians on how services to seniors can be improved. In my opinion, this appointment is a positive step towards taking a more modern and sophisticated approach to aging.

Speaking about services for seniors on a more general level, our government has created a continuum of care for seniors that includes home health, assisted-living and residential care services. We have heard from seniors about having direct access to care and supports within their community. Most everyone would like to age in a place within their own community rather than having to move away from their friends and family to receive services.

This is a large part of our strategic priorities designed to improve the quality of life for all B.C. seniors. Through the seniors action plan we are delivering on our commitments, such as establishing, as I already mentioned, a seniors advocate, expanding non-medical home support to help stay at home longer, and strengthening protection for seniors from abuse and neglect.

Here are some salient facts about seniors in British Columbia. Currently 1/6 of B.C.’s population is over 65. The number of seniors is expected to almost double over the next 20 years, from three-quarters of a million to a million and a half. Currently we supply over 31,000 publicly subsidized residential care, assisted-living and group home beds in British Columbia. This represents a 25 percent increase from 2001.

In the 2013-14 fiscal year regional health authorities reported spending $2.8 billion on home and community care. That is more than double what we had spent in 2001. Between 2001 and 2013 the number of clients receiving home health services increased 23 percent. In just the last three years this number has increased from over 86,000 to 96,000, or 11 percent more. Currently our government has provided $22 million in funding to enhance and support the Better at Home program, which now operates in over 60 communities throughout the province. Better at Home provides improved access to non-medical supports to help seniors remain living in their homes for as long as possible.

In December 2014, in partnership with UBCM, 28 communities received age-friendly grants of up to $20,000 to help create programs or tools that address the needs of their older residents. Today over 135 local communities in all areas of B.C. have received at least one grant, and over 225 projects have been funded. To protect vulnerable British Columbians, we’ve created the B.C. care aide and community health worker registry to help establish and improve standards of care in care aide and community health worker occupations.

We also introduced incapacity planning legislation, providing more legal options for capable adults to express their wishes and decisions for their future health care and manage their routine finances in care without needing a lawyer. We have also created seniors community parks in 18 communities throughout B.C. to support and encourage social connection and physical activity. As you can imagine, the government is proud of these accomplishments.

Before I conclude, I would be remiss if I neglected to mention the health report card which ranked British Columbia as the No. 1 province in Canada in terms of health performance. [Applause.] In fact — reason to continue that applause — British Columbia not only was the top-performing province, we ranked third in the entire world just behind Switzerland and Sweden. Yes,
[ Page 5807 ]
that’s third ahead of other jurisdictions known for great health care — countries such as Norway, Finland, France, Australia and Germany — and it speaks volumes of our performance in providing high-quality health care to all British Columbians.

[1610]

That being said, we can always do better. We want to do better, and this government strives every day to do better. I look forward to the coming months, to working hard to support seniors in this province to ensure that we continue the best quality of life possible in one of the best places to live in the entire world.

A. Weaver: Last week as I sat through the throne speech, it became apparent to me that this government is now without a vision, at a loss for new ideas and completely struggling for a new direction. Their promise of wealth and prosperity for one and all through an LNG message of hope wrapped in hyperbole has not materialized.

Last year at this time during the Speech from the Throne to open the second session of this parliament, the government mentioned LNG ten times. LNG was mentioned only eight times in last fall’s throne speech. Now at the opening of the fourth session we only find passing reference to LNG, five times.

But here’s what is different. In those two previous speeches the word “diverse” was not used a single time. Now as the government attempts to downplay their irresponsible LNG promises, they’ve introduced reference to a diverse economy, sectors or resources eight times.

Hon. Speaker, you will recall that for two years now, I’ve been saying the same thing. The economics did not and still does not support the government’s reckless LNG promises in a market oversupplied with natural gas and in a jurisdiction that is years behind others in terms of developing an LNG industry.

I’ve stood alone in this House repeatedly attempting to steer the government on a more sustainable path. Last fall I went so far as to propose an amendment to the throne speech by including the words: “and that the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia accepts the responsibility of demonstrating the leadership to choose growth, to move forward and create a legacy for our children but also recognizes that this leadership means not gambling our future prosperity on a hypothetical windfall from LNG, and instead supports the development of a diversified, sustainable 21st century economy.”

In light of the new direction this government is struggling to find, I find it profoundly ironic that they voted against my amendment. What’s even more remarkable is that so did the official opposition.

Today in this chamber I will offer British Columbians an alternate vision for the future of British Columbia, a B.C. Green Party vision that is grounded in evidence and at all times puts the interests of British Columbians first.

It has been nearly two years since I decided to run for office. When I made that decision, I did so because I saw an opportunity. I’d spent years studying the possibilities that are available to those societies who are first to act boldly in transitioning to a low-carbon economy. In my classes I’d cite statistics like how in the United States in 2011 green jobs grew at four times the rate of all other sectors combined or how, between 2007 and 2010, the global market for environmental technology and resource efficiency expanded at an average rate of 11.8 percent per annum. That is faster than the GDP growth rate of the country of China.

I advised governments at all levels on the policies they could take at the time to seize these opportunities, and I saw British Columbia begin to show leadership in doing just that. But as the government then shifted all of its efforts and all of its hopes to the LNG pipedream, I saw us lose that leadership. I watched as we went from leaders in developing a 21st-century economy to laggards scurrying back to the 20th century, hoping for an outdated and unrealistic LNG windfall.

As I watched that leadership unravel, I was reminded of something I would tell my students. “If you want your government to show leadership on the issues you care about,” I would tell them, “you need to elect people who will act on your concerns.” Or: “If you feel like none of the candidates is seriously addressing the issues you are worried about, you should run for office yourself.” Ultimately, I decided that it was time for me to take my own advice.

I ran for office because I saw an opportunity to use my role as an MLA to help build a vision that would put our province on a path to develop a 21st-century economy. Now after nearly two years I feel this is more important than ever.

[1615]

In the shadows of the massive challenges that we face, our province needs new leadership — leadership that offers a vision for how to make people’s lives better; leadership that pushes boldly forward when no one else will, because they see the opportunities, economically, socially and environmentally, to be the first to end, for example, homelessness, the first to act on climate change and the first to transition to a 21st-century economy; leadership that’s willing to be a lightning rod in this Legislature when that’s what’s necessary and to advance reasonable, commonsense ideas that can help address British Columbians’ pressing concerns. Leadership doesn’t wait for public opinion. It builds it and defines it.

If there is one clear message from the throne speech, it’s that this Legislature has lost its leadership, and British Columbians are paying the price. We have a government that is out of ideas and an official opposition that is bent on criticism when, more than ever, what we need is vision and an honest conversation about the challenges we face and the solutions available to address them.

We have built a political culture that puts personal
[ Page 5808 ]
ego, political games and partisan rhetoric ahead of the most important obligation we, as elected representatives, have: to provide leadership and direction to move British Columbia forward.

We’ve been tasked with addressing the greatest challenges of our time, not adding to them. Yet too often the pursuit of narrow self-interest trumps the interests of British Columbians. This is because most of us in this room will not have to live the consequences of the decisions that we make.

We have to do better, and doing better starts with a basic willingness to work across party lines. I’ve always said that I will support a good idea when I see it, I will contribute to a poor idea when I can help make it better, and I will oppose a bad idea when that’s what’s necessary. But steadfast opposition is a last resort. Our challenges are too big, and the consequences are too profound.

Opposition has to be more than standing on the sidelines and lobbing dirt until the government is buried and broken. There’s no vision, no leadership, in slinging mud. We don’t have to argue, but we do need to have honest discussions that extend beyond partisan squabbles. We need to demonstrate the respect we expect to receive towards our ideas when we consider the ideas of others.

We expect more from government. We expect a demonstrated commitment to govern for all British Columbians, not merely for those who voted for them or funded them. This means an honest and open commitment to seek out the perspectives and ideas of others and evaluate them based on their merits, not on their source.

It’s disrespectful to British Columbians to be presented with a throne speech completely void of ideas when so many people are struggling to get by and when so many solutions exist. It speaks to a lack of leadership in this government that they did not do more to actively seek out and try to incorporate the ideas of others, particularly when they were so lacking in ideas themselves.

We have to do better. Being an MLA, whether in opposition or in government, has to be more than partisan squabbles and staying in power. I find myself between two parties, each of which has an institutionalized disrespect for the ideas and, in some cases, the very existence of the other. We must return to debating the challenges facing our province, including those that began under an NDP government, those that began under a Liberal government and those that began before either was ever in power.

Let us now demonstrate the leadership that British Columbians expect of us and begin to discuss concrete ideas that, by working together, we can turn into solutions — the solutions we need to face the challenges that are before us.

Let me start with the economy. We have a unique opportunity in British Columbia to be at the cutting edge in the development of a 21st-century economy. Our high quality of life and beautiful natural environment attract some the best and brightest from around the globe. We are a destination of choice. Our high school students are consistently top-ranked, with the OECD specifying B.C. as one of the smartest academic jurisdictions in the world.

We have incredible potential to create clean, renewable energy sectors to sustain our growing economy. When we speak about developing a 21st-century economy, one that is innovative, resilient, diverse and sustainable, these are unique strengths we should be leveraging. Unfortunately, instead of investing in a 21st-century economy, our government has banked all its hopes on an irresponsible, unrealistic fossil fuel windfall, with its natural gas sector.

[1620]

We are already seeing these promises unravel. I’ve been saying this was inevitable for more than two years. Now more than ever, we have an urgency to invest in a 21st-century economy so B.C. can continue to prosper.

Here’s where we could start. A 21st-century economy is sustainable — environmentally, socially and fiscally. We should be investing in up-and-coming sectors, like the clean tech sector, that create well-paying, long-term, local jobs and that grow our economy without sacrificing our environment.

Similarly, by steadily increasing emissions pricing, we can send a signal to the market that incentivizes innovation and the transition to a low-carbon economy. The funding could be transferred to municipalities across the province so that they might have the resources to deal with their aging infrastructure and growing transportation barriers.

By investing in the replacement of aging infrastructure in communities throughout the province, we stimulate local economies and create jobs. By moving to this polluter-pays model of revenue generation for municipalities, we reduce the burden on regressive property taxes. Done right, this model would lead to municipalities actually reducing property taxes, thereby benefiting homeowners, fixed-income seniors, landlords and their tenants.

Yes, we should be investing in trade skills as described, for example, under the B.C. jobs plan, but we should also be investing further in education for 21st-century industries like biotech, high-tech and clean tech.

Natural gas has an important role to play in our economy, but we should use it to build our domestic market and explore options around using it to power local transport. B.C. businesses, such as Westport Innovations and Vedder Transport, have already positioned British Columbia as an innovative global leader in this area.

We could invest in innovation in the aquaculture industry, like the land-based technologies used by the ’Namgis First Nation on Vancouver Island, who raise Atlantic salmon without compromising wild stocks.

The logging industry is booming — as we send record amounts of unprocessed logs overseas. Now is the time to be retooling our mills to foster a value-added second-
[ Page 5809 ]
growth forestry industry here in British Columbia.

These are just a few ideas that could help us move to the cutting edge in the 21st-century economy. Fundamental to all of these ideas is the need to ensure that economic opportunities are done in partnership with First Nations.

Now to the environment. The continued prosperity of our 21st-century extractive industries, like mining, which are critical to B.C.’s economy, requires a strong and enduring social licence to operate. Government has a crucial role to play in this area, and British Columbians are looking to their government to ensure that resource projects in B.C. prosper safely, responsibly and sustainably.

Unfortunately, over the last decade the B.C. government has weakened environmental monitoring expectations to dangerous levels that cast dark shadows over our province’s extractive industries. From 2009 to 2014 the number of government-licensed science officers — like foresters, geoscientists and engineers — in government service has dropped by 15 percent. Their work has been discontinued, diluted or contracted out to the private sector.

When we fail to adequately monitor and inspect industrial activities, environmental disasters like the tailings pond breach at the Mount Polley mine occur, threatening the reputation of our entire mining industry and making it more difficult for projects to earn that essential social licence. This needs to change.

Government-licensed science officers have been and could continue to be our environmental safety net. When resourced properly, they ensure that as our province prospers, it does so safely and it does so with an eye to environmental stewardship and public safety. Reinvesting in keeping these positions in-house helps ensure government has the experience necessary to ensure we prosper safely.

If industries are going to thrive with a social licence in British Columbia, we must ensure the environmental review process is stringent and upholds the highest standards, instead of being a symbolic or political rubber-stamp process. We just have to look at the National Energy Board’s hearings on the Trans Mountain Pipeline project to see how poor a review process can be and how it can completely undermine any hope of earning social licence.

The costs of prospering safely in British Columbia should be borne by those who are prospering from our rich natural resources. That’s why we should look at financing these changes through a small increase in the corporate income tax.

[1625]

British Columbian companies already have one of North America’s most competitive tax climates for businesses with one of the lowest corporate income taxes in Canada. The Report of the Expert Panel on B.C.’s Business Tax Competitiveness found that a 0.5 percent increase of the general corporate income tax rate would generate $147 million a year — more than enough to fund the required scientific environmental assessment and monitoring process in our government.

These are small changes that could make a big difference in assuring British Columbians that their government is taking leadership to ensure resource industries prosper safely.

Now to affordability. A 21st-century economy must also be an affordable one. Right now over half a million British Columbians are currently living in poverty. Of this number, over 160,000 are children. B.C. cities have recently been ranked among the five least affordable cities in Canada.

The government responds to these facts with the same old mantra, the same old tired mantra. It can’t do more until the economy grows. Yet we hear year after year from the government that the economy is growing. This year we even have more than a $444 million budget surplus.

The fact is we have seen growth. We have money to invest, and we know that if we invest capital smartly, we will actually save in operating costs. So let me offer a few ideas of where we could start.

The official opposition has advocated for ending the atrocious policy of clawing back income supports for single mothers. It’s not an expensive change, but it’s an important one. So let’s start there.

Let’s also fix the registered disability savings plans and the registered education savings plans. Currently RDSPs and RESPs do not receive the same protection that our RRPSs and RIFs do when a family or individual is faced with bankruptcy.

This means that when faced with bankruptcy, these already vulnerable individuals lose the one thing that would otherwise provide a glimmer of hope for a financially stable future. By simply providing creditor protection….

An Hon. Member: Federal programs.

A. Weaver: To the member opposite, I would suggest he do his homework. In fact, the province of Alberta has legislated creditor protection for both RRSPs and RIFs. The member would know that if he had done his homework.

By simply providing creditor protection for disabled individuals and children’s education funds, we can make the pathway out of poverty that much easier for those individuals experiencing bankruptcy. And let me be clear. This is a policy change. It doesn’t cost anything.

At the same time, we know from other jurisdictions that by providing chronically homeless individuals with a home through housing-first policies, we not only provide individuals with a basic human right — that is, shelter — but we also provide them with better health outcomes, all while realizing long-term overall net sav-
[ Page 5810 ]
ings to government.

Medicine Hat, for example, saw a 26 percent decrease in emergency shelter use in just four years and has housed over 800 people, including over 200 children. Utah has reduced chronic homelessness by 72 percent as of 2014.

A housing-first pilot project in Denver, Colorado, found emergency-related costs and incarceration costs declined by 72.95 percent and 76 percent, respectively, while emergency shelter costs were reduced by an average of $13,600 per person. Canada’s own At Home/Chez Soi study found that for every $10 invested in housing-first services, there was an average savings of $21.72.

The solutions to our province’s affordability crisis are out there, and those solutions themselves are affordable. In fact, they save money. We just need to invest in them. Given everything we know, the question becomes this: how can we afford not to? The costs of inaction are greater than the costs of action.

Now to health care. The need for affordability must extend to quality health care too. We can be proud that British Columbia was recently ranked the healthiest province in Canada. This ranking shines a positive light on the healthy lifestyle choices British Columbians make each day.

While we celebrate our successes, we must also remember that our health care system faces serious challenges. With a highly regressive health care funding system, an aging population, major gaps in primary care and surgery wait-lists lasting anywhere from months to years, it’s time for government to take a serious look at how our health care system is funded and administered.

[1630]

British Columbia is the only province in Canada that continues to charge MSP premiums. Such premiums unfairly burden low- and fixed-income British Columbians with an overly heavy tax burden. With individuals earning a net income of $30,000 a year paying the same monthly flat fee as someone earning $3 million per year, it’s evident that MSP premiums are perhaps the most regressive form of taxation in British Columbia.

Instead of charging premiums, we could look at shifting to alternative, more progressive options, such as was done in Ontario and Quebec. Rather than flat-rate fees, health care premiums could be paid through the personal income tax systems. This avoids the regressive effects of flat-rate premiums and diminishes the additional costs associated with administering the MSP program.

But it can’t stop here. We also need to address the growing gaps in primary care. Doctor shortages and long wait times to get an appointment have led to increased use of walk-in clinics and emergency room services. Unfortunately, this can be costly for both patients and our health care system, as a lack of follow-up and coordination can mean problems are missed or poorly managed.

Let’s look at investing more in nurse practitioners to help close some of these gaps and provide the high-quality and timely care that British Columbians pay for and need. Let’s find more effective ways of funding these nurse practitioners. Let’s re-examine our approach to the delivery of chronic care services. Relying on acute care services such as walk-in clinics and hospital emergency rooms to deal with chronic health issues is both costly and inefficient.

Let’s consider increasing community and at-home care programs, which have been shown to provide better service at a more affordable cost. And let’s lobby the federal government for our fair share of the Canadian health transfer revenue, a share that accurately reflects our demographics and the true cost of delivering health care services in British Columbia.

The possibilities for improving our health care system are plenty. As our population continues to age and gaps in primary health care continue to grow, it’s more important now than ever to commit to re-examining how we provide affordable, quality health care in British Columbia.

To education. Public education represents perhaps the most important investment government can make for the prosperity of our province. Each and every one of us has attended school, and that experience has shaped who we are, what we do and how we contribute to society. Public education is absolutely critical in teaching the next generation of British Columbians to think critically, contribute responsibly to society and become the leaders of tomorrow.

Given this, why have we not shown more leadership in the education sector? At the end of the strike last fall, the government spoke about an historic six-year agreement, which means five years of labour peace ahead of us. The implication of this sound bite is not that government is stepping up to the task of finding new ways to fund and deliver a leading public education system. The reality is that they are stepping back, allowing their dysfunctional relationship with teachers to simmer, only to boil over again in a few years.

We’re stepping back despite an 18 percent — and aboriginal, a whopping 44 percent — six-year high school non-completion rate. We have school boards at a loss for how to fund their operations due to seemingly endless budget cuts. Surely, this is not indicative of a government properly valuing public education.

It’s time for the government to take leadership. Leadership means ensuring that the resources needed for success are provided. Over the last 13 years education funding, as a percentage of provincial GDP, has declined from a high of about 6.4 percent to an estimated low of about 5 percent. This is not indicative of a government that is prioritizing education.

We need to find new progressive funding solutions to reinvest in education. Leadership means acknowledging that behind the curtain of BCPSEA is the provincial government. Yet it is the government, not BCPSEA, that
[ Page 5811 ]
draws the line in the sand on funding. By dismantling the BCPSEA and bringing its operations back into government, a signal could be sent that government is serious in developing a new relationship with teachers.

Leadership also requires a clear-eyed assessment of what’s working and what isn’t. Clearly, a one-size-fits-all approach isn’t working. The needs on Haida Gwaii are different from those on Vancouver Island, which in turn are different from those in Surrey or Prince George. Now is the time to explore whether class size and composition negotiations are better conducted at the school district level instead of the provincial level.

[1635]

The status quo on education is not addressing these growing challenges. We cannot wait until the next labour dispute happens. Now is the time to sit down with all those stakeholders involved and start a dialogue about what exactly a 21st-century education system looks like, including how it is funded.

In conclusion, I’ve outlined an alternate direction that the province of British Columbia could and should be taking. It’s a direction that I offer to British Columbians on behalf of the B.C. Green Party. It’s a direction that puts the interests of British Columbians first, whether they be resident hunters, fishers, farmers, forestry workers, miners, educators, engineers, students or laborers, to name just a few examples.

We have a government that is out of ideas, lacking leadership, creativity and innovation, and truly void of any vision. We have an official opposition that is almost exclusively focused on pointing out the government’s failures without ever offering viable solutions. Witness the amendment before us as a perfect example of this:

“‘…and that the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia regrets that the families in the province have seen their wages fall as they pay more for their basic services, while the government gives a break to the highest two per cent of income earners; regrets that the government has failed to meet its commitment that all British Columbians will have access to a general practitioner by 2015; regrets that seniors still do not have flexible options for home care or assisted living; regrets that young people in the province face uncertain job prospects as the government has bet on one sector rather than working with businesses and workers across B.C. to reach their potential; and regrets that the government will not fulfill its commitment for at least one LNG pipeline and terminal online in B.C. by 2015.’”

Where are the solutions? We cannot stop at the word “regrets.” There’s more than regret. The key word littered throughout the proposed NDP amendment is “regrets.” Solving the concerns of British Columbians requires us to find solutions, and that starts with new ideas and new leadership. We have an official opposition that is also out of ideas, lacking leadership, creativity and innovation, and void of a vision. And ultimately, it is British Columbians who are paying the price for this lack of leadership from both of our parties.

There are too many people struggling in British Columbia for us to accept this status quo. There are too many incredible economic opportunities passing us by as we put all of our eggs in the LNG basket. To quote Preston Manning, we are counting our chickens before the rooster even enters the henhouse.

We need real leadership in British Columbia, and that starts with a willingness to offer new ideas and to approach other people’s ideas constructively and with the same respect that we hope others will approach our ideas with.

That leadership could start here today by passing my subamendment that proposes adding the words “and recognizes that leadership in government requires a commitment to seek out and incorporate ideas from others while leadership in opposition requires a commitment to offering solutions, and hence calls on this House to collaborate on the development of a new vision for British Columbia that builds on the good ideas of all Members, regardless of their party affiliation.”

Hon. J. Rustad: It’s a pleasure to stand today to have an opportunity to respond to the throne speech, in support of the throne speech.

Just before I go into my comments I, of course, want to start recognizing we’re on the traditional territory of the Lekwungen people. We have many events, many things that happen here at the Legislature, and the people always come and welcome us to their territory and provide us with some of their ceremony and history. It’s always great to be able to have that and to have that kind of relationship with the local people.

I also want to just take a second before I go into my remarks to just reflect a little bit of what we just heard from the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head. It’s refreshing to hear him come forward with ideas and suggestions in these components. It’s often devoid of what we would normally get from the opposition.

However, what I found he really had in common is he has the same solutions. Just spend more money. I guess there’s a reason why they’re both on the opposition side of the House.

[1640]

We’re here doing the work in the Legislature, and it really is an honour and privilege to be able to do this work on behalf of my constituents. But I also recognize that being here means spending a lot of time away from family. I’ll just take a moment to say hi to my lovely wife, Kim. I love you. Thank you very much for your support, for supporting me in the Legislature, as I know everyone’s spouses, partners, families do, around the House, for the time that we spend away from our homes and from our ridings.

My riding is a very large riding, a very rural riding. It’s a riding that, sitting down in Victoria in the lower point of Vancouver Island…. It’s about 2.2 times the size of the entire Vancouver Island, so it’s a very, very large area, and it’s very dependent upon resources. It’s very dependent
[ Page 5812 ]
upon opportunities in the resource industry. Forestry is a key part of my riding, as are mining and agriculture.

The thing I think about over this past year is really how the changes have happened. We’ve seen new mines open. We’ve seen one mine, unfortunately, go into a temporary suspension. We’ve seen expansions at mills, and investments. We’ve seen a mill, unfortunately, that has closed. We saw the new mill that opened up in Burns Lake. We’ve seen new power plants that are under construction and about to open up, utilizing wood waste. We’ve seen a lot of activity in the forest industry. There have been some changes, but what we’re seeing is a continual strengthening of that industry in my riding.

Similar with mining. There have been some challenges, but I think about New Gold and the Blackwater project. I had an opportunity to meet with them just recently, and they talked about how they’re still on track and they want to start construction in 2017. They’ve got, I think, 50 or 60 people out today doing exploration work. They’ve got a robust plan over the course of the summer as they continue to drill out their existing find, as well as explore for new opportunities. As well, there’s other exploration work that’s going on in the area.

Mining really has a great opportunity in the future. I think about Huckleberry. It’s in the middle of going through its expansion and has a continued future as well.

All of those types of things mean that people are working in my riding. They’re supporting their families. They’re supporting their communities, based on the strength of our resource industries.

I think about agriculture. Just recently I think the cattle prices dropped a little bit, but they’re up still very significantly over what has been the norm over, really, the last decade, and we’re seeing a resurgence of interest in the agriculture sector. We’re seeing new compressed hay plants that are starting to run and shipping hay out to China, creating additional demand on that side. It’s really encouraging to see that kind of an interest in our agricultural sector.

I think part of the heart of all of the communities, of course, is certainly what local governments and the provincial government can help provide and support, recognizing that there are all kinds of challenges and issues to be able to get to everything that the communities would like.

I’m very proud that Burns Lake…. We just recently celebrated the opening of their new hospital, their replacement hospital. It was a $55 million investment that was made. The local regional health district put some dollars towards it. If you ever get a chance, drop by and see it — just as a tourist, of course. No one wants to have to go to hospital for other reasons, but it’s nice to know it’s there for you. Get a chance to go by and look at it. It really is a gem, and it will be a centrepiece for the community and for the region for many, many years to come.

Along with that, we look at some of the other things that the communities are working on, and of course, transportation is very significant. With all the resource activity and things happening in the area, transportation is critical. We’ve seen, once again, significant and ongoing investments in our highway transportation system throughout the area. This past year I think it was somewhere around $11 million worth of improvements that happened to the riding, including the completing of yet another passing lane, a bunch of resurfacing and some safety features that were added in.

This is part of ongoing work that has been happening throughout the riding, making the road a much safer place to travel. This winter, of course, I’ve had an opportunity to travel back and forth and noticed a bit of a difference with the upgrade to the highway, to the class A status now along Highway 16. It’s made for some improvements on how the highway is being maintained, to various levels. I’ve noticed, from my perspective, it seems to be safer from those improvements.

[1645]

Also, a few recent things that I want to touch on are things like the community arts grants that we’ve recently put through the arts foundation. It’s great to see communities like Burns Lake and Fort St. James receiving these kinds of grants so that they can promote arts and culture within their particular communities.

I think the one other component of my riding I really want to talk about — I’m talking about my riding from a perspective of what the throne speech is saying — is continuing on with the work that we’re doing, continuing on with the progress and supporting the types of things that make communities, individuals and families successful. The throne speech talked a lot about just those things. We laid out our plan, we’re implementing our plan, and we’re continuing to work with that plan. We’re providing the kind of consistency and stability that are needed for success within the area.

Part of that success, of course, is liquefied natural gas and the opportunities that will come from that. Through the work that we’ve been doing in our government, we’re continuing down the path of promoting this opportunity, of making sure that we’re meeting all of the timelines, helping companies to come to these decisions and making sure that this opportunity can be fulfilled within British Columbia.

In particular, in my ministry there’s a significant component of that. That is making sure that First Nations have an opportunity to benefit from the liquefied natural gas industry. We’ve been busy over this past year going out, working with the nations, reaching agreements with them, to make sure that there are not just short-term jobs but long-term training opportunities that can come from this — not just short-term opportunities in terms of some revenue but ongoing revenue they can base an economy on, that they can use to be able to reinvest. Whether it’s in social programs, services or facilities within their com-
[ Page 5813 ]
munities or whether it’s to help promote economic or entrepreneurial types of activities, it really enables First Nations to be able to fully take advantage of something that we believe will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for British Columbia.

I’m pleased to say that as we’ve been going through these discussions with First Nations on liquefied natural gas, we now have announced eight First Nations that are in agreement, new agreements, with these new pipelines. The 16th nation has joined the other 15 in terms of support for the Pacific Trail pipeline and that project going forward. We’re entering into agreements on the coastal side, where the facilities will be located. We continue to work with the Treaty 8 — where the gas is extracted — with their existing economic benefit agreements but looking to renew them. We’re working with the nations through those sorts of issues.

Really, right across the north, from the gas being extracted all the way to the coast, even the ones that aren’t directly touched on liquefied natural gas but across, throughout the oceanside, we’re entering into agreements with them. We’re working to see what kinds of benefits…. We can make sure that they can also participate in this great opportunity of liquefied natural gas. As we go through and continue with these kinds of discussions, I anticipate that we’ll have a great number of announcements to make in the coming weeks and months because of the momentum that has been built and because First Nations look at this as a tremendous opportunity as well.

I talk about my riding and the things that are happening through there. Liquefied natural gas, of course, plays a big role in what the future can be. These lines will all travel through my riding for significant lengths.

Beyond that, I also want to take an opportunity to think a little bit about my ministry and the relationships we’re building with First Nations. My ministry is the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. We’ve been going out and taking a different approach with First Nations now for about a decade.

A big part of that is how we make sure First Nations can participate in the economy, in things like revenue-sharing, to work with First Nations as to how we can reshape our government-to-government relations, how we can look at things like shared decision-making on the land base, how we can support social initiatives as well as the types of things that they want to see happening, how we can make sure that we’re respectful of the environment.

[1650]

One of the big pieces of that is what we’re doing now, as a legacy for liquefied natural gas, called the environmental stewardship initiative. It’s something that will be able to look at environmental initiatives that First Nations want to see happening on the land base, how we can try to provide support, how that can create jobs, as well as improving the environment. It’s one of those types of opportunities that really will be a legacy, and it’s something that we’re quite proud of being able to deliver.

As we work with First Nations and go forward, the ultimate form of the reconciliation or the relationship that can be built is treaty. I’ve had an opportunity to meet with all of our treaty nations — all of our modern treaty nations, that is — to look at the types of things that they can achieve, the things that they want to try to work on, and it’s very exciting.

I think about Nisga’a and what Nisga’a has been able to do. We just entered into a recent taxation-sharing agreement with them that allows them to be able to do taxation on and off their treaty lands, for the revenue to be able to flow. What they’re trying to do and how they want to use that to leverage to create economic opportunity is really quite remarkable.

You look at Tsawwassen, the investment that’s being made on Tsawwassen and how that is completely transforming that nation, the jobs that are being created, the way that the nation is optimistic about its future. It truly is inspiring.

Just recently, with Maa-nulth and their engagement with Steelhead LNG, the types of things that they’re trying to achieve on the Island with their nation — it’s quite remarkable. They’re excited about building their futures.

I also think about Tla’amin and Yale that will come to full implementation of their treaties in about a year and a half, two years’ time. Once again, they’re excited about building their future. It’s that type of excitement and optimism that we want to really try to help promote and help create that potential for many more nations around the province.

Treaty is a way to do that, but unfortunately, it is a bit of a slow process. We do need to be thinking about how we can try to accelerate the types of benefits we’re seeing for those nations that are in treaty for the nations that want to be in treaty. We’re having some success. We’re out there. A number of nations are at the agreement-in-principle level, and they want to be able to progress as quickly as they can through to final treaty. That’s great news, but at the same time we know that we need to be able to progress dramatically with other nations.

As we work through doing treaty, I think the important thing to remember is that because it takes time, we cannot limit First Nations’ ability to build an economy, which is why we do things like revenue-sharing and strategic engagement agreements and reconciliation framework agreements.

I’m very pleased, now that we have entered into more than 250 significant revenue-sharing agreements from the resource base and the activities that are happening on the land base, to return revenue to First Nations from their traditional territory. Those include over 170 forest and revenue-sharing agreements, 19 for economic and community development agreements on mining, 25 for clean energy agreements, as well as now more than 11 on
[ Page 5814 ]
liquefied natural gas and the pipeline benefits and how that process will go.

As each nation looks at its future and what it can achieve, not every nation has natural gas or not every nation has an opportunity for mining or even forestry. But another great potential is clean energy. We know that First Nations are very interested in clean energy, and so we launched the First Nations clean energy fund back in 2011.

As I mentioned, we have now 25 clean energy revenue-sharing agreements with various nations. And we’ve invested more than $5.1 million into nations so that they can pursue these clean energy opportunities, so they can find ways to get equity in these projects, as well, of course, as seeing the revenue stream from water and the land rentals. These kinds of activities help nations to be able to engage and really to be able to build their future.

Of course, I’d be remiss if I didn’t talk a little bit about the Tsilhqot’in decision and how that has changed some things on the landscape. From that decision, of course, we had a first of its kind. I spoke about this a little bit last fall. We had all of the First Nation leaders from around the province, over 400 leaders of First Nations, come down and meet with our entire cabinet.

It was quite an interesting day to talk about the types of things that they want to achieve, how relationships need to evolve and go forward, and so we’re continuing to grow on that. The throne speech made our commitment to carry on with doing these high-level meetings for the opportunity to bring people from around the province into one place and to be able to share these ideas, share these discussions and talk about how we build our future.

[1655]

It fits in very nicely with our jobs plan. We’ve talked about it in our throne speech, and this has been out there now for a number of years. We’re continuing to progress now on our jobs plan, but we want to make sure that First Nations have that opportunity to be able to fully participate in it. We know that over time there will be a million new job openings. A lot of those are going to be available to anyone in British Columbia, and we know that we probably won’t even have enough workforce to be able to fill them all. But First Nations are well positioned to be able to take advantage of these jobs that are being created.

We want to be able to add, over the next ten years, more than 15,000 people from the aboriginal communities into our workforce. We know that they’re the youngest and fastest-growing workforce in British Columbia, but more importantly, it’s the right thing to do. We want to see the changes for First Nation communities and for their people. I think once again about liquefied natural gas and the training that’s in there, but I think about the jobs blueprint and the training component and how it will help to shape the types of training that we’re going to need to really be able to match to those jobs.

More and more I’m out talking with nations about the training and the opportunities that are there. They’re excited about training, but they want it to lead to a meaningful job. It’s not just about the training. They want it to be tied in directly with employment. I’ve talked with a number of trainers and companies, and they’re interested in making sure we have those kinds of partnerships as well, so it’s an exciting time and an exciting opportunity.

One of the other pieces, of course, that we need to think about in terms of the work that we do with First Nation communities is, really, around violence, and in particular, violence against aboriginal women. It’s something that needs to change, that we think is unacceptable. It’s just wrong. Just recently I had an opportunity to participate in the moosehide campaign. It’s a great initiative that’s taken on by Paul Lacerte and the aboriginal friendship centres. It’s really about empowering men to have a conversation about this issue, bringing it out into the open, shining a light on it, not letting it be hidden and making people understand that it’s not okay.

This is not something that should be acceptable within our communities. It’s a very powerful statement that is being made, and more and more people across Canada now are starting to sign in and be a part of what this program is trying to do. They have a goal to try to promote and get more than a million moosehide tags out to the public in Canada, for people to wear them to say that this is not right. It’s all about making sure that people know it’s okay to say this is wrong and to do something about changing it.

That is a grassroots effort that we’re going try to find ways to support, because it can make a real difference. But beyond that, we also know that there is support that’s needed. Through an advisory committee, my Minister’s Advisory Committee on Aboriginal Women, there’s a group of remarkable aboriginal women from around the province that have come together to give me advice and to give our government advice on this particular issue: how do we try to bring an end to violence against aboriginal women?

They had an idea that came forward out of this called Giving Voice. We found a way to be able to provide some funding for that, and now across the province we have 37 of these projects that have gone out and that have been initiated to try to give voices to women to make sure that this issue, once again, comes out of the dark and is talked about.

In terms of support, we announced recently our violence-free-B.C. strategy, which has a specific component and several million dollars set aside to be able to provide support for aboriginal women that are fleeing violence. In the coming weeks I’ll be leading a delegation to Ottawa to engage on the federal side around murdered or missing women and around bringing an end to violence.

[1700]

All of these are important components around how we try to support aboriginal communities and how we
[ Page 5815 ]
try to change some of those dynamics that we’re seeing. I want to just relate one story that relates to this. Through economic development, through a mine that opened up, through the training initiatives that have been created and through the support for community, I want to share a story about a young woman in Fort St. James who I had an opportunity to meet not too long ago. She was living on the street, a single mom. She really didn’t have any optimism for the future. She was struggling with everything. But because of the economic activity that’s happening, some resources went in, in terms of training, and she had an opportunity to get some initial training.

She took that training, and she managed to get a job. Then she came back, and she did some additional training, which is where I saw her, at the College of New Caledonia facility in Fort St. James. She said to me: “It’s remarkable what a difference this has made.” She has gone from not having any real hope for the future and really struggling to being proud and optimistic about what she can do and where she can go — to being, in her words, a better mother, able to support her child, and to being a better community member, being able to help other people in the community and able to support and build the community.

It’s remarkable what a change has happened. That came from having a new mine that was opening up in the area that drove some employment opportunities that then were able to be supported by training — to have an individual able to change around her life. That’s something that you’ll never be able to take away from her. She now has these skill sets. It has completely changed her life.

That’s why we are so engaged in this whole suite of opportunities for First Nations on the economic side, on helping around things like shared decision-making, recognizing culture, recognizing history, helping to rebuild nations for what they are and what they would like to be in the future. It’s how we as a government come in and try to support and help and work in partnership with nations as opposed to doing things to nations. It’s been quite remarkable to see how some of that change has happened on the land base.

Of course, not all First Nations people live on reserves. Many live in our urban areas as well. Through the work that we’re doing through the off-reserve aboriginal action plan, we’re seeing more of this type of support, as well, happening and bringing partners together: the federal government, the friendship centres, the provincial government, many of the other types of institutions that do work — coming together, finding best practices and being able to make a difference for many aboriginal people in the urban settings.

We recognize the importance of finding these ways with First Nations and trying to find new ways and be innovative or creative. I think one of the leadership council members said to me not long ago that they wanted to see a significant change in the status quo. But I’d say to you, Mr. Speaker, that it’s not so much a change in the status quo that’s needed. We need a new status quo. We need to find a new way to be able to work with nations to be able to help them to be successful in building their future and being part of our province and our country.

In no place is that more important than the Tsilhqot’in. I mentioned the Tsilhqot’in earlier. From the Supreme Court decision that came out, we entered into a letter of understanding. We’ve been working closely with the Tsilhqot’in for the last five months, working on how we can work through all these sorts of issues — like, for example, who plows the road during the winter and how we can, as a government, be able to continue to provide services and support within the Tsilhqot’in title area — but to go beyond that, to go beyond to how we help the Tsilhqot’in grasp their future and build what they’d like to achieve.

They’ve come forward with their ideas and the way they’d like to develop their future — issues such as how they get social infrastructure and support in place, dealing with training, how they work with resources, how they go through a wide range of components and how, of course, that can be supported through the economy. This is very, very complex work that’s being done, but it’s very important work about how to shape that kind of a future.

[1705]

It’s an exciting opportunity to think about the Tsilhqot’in and to think about the title and what that means — and what all the nations around the province are really trying to achieve.

I’d like to just come back to my riding once again. Through all of the work that we do in the Legislature and the work that you have the opportunity to do around the province, at the end of the day it’s always about your constituents. It’s always about making sure that you provide the best services you can for the people that have sent you here, to make sure that you use the great honour and privilege that you have to be a representative for the people, to make sure that their concerns and voices are heard.

I’m so very pleased that just recently, after the disaster of the mill explosion in Burns Lake, that to the families that wanted to see the coroner’s office be able to move in and not just have one public inquiry hearing in Prince George but be able to extend it to Burns Lake — the coroner’s office responded and said: “Yes, we will hold that hearing in Burns Lake.” I actually want to take a moment and thank the coroner’s office for that. It was a big step.

I met with many of the families and the First Nation communities and the local non–First Nation leaders through a community healing project that we worked on. We talked about how these things can move forward and the importance of having that opportunity locally for them to be able to go, to be supported by family and to tell the story, to make sure they bring information forward.

It was one of the things that I encouraged them to
[ Page 5816 ]
move forward on. I asked the coroner’s office for it, and they did that. I’m just so pleased that that will be taking place for those families. At the end of the day, we’re here to try to represent our area, our people, to the best of our abilities. It truly is an honour and a privilege to be able to have that opportunity.

With that, I’m very pleased to be able to stand up and support the throne speech, to support the continuing work that we are doing as a government. It’s important work, and it’s showing success. We are moving forward with LNG. We’re moving forward in the support and diversification of the economy. We’re moving forward with opening up new markets, building new relationships for us and strengthening our relationships with those trade partners and finding ways to make sure that all British Columbians can see the benefits of the job strategy and how we support our economy.

Our unemployment numbers are at almost record-low levels, and we’re seeing, truly, a lot of strength. I’m very proud to be able to be part of our government and a part of helping to deliver on the Premier’s vision. It’s why I’m standing up and supporting our throne speech, so that we continue the progress that we’re making and continue to make sure we provide good government for the people of British Columbia.

Deputy Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition. [Applause.]

J. Horgan: Thank you, hon. Speaker and colleagues. I appreciate the warm response to my opportunity to stand and offer my thoughts on this year’s throne speech.

Of course, it’s the third throne speech in the past 12 months, and that’s unusual. We went a great distance between throne speeches in the early part of the current government’s mandate. I recall that one throne speech was delivered on a radio program. We’ve gone the full gamut. We’ve gone from “well, let’s not bother having a throne speech” to “let’s have as many throne speeches as we possibly can.”

I want to take a few moments before the heckling gets to a high level to speak for a few moments about my constituency of Juan de Fuca and how important it is to me and how fortunate I am to be the representative for a host of communities in the capital regional district. I want to talk a little bit about being born and raised in the capital regional district and raising my family in Juan de Fuca and having them go to Happy Valley Elementary School.

Happy Valley Elementary School. I know. Quite often people say: “Member, you live an idyllic life.” You certainly have to when you live in Happy Valley. Our children were blessed to have been able to attend Happy Valley Elementary and then Dunsmuir Middle School and then Belmont high school — which will be, I’m happy to say, replaced this year after 56 years of hard service to the good people of Langford, with two new facilities in the West Shore. I’m looking forward that opening day, come September.

[1710]

I want to give congratulations to two newly elected mayors in my constituency as well. Ken Williams was elected the mayor of Highlands, replacing Jane Mendum. Jane has decided to relax for a time. I’m sure that her community activity has not ended, but it’s good for her and good for Ken to be the new mayor of Highlands.

Also, we have a new mayor in Sooke. Maja Tait was elected to replace the retiring Wendall Milne, an outstanding individual who did one term as mayor of Sooke and did great work there. Maja is very excited about the new challenges that await her.

And two stalwarts in the West Shore: the mayor of Langford, Stew Young, again returned for another term; and the mayor of Metchosin, also in my constituency, John Ranns — long-serving, both of them, outstanding community members, hard-working, trying to do the best for Metchosin and for Langford. I’m pleased to have the opportunity to continue to work with them.

Lastly, I want to speak about an acclamation for one of the members in the capital regional district, the director for Juan de Fuca. Mike Hicks was acclaimed. Mike and I were able to spend some time watching his son play hockey at the Sooke arena on the weekend. My sons have now moved on from organized sports, so I have to go and follow other people’s children. It was great to see Beau and the Sooke Thunderbirds win the South Island championships and looking forward to taking on, I believe, Tri-Cities in the North Island for the Vancouver Island championship coming ahead.

There’s also sadness in Juan de Fuca on the passing of Pia Carroll. Pia was the foundation of the culinary arts program at Edward Milne Community School as well as one of the founding chefs at the Sooke Harbour House, renowned worldwide for its cuisine, hospitality and spectacular vistas of the Sooke Basin and across to the Olympic peninsula. Pia passed away after a long fight with cancer. A very, very heart-warming memorial service for her just a few weeks ago in Sooke demonstrated, I think, the community spirit in the Juan de Fuca district, and it’s so much an honour for me to be part of that as a member of the Legislature.

Now, others may know — those who are watching for the first time may not be aware of this — I’m also the Leader of the Official Opposition, and that would explain the rousing applause from my colleagues when I took to my feet. As Leader of the Official Opposition, I’ve had a tremendous opportunity, not just to spend time getting to know better the people in my community of Juan de Fuca, which stretches, as I’ve said, through four municipalities and a large electoral area, but also I’ve had the opportunity to travel around British Columbia, visiting communities in every corner of the province — in the northeast, the northwest, the southeast, the Lower Mainland, the
[ Page 5817 ]
Cariboo several times and Prince George several times.

What I’ve discovered is that — I knew this before I embarked on my travels — British Columbia is a province rich in potential, regardless of where you come from. If it’s not human resources, it’s our natural resources. If it’s not the diverse multicultural makeup of our communities, as we see in the Lower Mainland and out through the Fraser Valley and up into the Okanagan and the Interior, it’s just the nature of British Columbia.

We’re a proud people. We work very, very hard. And we deserve better than we’re getting from the government of British Columbia. We deserve much better.

When you’ve done three throne speeches in a year, I can well imagine that you can be forgiven for not having much to say on the third go. What we discovered in throne speech part 1, back in February of 2014, was all LNG all the time. There was nothing else going on in British Columbia. The only issue was LNG. There were letters of expectation sent to every minister, including the Minister of Children and Families, making reference to: how you can work towards expanding and developing our potential and opportunities with respect to liquefied natural gas? So that was throne speech part 1.

Throne speech part 2 was rinse and repeat, as they say. It was a familiar refrain — no mention of forestry, no mention of mining, no mention of high tech, no mention of the other industries in British Columbia, just LNG.

Now, it’s interesting that we have throne speech part 3, 12 months after the beginning, three years after the big bet, everything is all in on LNG. And now we have a recitation of the other industries that are in British Columbia — not any hope for those industries, not any hope for the people that work in those industries, but a checklist.

[1715]

The Lieutenant-Governor sat in that chair not a week ago and offered up a list of things that go on in British Columbia. It reminded me of What Do People Do All Day? That was a Richard Scarry book. I would have to say if there was more substance in the throne speech, it might have been scary, but it was actually scary because of the absence of substance.

When I look around at the opportunities in British Columbia, whether it be natural resources, whether it be human resources, whether it be our fine upstanding public institutions of higher learning, renowned worldwide — UBC, cutting-edge medical training, and UNBC, as the member for Prince George will attest…. The ability and the potential of the people of British Columbia is unparalleled, but that potential is being squandered by a government that seems to be able to recite what people want to hear but not deliver what people need. They seem to be able to say what they think people want to hear but not listen to what people are saying back to them.

MSP premiums have doubled — doubled — in the time the Liberals have been in power. Hydro rates — 65 percent increase from the time the Liberals have been in power. ICBC rates are up. I don’t think that I can tell the member for North Island or the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast or the member from Esquimalt about ferry fares, but they’ve gone up a little bit too. I heard the Minister of Transportation say today that he was focused — focused like a laser — on bringing down those fares as we await the next increase just weeks from today.

It’s hard to take them seriously and hard to take a throne speech seriously that paid no attention to the challenges that people face in every single community in this province. If the government got out of here and went back not just to hide in their constituency offices but to get out to talk to people in their constituencies, they would be hearing the same things that members on this side of the House are hearing. They would be hearing that people are being squeezed and crushed by increased fees, increased taxes.

The government says: “Oh, we don’t raise taxes on this side of the House.” Well, you just did with respect to MSP premiums not weeks ago. They went up again. Year after year after year, MSP premiums have been going up. That’s a tax to just about everyone in the universe except the people that sit on that side of the House.

Hydro increases. We’re going to wrestle those to the ground, too, in 2018 or 2019 — sometime in the distant future. Sometime after the next election the people on that side of the House are going to start to focus on the people who sent us here, the people of British Columbia. What they’re saying to those on this side of the House, what they’re saying to me when I travel to every corner of the province is: “Enough is enough. When are we going to try and get a little bit back for the money we’re putting in?”

When are we going to have a reduction in wait-lists for childhood challenges with learning disabilities in our K-to-12 system? The list gets longer and longer and longer. The challenges for young people — a year lost, two years lost, three years lost is extraordinary when you’re 10 and 11 and 12 years old. The member for Comox Valley knows this. He knows it full well, and so do the members on that side of the House, from one corner to the other. Yet no effort — no effort — has been made to reduce the wait-lists for assessment of these early learning challenges. Imagine what these kids could do if they had access to early training, access to tools to overcome the adversity that they face in the classrooms today.

I hear over and over again from working families that they can’t find child care. No mention at all in throne speech part 1, throne speech part 2 or the recent throne speech last week about child care. We need to recognize that the world of the 1950s and ’60s, which sometimes the members on that side of the House like to harken back to, doesn’t exist anymore.

We need to make sure that we’re providing services for families, particularly those families that are be-
[ Page 5818 ]
ing squeezed, that have kids that have not yet launched and parents that are seeking care in their senior years — whether it be improving our home care capacity or trying to produce some of the beds, the continuing-care beds, we’re going to need in every community in British Columbia, particularly in my constituency of Juan de Fuca.

I’ll pause for a moment to talk about Ayre Manor, which is a facility that was planned by the people of Sooke starting in the 1960s. They bought the land, and they started preparing for the time when that working-class community that had young families was going to become a seniors community, and they could have a facility of their own so they didn’t have to drive into Victoria or beyond to find seniors care. Well, they managed to get the facility built, and there are three phases to come. Is there a scrap of money or a scrap of planning capacity from the government to see that realized? No, there’s not.

In fact, I met with the CEO of the Vancouver Island Health Authority, and he said he was going to get back to me on that. I’m hopeful that it won’t take four years for that to happen because, like with kids in the K-to-12 system, seniors are on the clock. We all understand that. We’re all here for a limited period of time. As my mom used to say, you’re a long time dead.

[1720]

But when you’re here, you want to be able to get some access to the services you’ve been paying for. When it comes to our seniors, they’ve been paying for a long, long time, and they’re getting less and less and less.

I want to look for a moment at throne speech point 1 and throne speech point 2, which focused, as I said earlier, exclusively on liquefied natural gas. I want to remind members, if they need reminding, of the promises and the hyperbole that came from the government leading into the last election and, then, following in the throne speeches that I mentioned.

There was going to be, of course, the elimination of the provincial debt. It was going to be disappeared. It was going to be gone, just like that. We were going to do away with sales taxes. There were going to be 100,000 jobs in LNG and ancillary industries. And there was going to be, of course, the infamous — and now often forgotten-about — creation of a prosperity fund.

I don’t know if the Minister of Finance is going to make reference to the prosperity fund in his budget presentation tomorrow, but if he does, I know how much money will be in it. Zero. Zero will be what is in that prosperity fund. Three years and ticking — an empty vessel, somewhat similar to the speech that was delivered from the throne last week.

Now, the promises were fine. I recall the Premier saying during a by-election in Port Moody back in 2012, “Well, people say things to get elected,” and nothing could be more obvious than the promises that were made by the government when it came to LNG and the jobs that were going to flow from that.

When Petronas was heading for the door, deciding that they were going to put a pause on their activities here, we managed to get hold of their environmental assessment materials. We determined, by reviewing those, that 70 percent of the jobs that they proposed for British Columbia would be filled by temporary foreign workers. Imagine that: 70 percent of the jobs promised by the leading proponent that the government was championing were going to go to people from somewhere else.

So if 70 percent of those 100,000 jobs were going to come from somewhere else, one has to pause and ask: “Well, why have we been putting so much energy into doing this if it’s just for someone else?” We all know now that the tax return to British Columbia is going to be half what it was promised to be. We all know now that the final investment decisions have been moved and moved and moved down the road.

We know now — the good work of the member for Vancouver–West End — that the cleanest, greenest liquefied natural gas industry in the known universe was not going to happen. If you eliminate 70 percent of the emissions from the wellhead to tidewater and don’t count them, much less try to control them, then you’re not going to be the greenest in the world.

So there was lots of promise and zero delivery. While they were making those promises, what were they doing in other sectors? What happened in forestry? Since 2001 there are 25,000 fewer British Columbians working in the forest sector than there were when we started with this government back in the day — 25,000 fewer workers.

And 206 mills have closed during that time. A 500 percent increase in raw log exports, a 500 percent increase in raw logs. Now, I don’t want to take jobs away from the feller-buncher operator or the truck driver that’s going through Sooke with truck after truck after truck of raw logs heading for tidewater up Vancouver Island. They’re going by shuttered mills to give those logs to someone else.

Quebec and Ontario get more jobs per cubic metre than British Columbia does. Forestry built this province. Forestry was the foundation of our economy for generations, and now Quebec and Ontario create more jobs per cubic metre than we do. I don’t believe that’s acceptable. Living in what was a forest-dependent community, living on Vancouver Island, which was the foundation of the coastal forest sector, I don’t believe that’s acceptable to anyone on this Island. I don’t believe it’s acceptable to the people of British Columbia.

Yet, when I listen to member after member stand up and talk about the diversified markets that they found to send our raw logs to, then I think that we have to stop and say: “Wait a second. What’s in it for the people of British Columbia? When is it that the government of British Columbia is going to start working for the people who sent you here rather than the companies?”
[ Page 5819 ]

I’ve been to Mount Polley a couple of times since the disaster in August of last year, when 25 million cubic metres of tailings left the tailing facility and made their way to the pristine Quesnel Lake.

[1725]

I’ve seen — and we’ve talked about and we’ve discussed in question period — the report by engineers on what they believe to be the cause, the primary cause and the additional causes — the slope increase; the lack of appropriate material to build a tailings pond that was designed for tailings, not for water. The minister doesn’t want to talk about those issues, but I think it’s there for all to read, when they can get access to the report.

The challenges are not just in the mining sector, when you consider and then contemplate the failure that happened last August. It’s also with tourism operators. My colleague from Vancouver–Point Grey and my colleague from Kootenay West have both been repeat visitors to the region, to talk to people on the ground in Likely about how they’re going to rebuild their futures after the disaster.

They heard a lot from the governments in the first couple of days. “We’re going to be there for you.” The Premier looked in the eyes of Peggy Zorn, a long-time operator of a tourism facility in the region, and said, “We’re going to be right there with you,” and then never went back.

You can’t give people hope when it’s false hope. That’s what the Liberals did, and they continue to do, with respect to the ancillary businesses in the region and, particularly, when I look at the Mines Minister, with the mining sector in general.

They promised eight new mines before the last election. What’s happened is we’ve closed five in that time. The only people mining right now in Tumbler Ridge are temporary foreign workers. The steelworkers were sent packing. The operating engineers were sent packing. As they leave town, as they leave Tumbler Ridge to find other opportunities elsewhere, the only people working are at HD Mining, and they’re temporary foreign workers. Apparently, those skilled workers that were for many, many years working at the various mines in and around Tumbler Ridge are not qualified to do the work at HD Mining.

That sends a message, I think, of where this government’s priorities are. It’s certainly not with the people who built this province; it’s with temporary foreign workers and investors from offshore. As important as investment from offshore is to the growth of our economy, don’t you think that the government of British Columbia should be putting the people first? Put people ahead of those industries. Put people ahead of those people who show up to fundraisers. Those are the people that sent us here, and those are the ones that expect better from the government of British Columbia.

Mining and forestry are not the only two sectors that have been neglected, however. As I travel around, the high-tech sector in the Lower Mainland, one of the bright spots in the B.C. economy, can’t get a meeting. There’s a new minister now, the minister responsible for document disposal. He may well be able to light a fire there. But these are very skilled, very proficient individuals and companies that have started, oftentimes from nothing, and are making wealth, creating jobs and diversifying the economy of British Columbia. They can’t get anything but lectures and sermons from ministers on the other side.

What they need is a receptive ear. What they need is a government that will hear their concerns and facilitate some of the changes they need to make their industries grow even faster than they have been over the past number of years.

I want to talk a bit more about job growth. Again, one of the “I’ll say anything to get elected” promises was to lead the country in job creation. “We have a plan,” the Premier said. I heard her again after the throne speech last week. “We have a plan. The plan’s working. We’re going to stick with the plan.”

The plan in forestry is 25,000 fewer people working in the sector. I don’t think that’s a plan we should stick with. The plan in forestry is 500 percent increases in raw log exports. I don’t think that’s a plan we should stick with. I don’t think that closing mines and opening up opportunities for temporary foreign workers in the sector is a plan that we should stick with.

More importantly, when it comes to jobs, we were going to lead the country, the Premier said, in job creation. Well, we’re at the bottom half in a good month. We’re about eighth in real wage growth. In fact, the Broadbent Institute just did a study based on statistics from Revenue Canada. From 2006 to 2012, real wages went down 2.4 percent in British Columbia.

Now, I don’t know if we’re going to be able to get access to that data now that the federal Conservatives have canned Stats Canada’s ability to collect that information, but the information that was available up to 2012 showed not just stagnation but actually a decline in real wages.

So what are we getting in British Columbia with this tremendous potential? We’re getting a government that’s squandering that opportunity, squandering opportunity for kids, for families and for seniors.

[1730]

We saw the largest, longest dispute in education history in British Columbia, weeks and weeks of kids out of classes. The government pats itself on the back and says: “Everything’s fine now. We’re all going to be just fantastic. Teachers are back in the classrooms, and they’re happy with their pay packets, and kids are going to get the education they need.” But we’re still underfunding critical areas that I touched on earlier.

Assessments of special needs kids. Nothing can be more important than getting early indicators of where there are challenges. Again, I look to my colleague from
[ Page 5820 ]
Comox, who knows this full well and would support this initiative and, I think, would support a government, his government, investing in special needs training, in specialist teachers and in ensuring that we are leading the country and leading the world, if at all possible, and meeting our potential here in British Columbia.

The “kids on the couch” comment from the Premier. I want to touch on that for a minute because I have kids of a certain age, and they’re working very hard to make their way in the world. Many people in this place will have kids that are also trying to make their way, get their first job, get out of the house and into an apartment — maybe scratch up enough to buy a modest accommodation close to where they live or where they want to live.

Wherever I go, I’m hearing parents talk to me about the challenges their kids are facing. What was the Premier’s response to that? “If you’re still on the couch, then you’re lazy. You’re lazy.” I don’t know. Maybe it’s just me. But when I was raised, it was…. You know, if someone’s having some trouble, you should try and help them out. You shouldn’t ridicule them. You shouldn’t make them the brunt of your jokes. If the Premier spent as much time looking at solutions for the challenges families face as she spent trying to write some laugh lines for her fundraisers that she goes to, then perhaps we’d be in a better position than we are today.

I firmly believe that we can do better in British Columbia than ridicule our citizens. I firmly believe that we can do better than an inventory of activities in a throne speech. We should be laying out, at the mid-term of a government’s mandate…. It’s been two years since the election. There are two years left. I would have thought that…. A throne speech is often long on platitudes. That’s often the refrain from those who observe what we do here. “Ah, it’s just a throne speech. What do you expect?” We didn’t even get platitudes. You know, we got nothing. Half an hour we’ll never get back. Emptiness for 30 minutes.

I commented to some of the attendants that were with the Lieutenant-Governor on their ability to stand ramrod straight for the full 30 minutes without even remotely coming towards a yawn. I can’t say the same for members on the other side. I won’t name any of them, but there were a few that were working hard to keep their eyes open. That’s to be forgiven when you’re listening to a speech that is full of nothingness.

At the two-year point in a mandate, wouldn’t you think, hon. colleagues, that a government would be saying: “This is what we want to do. This is what we were elected for”?

“LNG — no, we’re not doing that anymore. We put it all in for that, and it doesn’t look like it’s working out, so let’s pretend we never raised the issue at all. Let’s just move along. There’s nothing to see here. No one paid attention to the last two throne speeches. Let’s hope they’re not paying any attention to this one. Let’s just hope they’re not paying any attention to this one.”

In closing, I want to urge the members on the other side to reflect on the past two years of their time as boosters for a government that offers no hope for those who are being beset upon by increased costs, whether it be by hydro rates that were increased not by Stephen Harper but by this government, by increased ferry fees that were not increased by anybody but this government, by declining services in health, by declining services in education, everything going wanting with respect to seniors care. Home care is in chaos. Continuing care doesn’t seem to even be on the radar for this government. Seniors are being put upon. It’s time, long past time, for us to do better.

At the second-year point of a mandate in a government, surely to goodness there’s an idea or two over there. We heard members on this side of the House and some members on that side of the House make reference to the wonderful things that go on in their communities. I can attest to that. I’ve been to all of those communities as Leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition. There’s a tremendous amount of potential in this province. It’s being squandered.

Imagine, those at home, people in this House, what we could do if 85 people came to work to try and make life better for British Columbians rather than just moving on to the next day.

[1735]

D. McRae: I’m pleased to stand and rise in this chamber. I’ve had many opportunities to rise in this chamber since 2009 when I was first elected, and I’ve had many vantage points. I’ve been sitting there. I’ve sat there — several times over there.

I’ve had a chance to listen many speeches. Again, I had a chance to listen to the Leader of the Opposition give his take on a speech which I’m not sure whether it was listened to or not. Before we get to the response and such, I want to take some time to do the important things, obviously.

We aren’t here by ourselves, obviously. We’re here with the support of our family. I’d like to take a few seconds just to recognize and say thank you to my family, who’ve been such a rock for me: my lovely wife, Deanne; my daughter Gracie, who is now in grade 6 at Puntledge Park; and my daughter Chloe, who is in kindergarten at Puntledge Park.

Truthfully, I would be surprised to find out they’re actually watching my speech today. In fact, I didn’t even tell them I was giving my speech today. But you know what? Chloe’s bedtime is 7:30, and if we ever need that extra sort of oomph to get her to fall asleep, I’m sure my wife has lovingly taped this on the PVR and we can help them along that way.

As well, I’d like to recognize my constituency staff. Dianne Lineker, my constituency assistant Rosanne Gerritsen, and Donald Taylor work very hard in the of-
[ Page 5821 ]
fice in Courtenay to make sure that we’re supporting the 65,000 residents of Comox Valley.

Comox Valley, as is obvious to many…. For those who aren’t sure where Comox Valley is, it’s about a 2½-to-three-hour drive north of Victoria, encompassing the municipalities of the village of Cumberland, the town of Comox and the city of Courtenay. Of course, we have the unincorporated areas — places like Royston and Union Bay, Murrayville, Black Creek, etc. — just great places. There’s Hornby and Denman islands as well, I can’t forget.

Sadly, I was in the news not too long ago. I hate being in the news if I can possibly avoid it. I had an opportunity to vacate a ministry portfolio to better serve my constituents and my family. While I regret, in many ways, leaving that ministry, I also get the benefits of spending time in the Comox Valley a bit more than I did before. But as I left, I must say, very much, thank you to the individuals who supported me directly in the minister’s office while I was there. Kirsten O’Byrne, Valerie McKnight, Ed Sem and Joan Dick did absolutely great service trying to organize a minister who is often hard to organize. My opportunities and my time there were made better by them. I miss them all and wish them luck. I know they will be well served with the new minister.

Lastly, I’d like to recognize a colleague of ours who is not here today, but I’m looking forward to seeing him soon. The member for Richmond-Steveston is obviously recovering right now. I have sort of a double reason to acknowledge him. Not only do I want him to get better soon, because he is a great presence in the Legislature…. He does a great job representing his constituents. He does not know this, but he is actually my office roommate now in the Legislature.

Because he wasn’t there, I looked around to decide which office was the one he would want. I decided he wanted the smaller of the two offices we share — the one with the lesser view and the one with the mould in the corner. I, on the other hand, agreed that I wanted the bigger, better office. I will celebrate that in front of him as soon as he comes back, and enjoy it.

Now, I also had the opportunity to follow the Leader of the Opposition. I was looking forward to having so many members opposite here to enjoy my speech. I’m glad they’re all still here today because they want to make sure that I’m truthful. One thing that is consistent, I must say…. When I came to the chamber I always expected people to acknowledge: “Well, the throne speech did a couple good things, and we don’t agree with some of the other things.” But I must say, the opposition are incredibly consistent. They will always be against everything all the time.

It took the Leader of the Opposition about 30 seconds to get into sarcasm and negativity. That’s okay. Maybe that’s what people want in their opposition. But I know in government they want us to be positive, to look for opportunities for British Columbians, to make sure we lead this province to a better place.

I must say, to his credit — and I will give credit where credit is due — he did recognize a new school being built, a school that’s really important in his riding. It’s because this province, this government — we make sure we are growing the economy to make some of those strategic investments. We would not be rebuilding a great school, Belmont, without British Columbia’s economy doing better and better every year.

[1740]

Now, I’ve only been in the Legislature since 2009, but I look down the aisles here and I see colleagues who have been here before my time. Because of their hard work and the hard work that we’re doing today, we can make those benefits.

But you know what? It’s not just in that riding. I’m going to choose another one — Wellington high school in Nanaimo, a riding two hours north of us. Again, a new build being done there. Why? Because we’re making those strategic investments in the economy so we make sure that our youth are better served. I think it’s important we continue to do these things.

The opposition was talking about, again…. I’ll be honest. I only listened to the first eight or nine minutes to make some quick notes about things from the Leader of the Opposition, his points. He talked about the throne speech. In his opinion, it was not spectacular.

I don’t think people in this day and age are looking for Hail Marys. I don’t think they’re looking for a change of direction. They are looking for consistency, because they recognize that B.C. is on course in a positive way. People are saying they want stability, they want a fair level of taxation and they want a diverse economy.

That is why not only did they vote for us in 2013, that’s why they voted for us in 2009, 2005 and 2001. For four years the one thing I can say about the electorate of British Columbia is they have been incredibly consistent in saying to the people of this Legislature: “This is what we want in our electorate.” I want to say thank you very much to them.

The other thing the member opposite talked about was hydro rates going up. Yes, they are going up. But today I had an opportunity to see one of the reasons why this is happening. I came to the Legislature a little late today. Why? Because I went to the community of Campbell River.

In Campbell River we are basically reinvesting in John Hart dam. Over $1 billion is being invested in that facility. People would be surprised. For a billion dollars, you’re not even getting a new dam. You are getting new spillways. I had an opportunity to see that 185 individuals in Campbell River are working on this project. When it ramps up to full capacity, about 360 individuals will be doing it.

It’s a four-year project. They are going to have 50 sub companies working on site to supply the build. Today
[ Page 5822 ]
when I had an opportunity to tour with the mayor of Campbell River, we were able to see two large tunnels that are being constructed in Campbell River. They are replacing a spillway that is 60 years old that is not seismically safe.

They are actually tunnelling into the bedrock of the property to make sure that if there is ever an earthquake — and statistically we know it’s coming — we want to make sure that both the electricity supply and also the water supply for Campbell River are going to be looked after.

After this billion-dollar investment is done by B.C. Hydro, there’s still more work to be done. B.C. Hydro and the government of British Columbia are able to make these choices. Why? Because we’re growing the economy of this province. But sometimes you do need to invest in heritage assets. For 60 years we’ve used this asset incredibly well. We want to make sure it’s there for another 100 years for the residents of British Columbia to enjoy that heritage power.

The other thing the opposition talked about is how we’re not looking after seniors. I’ll give you an example, just one example in the Comox Valley, where this is not true.

The member opposite, who said he toured British Columbia, the Leader of the Opposition, might have missed two of the biggest hospital builds going on in the province of British Columbia right now. Between Campbell River and Comox Valley over $600 million of taxpayers’ money is being invested in health care in the north Island. In Campbell River there will be a hospital that will accommodate approximately 100 beds — I’ll just give rough numbers — and in the Comox Valley we’ll have 160 beds.

Between those two hospitals there will be 260 beds of modern health care in the north Island. That’s not just for older residents. It’s also for younger residents. It’s for all residents and those who visit our area.

Added to that, because that’s not just what’s happening…. I was also pleased to see the Minister of Health last year and Island Health have made investments in hospice, especially in the Comox Valley.

In the next several months we’ll see an opportunity to open four hospice beds. It’s a place that, often, we prefer not to have to think about. But the reality is, as we have an aging population, we want to be there to support the families and the individuals and make sure their final days are in dignity.

Hospice, not just in our community but across the province, works so hard to make sure that seniors and those in the need of their services are looked after and treated in the best possible way as they go forward.

I’m really excited to see these beds open up in the next several months. Our community — whether it is service clubs, whether it is the hospice organization, whether it is various groups that help support this, whether it’s community members who have come out and raised money….We want to make sure that our seniors are given this opportunity, and I know across the province of British Columbia, those offer the same opportunities.

[1745]

Lastly, the other thing that caught me as a surprise is when the Leader of the Opposition talked about how LNG is a pipedream that’s not going to support the province of British Columbia’s workers. Well, I can say firsthand that that is just absolutely wrong. The reason I know that…. Here’s a prime example.

Several months ago I had the opportunity to be in Fort St. John as the former Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation. One of the things we often do is we want to make sure we visit the Work B.C. offices. If anybody in this chamber has an opportunity to go into a Work B.C. office, one of the things that’s very obvious when you walk in is there’s a board that actually lists job opportunities for individuals to come in and apply to.

Now, in many communities, if you go in you’ll see, as we call it, a billboard. It is there on the wall, and there’ll be several jobs in a whole bunch of different categories, opportunities for people to apply into. But in Fort St. John, I must say, it was slightly different there than anywhere else I’d seen in British Columbia.

“What was different?” you ask. Well, not only was the entire billboard full of job opportunities; they actually ran out of room and were forced to start using the wall below the billboard, down below. As they go forward, down below, it actually got to the stage, in certain sectors in the economy up there, where they were hitting the floor. There were literally seven feet of job opportunities in various sectors to help British Columbians look for work in an area.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

One of the reasons is because LNG is happening right now in British Columbia. It is happening in terms of $8 billion of investment that’s happening in communities large and small. This is allowing companies to get to that place to make that final investment decision.

I think we’ve done incredibly the right thing going forward to take advantage of this opportunity. We’ve set the table in taxation and environmental rules to make sure we have not lowered the bar. We are making sure it is a place where British Columbians can come and have that investment.

Now the companies need to make that decision. I’m looking forward to the next several months, if not years, to see companies making that decision. When they make that decision, it’s not based on the here and now. They are looking decades forward to make sure that they are getting that investment and providing those jobs for our people of British Columbia.

As well, often when I listen to members’ opposition,
[ Page 5823 ]
it’s a bit of a gloom-and-doom kind of environment. You know, the world is still in a very tentative stage. As you look around and see some of the opportunities in Canada and North America, especially in British Columbia, you realize that not everybody has the benefits of a diverse, strong economy that we do. I follow international news with great regularity. I want to see what’s happening, because I know it has an impact on us in British Columbia.

I look to Europe, and I look to a small nation of ten million people, a nation that you could easily fit many, many times over in land space into British Columbia. I look to Greece. Greece is one of those cradles of civilization. Yet because of an interconnected economic world, we want to make sure we follow those kinds of events.

In Greece, if you look around, their unemployment is at about 25 percent right now. Their economy since 2009 has contracted — not grown but contracted — by 26 percent. As a nation of ten million people — if you want to look at it, it’s basically British Columbia, Alberta and a little bit of Saskatchewan all thrown together but just in a heck of a lot smaller place — they have a combined debt of $300 billion. It is a huge, major concern. They’re part, as we members in this chamber know, of the euro.

It’s very important that we want the world economy to be strong, the European economy to be strong. Even if British Columbia doesn’t trade a lot with Greece today, we want to make sure that the euro is a strong economy. We do not need more instability.

We watch with Greece and how some of those impacts are, potentially, on us. But it’s not all doom and gloom. I know certain individuals might look around and look at the currency fluctuations in Canada, and it has changed a lot. In the last 52 weeks we’ve seen the Canadian dollar, compared to the American dollar, fluctuate as high as 94 cents in the past year, and recently it was as low as 78 cents.

Well, these come with both challenges and opportunities. If you’re looking for an opportunity, perhaps, to buy American goods — yes, the prices of those goods have gone up if you’re a Canadian company that’s purchasing using Canadian dollars. If you’re a tourist looking to go south to the States — yes, that has a challenge. If you’re looking, as a family, to perhaps visit a place like Disneyland, your holiday has gone up substantially.

There are also other opportunities here as well. British Columbia has been, will be and will continue to be an export-based economy. We want to offer an opportunity to make sure our goods that the world needs, our resources, are accessible. Sometimes a lower dollar provides those opportunities.

I’m really pleased to see that as the Canadian dollar was not perfect for everyone, it does allow industries and sectors like the forest sector to export in a more attractive environment. Maybe it’ll attract more investment.

[1750]

I want to make sure we have that opportunity to basically see if we can attract back some of the workers who perhaps have left British Columbia to work in the oil fields in northern Alberta. Many people in my community have gone off to take advantage of those incredibly high-paying jobs. They all leave reluctantly, but they are lured by the great wages.

Forest companies often cannot compete with those wages. It is definitely a challenge.

That being said, as families leave or perhaps a husband or a wife takes the job and commutes back, they say they want to stay in the Comox Valley. They want to stay on the east coast of Vancouver Island or British Columbia. Yes, there is, I’m sure, some turmoil in some of these families as the oil sector in Alberta has changed, but it’s also an opportunity for B.C. companies to step up and bring back some of the workers to British Columbia.

I look forward to those families coming back — hopefully, bringing back a nest egg with them, as well, if they’ve worked really hard the last several years — and having a chance to make sure they establish themselves back in British Columbia and continue to stay here and have their children go to school in our province and make sure that they enjoy everything that British Columbia has to offer.

We also talk in the throne speech about something we’ve been talking about for a long time, and that’s the B.C. jobs plan and how it focuses on eight key sectors. I’d like to talk about, just in a micro way, how these sectors sort of impact one community. The community I know best, obviously, is the Comox Valley.

One of the sectors we focus on is international education. Across the province, whether communities be large or small, international education has a major impact. People want to come to British Columbia because we have great educational institutions and we also have a reputation, worldwide, of being a place where our educational institutions provide solid education. Whether it is at the K-to-12 level, we have young individuals wanting to come — whether it is Lower Mainland or Vancouver Island, communities large and small — to do two things. One is to learn English, but also to be, basically, a huge contributor to our communities.

Comox Valley, for example. We’ll have about 250 students — not all for a full year; some will come for two or three months — come to the Comox Valley, for a couple of reasons. What does this do for us? Well, it provides more multicultural opportunities for our young people. That’s not a problem at all.

Like many communities around the province of British Columbia, sadly, we’ve had declining enrolment. Our population keeps going up, but our school population goes down. It’s an opportunity to make sure that the school classrooms are still full — an opportunity for teachers to keep working, to make sure we don’t have as many layoffs. It also gives a chance for young people to
[ Page 5824 ]
have a chance to basically understand that there’s a larger world out there than just British Columbia or just the Comox Valley.

It’s not just K to 12, obviously. Whether it is a large institution, perhaps a university, like UBC, or a small community college, it’s the same idea. International students come to our communities and provide great benefit and value to all members of our community. I’m really pleased to see that that occurs.

I mentioned a little bit about forestry. Forestry has been a huge part, as the Leader of the Opposition talked about, of B.C. history. It has been something not just in the history of Confederation but, obviously, prior to European contact. The First Nations understood the value of forests in our province.

Mr. Speaker, you probably know that B.C. in 2013 was the world’s largest exporter of softwood lumber. We are the largest exporter of lumber, but we also make sure that we do it without just relying on one market. We saw the problems in 2009 when you rely on just one market, and we saw that, as well, in past history.

What have we done? For the last 15 years, we have been making sure we have opportunities in countries like China, India, Japan. At the same time, we are not going to take away from the importance of the American market. This is an opportunity to make sure that we have good investment, sustainable investment, in our province. It’s something we’ve done very well.

I’m really pleased that the minister is here today — the Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Minister, who works really hard. I am staggered by the amount of workload he has to make sure that that industry remains vibrant and successful. I know he travels not just the province of British Columbia; he travels the world when necessary to make sure that people are aware of the forest practices and the opportunity that our province does provide.

Now, when we talk about growing the economy, we talk about investments in transportation. Transportation comes in many ways. Obviously, British Columbia is incredibly well positioned. It’s well positioned not just for us as a province, but it’s positioned for the nation as a whole — whether it is items leaving the port or coming to the Port of Vancouver, the Port of Prince Rupert or smaller ports that people don’t always think of: the Port of Port Alberni on Vancouver Island, Port of Nanaimo. These are opportunities, entry points into Canada, that provide great access to the resources that our province has and can sell to the world but also how we can bring in goods to British Columbia and Canada.

[1755]

I know because of growing the economy we’ve had the opportunity to make really key investments in the province in other areas of transportation. For example, years before I became MLA for Comox Valley, because the economy was moving in the right direction, the province made choices to invest in air transportation. Like in many communities around the province of British Columbia, we invested in terminal access points in the Comox Valley. Over 300,000 individuals either leave or come to the Comox Valley through that airport every single year. It’s created great economic revenue for our community, and they work so hard as an airport commission to make sure we continue to grow and cherish that investment. As it grows, so does the Comox Valley.

On a smaller scale but one that has a huge impact…. About 20 years ago in the Comox Valley a bridge burnt down. For whatever reason, it was never put as a high-priority replacement. I was so pleased when I saw the three mayors of the Comox Valley — the mayors of Cumberland, Comox and Courtenay — all come together, with the chair of the regional district, and say to the Minister of Transportation: “We need some transportation improvement in our community. We’ve thought about everything that our communities could use, and every single one of those communities could use a little bit of something.”

They said: “Together we’ve decided what is the most important priority for the Comox Valley.” They decided that this bridge needed to be replaced because it will benefit everybody. It will benefit people coming to the Comox Valley. It’ll benefit farmers who have a hard time getting their large equipment across this temporary bridge. It would be a good investment. I’m really pleased that the Ministry of Transportation has made some initial investments and planning for this.

I’m looking forward to the Minister of Transportation, sometime in the future, moving it one more step forward — one that’ll have an opportunity, especially with the new hospital being constructed, that will actually benefit north Island residents as they come to the new hospital in the Comox Valley or tourists who come through the airport, which I mentioned earlier, as they want to travel to the north Island and see some of the great tourist opportunities.

Today, like I do pretty much every week, I drove to Victoria. I drove over the Malahat. Today it was nice. It was light out. It was a good weather day. The roads were dry. There wasn’t a problem. But what did I notice as I drove across the Malahat summit? I looked over, and I saw that we had invested once again into the highways of the province.

The Malahat is one of the more dangerous areas to travel, both in terms of the speed of some of the drivers but also some of the weather conditions. We have put a median up for another 2½ kilometres on that road. Why? Well, it was identified as being one of those pinch points, or one of those danger areas, on the Island Highway. I was really pleased — with the Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation, just several weeks ago — to come down to Victoria and celebrate the Malahat, that little extension, not just completed on time but on budget.
[ Page 5825 ]

It’s an example of why we make those investments — by growing the economy of this province for the benefit of all. That road will be travelled by 25,000 residents today and 25,000 residents every day, going forward. It’s important to make those investments, and we’ve done a great job doing that.

That’s two. I’ve got to two so far, and I’ve got eight. I know that the members opposite, in the opposition, are going: “There can’t be more.” And I say: “Oh yes, there is.” We talk about technology and green economy. Oftentimes people associate that with the really large urban sectors — maybe Victoria, Lower Mainland or even Kelowna, in the Interior. Clean and green technology is something that can happen anywhere. Often it does happen in communities large and small as we continue to make high-speed Internet a priority in this province.

Comox Valley traditionally has been a resource-based economy — fishing, logging, agriculture. We’re saying we can be much more than that. You look around Comox Valley, and you see areas where we have tech leaders, whether they’re quietly working alone in their own community or whether they’re out networking. But we can do more.

I was really pleased…. I was at an event with the Minister of Advanced Education not too long ago in the Comox Valley. Actually, it was on January 23, where he led a panel discussion talking about opportunities for technology in our community. It was all revolving around the concept of developing and supporting the local tech ecosystem and celebrating the new partnership between Comox Valley Economic Development Society and Innovation Island. We used North Island College as the location for this announcement.

One of the things is…. We have these individuals in our communities. We all have these people in our communities. We want to make sure that they have that critical mass, or growing in opportunity, and realize that if you’re a young person, you don’t necessarily need leave a community of 65,000, like the Comox Valley, and go to the big city. You can stay in your own community many times and can actually grow your tech business right there.

That was, by the way, job sector 3. Tourism is obviously something that we’ve been very proud of in the province. I’ve had the luxury of travelling to every province in Canada. After looking at all of the other provinces and what they had to offer — maybe I’m a little bit biased — I kind of believe that we actually have, by far, the best reason to come to this province than any other province, in terms of natural beauty and opportunity.

[1800]

I look around, and the thing I like about British Columbia is we are so diverse. As an MLA — we’ve all had this opportunity — you do travel the province in your work capacity. You have the opportunity to really see that there is a staggering difference of opportunity and beauty as we go across the province.

You visit eastern British Columbia, say, the Kootenays and southeast B.C. Just incredibly strong, high mountains, and the landscape and the animals are just different there.

Interjection.

D. McRae: The member from Cranbrook is here today. He has been nothing but a strong champion of not just his riding but pretty much every riding in the Kootenays. One of the things we often say, the member for the Kootenay — I think it’s Kootenay…. Oh, I’m not going to say it wrong. Anyway, the lovely gentleman who lives in Cranbrook is a great booster. It’s basically the bookend to Vancouver Island, where I’m from.

We’re on Vancouver Island today, and we see everything from whales to mountains and skiing. The Lower Mainland is obviously incredibly cosmopolitan. As a former Agriculture Minister, I’d be remiss not to talk about the orchard opportunities and ranching opportunities of the interior of British Columbia. They celebrate not only what they do there, but they promote agritourism in our province — and in our community, too, as we see the world changing.

I mentioned earlier about the Canadian dollar sometimes being a benefit and sometimes being an opportunity. As we have a lower Canadian dollar, I think we have an opportunity to see more Americans and foreign visitors coming to our province. You’re also going to have an opportunity for British Columbia residents to make a decision to stay home in British Columbia. I won’t call it a staycation because I have a feeling they’ll be travelling around the province of British Columbia.

I want to take this opportunity, if I can, for a plug for my community, which I think is a great year-round tourism opportunity. You know, it hasn’t been an easy year for the ski hill at Mt. Washington on Vancouver Island. That being said, we are very lucky we have a ski hill in our community. They work incredibly hard to provide opportunities. They’re a great employer. I look forward to maybe later this year or next year taking my family up and enjoying the ski activities, whether it is cross-country or downhill or the tube park and such. They want to make sure they can provide as much opportunity for all the tourists.

While we have the beaches and mountains in the summer, sometimes you can’t rely on just that natural beauty. Like many communities as well, we celebrate a number of festivals that will attract individuals. We just left January where we celebrated WinterJam, where we brought in musical acts in the Comox Valley to provide not only a combination of tourist activities but local enjoyment of great musicians. An example was we had Michelle Wright, if you’re into country. She played the Comox
[ Page 5826 ]
Valley not too long ago and did a great job.

We do the arts, obviously. Later on this year we’ll be celebrating Elevate the Arts with the city of Courtenay downtown. We’ll actually block off most of the streets and give children and adults an opportunity to embrace art, take part and be active participants in artistic opportunities.

In June, as well, you probably have heard of the B.C. Shellfish and Seafood Festival. It’s a great opportunity to celebrate something we have in our community and on Vancouver Island that is very unique. In fact, over half of the shellfish industry in British Columbia is based in the Comox Valley. We’re incredibly lucky because, again, it’s done sustainably. It’s long-lasting. It’s a product that not only British Columbia residents love but the world wants. We export many of our seafood products and shellfish products outside of this province to make sure that others get to enjoy them.

Later on this summer we have the Filberg Festival and Nautical Days. Again, artistically….

The city of Courtenay this year is doing something you don’t get to do very often. In fact, you only get to do it once. They’re celebrating their 100th anniversary this year. A hundred years ago this year, they were incorporated as a municipality. They are making sure those opportunities are going to be celebrated throughout the year.

Lastly, as I am down to my last minute or two, I want to talk briefly about agrifoods. Just this past weekend we had the Vancouver Island agricultural show in the Comox Valley, celebrating not just Comox Valley agriculture but Vancouver Island agriculture. It’s an opportunity to understand that people, whether they’re new farmers…. Sometimes I’ve met individuals there who went into farming for a year or two. I’ve met individuals who are multigenerational. I’ve met First Nations individuals whose families have been basically harvesting the bounty of Vancouver Island for thousands and thousands of years.

One thing that has to be said, and I’ve talked about only a handful of the sectors that we celebrate in British Columbia, is we do indeed have an incredibly diverse economy, one that our citizens and the world celebrates. As I sit here and listen to the opposition as they doom and gloom their way through things that are just not great, I say we stay the course, we make sure that we have a good taxation environment, we make sure we have a diverse economy, and we make sure we are proud of this province. We constantly say that.

[1805]

If they’re going to sit there and snipe, as they often do, that’s their business. But you know what? The world doesn’t want negativity. It wants people who are leaders taking this province to a better place, and I’m pleased to stand up and support today in this chamber the throne speech that we delivered just last week.

K. Corrigan: I’m going to stand up for as long as my throat stands up. We’ll see how well I do here this evening.

I am happy to speak in response to the throne speech. Initially, what I’d like to do is I’d like to thank a few people in my constituency, particularly Cate Jones and Isaac Vallee, who are my constituency assistants, and Heidi Reid over here, actually, in Victoria, who is a wonderful legislative assistant. Also, I would like to thank many, many volunteers, both in my office and also the thousands of people who volunteer in my community of Burnaby and make it a better place. I also want to thank people like Lance and Carol and Lorraine and all the people that work in my executive.

I want to pay special recognition to my family. I don’t always recognize them here, but I particularly want to recognize and congratulate my husband, Derek Corrigan, on winning his tenth local election and fourth as mayor of the city of Burnaby. Burnaby has been a BCA-led community for over a quarter of a century. Many of us, of course, will know that the BCA is a NDP-affiliated organization. I’m very proud of the contribution that he and many BCA councillors and school trustees have made to the community of Burnaby.

I also am very proud of the four children that we’ve raised — four ethical, thoughtful, bright, accomplished and just plain good young people that we’ve raised. A tribute to and thankfulness to have Sean and his partner, Liane; Darcy and Nat; my son Patrick and Kaleigh, who just bought a home. They’ve struggled hard.

You know, they lived in our basement for two and a half years. I’ll tell you, they were in our basement, they were living in our home, and they were far from lazy. They were working hard — sometimes working two jobs, my daughter-in-law. They were there because, in a really tough place to buy a home, they wanted to save money. So they worked hard and have been able to do that, but that’s because they lived with us. Like most young people living at home, they are very hard-working.

Finally, my love out to my daughter Kelsey — and congratulations, as she’s gone off to tackle law school in Saskatchewan this year. She gets the double whammy of adjusting to the academic life and the climate of Saskatchewan, which she has found interesting. She found out what a block heater was fairly quickly.

I want to make a couple of comments about the throne speech, and then I’m going to talk a little bit more about my community of Burnaby. I know people have talked about it as a do-nothing, no-content speech. The thing that was interesting to me was that after two years of hearing virtually nothing except for LNG from the Premier and promises that LNG would wipe out our debt — two years of simplistic slogans and promises and a promise, more specifically, to have LNG up and running by 2015 — there is barely a reference to LNG in this throne speech.

For those that voted for the members on the other side,
[ Page 5827 ]
while it undoubtedly helped with the election, I think, ultimately, what it does is it damages the credibility of the government, or it certainly should.

[1810]

This throne speech, as well…. Instead of that earlier self-professed, laser-like focus, we suddenly discover that we have a diverse province. I think six or seven times in this throne speech, and twice in one sentence, the word “diversity” was used, which is what we on this side of the House have been urging this government to recognize but which has been ignored for the last two years.

The Leader of the Opposition said of listening to the throne speech that that was a half hour of our life that we would never get back. But I would say that what we have done…. It’s actually more like two years of squandered opportunities that we will not get back, because we were not paying attention to what we should have paid, which is a diversified economy.

We have a very diverse economy in my community of Burnaby. The Leader of the Opposition and I and some of the other members recently did some business tours of Burnaby. Actually, the Leader of the Opposition has been several times to Burnaby, particularly visiting some of the high-tech businesses. We have a really strong high-tech sector in Burnaby.

Canadian Motion Picture Park — I toured with Wolf Isachsen and Alec Fatalevich and Jennifer Fatalevich — the largest studio complex in Canada. The film industry generally in Burnaby had a report a couple of years ago, so the numbers are probably higher now — I hope they are — of $154 million of direct activity in Burnaby because of the film industry and $408 million of direct and indirect businesses together in Burnaby.

We also went to D-Wave Systems. It’s quantum computers, which are the most advanced in the world. It has just had further investment — blue-chip investors from around the world.

We have Electronic Arts, and we have Schneider Electric and General Fusion — all high-tech businesses that are doing extremely well and providing good high-tech jobs in Burnaby for Burnaby residents and other residents from around the region.

I’ve attended several cement pourings or tours for wonderful projects in Burnaby over the past few months — Shape Properties. I’ve got to say, kudos to Shape. It’s working with the city of Burnaby on that wonderful project. When we went to look at that, several of us said we thought we might want to move to Burnaby North and vie for that seat because of the beautiful development that’s happening in that area.

Aviara. Ledingham McAllister projects. Destination Toyota’s first concrete ceremony. And, of course, congratulations to Aziz Ahamed, the president, who has headed up that expansion. I think there are dozens, or maybe 20, Destination Toyota locations that Mr. Ahamed and his family head up.

One of the results of all this development is that we have community resource centres — now four of them around Burnaby. They are achieved because of community bonusing, density bonusing, by the city of Burnaby. We have four locations around Burnaby that provide spaces to local non-profits at reduced rents, one of them in my riding at Metrotown, the Metrotown resource centre. The city has been very successful in providing numerous facilities that have made a substantial contribution to community life.

I want to talk about a few areas of concern that I have for my community. Two of them are Burnaby Hospital and a real concern about something that I am very, very concerned about, which is lack of adequate funding to the Burnaby board of education and therefore to the students of Burnaby.

Burnaby Hospital is an old hospital. It was a hospital that the Liberal government, right before the last election, promised it was going to replace. There is nothing. There has been nothing in the budget since that promise, and it continues to decay. We have a history, a well-publicized history, of a high number of C. difficile deaths that were directly, according to the doctors and others…. The heads of departments at Burnaby Hospital, the doctors, said that that was directly related to the aging infrastructure.

[1815]

The city of Burnaby wanted to consider relocating the hospital to a site at Burnaby and Willingdon, but unfortunately, in the rash of sales of land, the province sold off that property, so that land is now gone and will never be able to be used for public purposes again.

Real concerns about the hospital. I want to just quote a woman who said I could quote her but didn’t want to mention her name because it talks about her son. She didn’t want his name mentioned. She said:

“I’d like to comment on the unfortunate state of Burnaby Hospital. My 18-year-old son had a couple of in-patient experiences at the hospital in September. He was admitted with cellulitis and bacteremia caused by strep G and MRSA, yet twice he was placed in rooms in close quarters with two other elderly patients, posing a risk to them. I’m certain if the other patients and their families knew what my son had, they’d be very concerned with the transition of infection, especially as they all shared one washroom. This is in contrast to other hospitals, where my son has been treated and sensibly placed in isolation.”

She goes on a little bit later, saying:

“Burnaby Hospital is an aging, overloaded facility. Despite it being five minutes away from our house, I’m afraid that we’ll have to rush to bring my son to Vancouver General Hospital, where the facilities are superior. This poses a risk to my son, as every minute counts when seeking emergency treatment for sudden-onset bacteremia.”

That constituent is very concerned and reflects the personal side — a story that reflects the personal side — of the problems associated with that very, very old building that needs to be replaced.

It hasn’t happened yet, and as I said, we’ve had deaths associated with it. We have improved the cleanliness
[ Page 5828 ]
of the hospital, but the reality is that you cannot fix the problems with Burnaby Hospital without replacing it. Right now it’s very expensive to try to clean it, to try to keep it clean. The hospital needs to be replaced.

I also wanted to mention quickly a concern about a few issues that are regional in nature. One of them is the very unfortunate decision by the Environment Minister to reject a Metro Vancouver bylaw that is necessary to increase recycling and property management of garbage. That will have catastrophic consequences throughout the province.

As the Metro Vancouver board chair, Greg Moore, said a few months ago when this baffling rejection of the bylaw was announced: “This decision means the commitment of our citizens to recycling and waste avoidance becomes virtually unachievable. The result will be increased costs for residents and businesses, and rather than being recycled, materials will simply be shipped to dumps, where they will rot for centuries and create problems for future generations.”

For a government that’s supposed to be concerned about the environment, it is very unfortunate for half the population of the province that this decision has been made, for whatever reasons — probably because of some friend somewhere that has come to the government looking for assistance. In fact, what Mr. Moore was concerned about is coming to pass.

A couple of other things I wanted to talk about fall under the heading of TransLink. Government talks about being good managers, yet at TransLink we have an example of $200 million being spent on fare gates. That’s way over budget — $200 million that’s been spent — and they’re not working. They haven’t started, and we know that it’s going to cost more every single year to run that system. Operational costs of…. I don’t know what it’s at now. I think the last I heard — it keeps going up — is $20 million a year to save something like $8 million a year in fares.

It makes no sense, no financial sense whatsoever. That’s an investment that has been completely wasted, along with BCeSIS and other brilliant things that this government has done.

[1820]

To suggest that this government are good managers is absolutely ludicrous. When you have decisions being imposed on local government…. That one was imposed, as other decisions, like the transit referendum. Most of the mayors are valiantly out there trying to have this referendum pass. They believe — like we on this side of the House have said — that investing in transit is important. Having an improved transit system is important.

Yet this was a referendum that nobody asked for. We have a mess of a transit system entirely caused by this government repeatedly imposing its will on local government, creating a governance system which does not work and then repeatedly imposing its will and making lousy decisions for transit in the Lower Mainland.

Now the people of greater Vancouver are left between a rock and a hard place, not knowing what to do — not wanting to put money into a system that is completely broken because of this government directly but, at the same time, believing, as I do, that what we want to do is we want to invest in transit for the future. So two unfortunate areas where government has treated local government with disregard, with disdain, often, and making baffling, poor choices that will cost money and lead to greater inefficiencies, as opposed to efficiencies.

I want to spend a couple of minutes now…. I imagine I have a few more minutes before we finish today, and I want to, at least, start talking about advanced education. Advanced education is my spokesperson area, and it’s one that I’m very pleased to have been appointed to. I believe, in the area of education, generally, that it is the most important thing. The most important thing that we can do is to provide a cost-effective and accessible education system, both at the K-to-12 level and the post-secondary.

You know, with regard to the K-to-12 level…. I haven’t spoken about that. I keep in close touch with the local school trustees. I talk to them regularly. I talk to parents. I talk to students. I talk to teachers, who deliver that education. They are a dedicated group, I must say. Unfortunately, they are going to be faced yet again, like last year, with having to take money out of our classrooms and away from students.

I know that Burnaby has done a tremendous job. They’ve done the cuts as effectively as they could, tried to keep the cuts away from the classroom. But even there, some teachers had to be cut. Unfortunately, far more will have to be cut this year, because the funding that this government provides does not come close to allowing a status quo delivery of services. It’s very concerning to me. I think that we need to keep the K-to-12 system well-funded so that we don’t lose more students to private schools, which is what is partially happening in this province.

I think that’s very unfortunate. We need to have broad support for our public education system in the middle class. We need to have everybody, people across the spectrum, going to our public schools so that we keep the broad support. You see it in some American states, where more and more students have gone to private schools. What happens eventually is that the middle class abandons the public school system, and it becomes a two-tier system.

We are heading in that direction. We’re not there yet. Our public schools do a fabulous job, and parents, for the most part, support the public schools and have their kids go there. And so they should, because the teachers do a fabulous job.

If you actually look at achievement levels in university, public school graduates do better in some areas. I know that’s been tracked at the University of British Columbia. They do better than the private school graduates do.

[1825]

I want to turn for a few minutes to advanced education. As I said a minute ago, educating young people — and sometimes older people — is the most important thing that we can do. We have a province that claims that we need to have skilled workers, that we need to have literate and well-educated people to fit the jobs that are going to be available tomorrow. And yet what has this government done?

This government not only has not done what it’s done in other areas. Not only has it not increased funding in order to keep up with inflation. It has actually cut. Keeping up with inflation would be one thing, but it has not done that. Not only has it not done that. It has cut.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

It’s cut the B.C. budget; $51 million in cuts to post-secondary education over the last three years. What that is doing is it’s forcing colleges and universities across British Columbia to consider layoffs. It’s causing massive program cuts and student fees that are being increased to deal with increasing deficits.

Noting the hour, I will take my place, adjourn debate and reserve my right to speak again in the future.

K. Corrigan 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 6:26 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