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 23, 2015

Morning Sitting

Volume 20, Number 1

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

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2015

The House met at 10:02 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

ERASING BULLYING

J. Thornthwaite: It’s a pleasure to rise in the House today to talk about a program that’s having a profound effect on the well-being of students across British Columbia.

In June 2012 our government introduced the ERASE Bullying strategy. It’s a ten-point comprehensive prevention and intervention plan designed to promote positive mental health and address student safety in schools throughout the province. Under the ERASE Bullying strategy, B.C. has become a national leader in bullying prevention and is the first province in Canada to develop a comprehensive approach to this issue. In fact, many other provinces have reached out to us to talk about how they can implement similar strategies in their own jurisdictions.

ERASE stands for expect respect and a safe education. Since it was launched, more than 10,000 educators and community partners have been trained to help them identify, address and resolve threats. The training includes a strong focus on on-line bullying harassment, which is particularly important because of the increased access youth have to mobile devices such as tablets and smartphones.

We know that the majority of on-line bullying is now done through a smartphone because it can be taken anywhere and is always connected to the Internet. This means bullying is no longer restricted to the hours of a school day. It can happen any time and often through a medium in which there is little or no adult supervision or guidance. It’s because of this that many youth believe being on line provides anonymity that allows them to get away with certain behaviour. One study estimates that more than half of teens and adolescents have been bullied on line and as many as one in three have been the target of a cyber threat.

[1005]

The ERASE Bullying strategy aims to combat cyberbullying by getting parents and educators involved. Through the strategy, the province offers training to help educators identify problem behaviour and provide guidance and conflict resolution.

Specifically, training helps them understand three key points: the importance of developing a response plan to cyberbullying, the importance of teaching students to use social media ethically and responsibly, and helping students remove harmful content from on-line platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. This last point is extremely important because many students have a misconception that on-line profiles are a safe place to share personal information.

The ERASE strategy is largely web-based so that it can make use of the same technology the kids are using. For example, the ERASE Bullying Twitter feed interacts directly with students on line and provides updates and tips on bullying prevention. The ERASE Bullying website provides a wide array of information for students and parents on conflict, bullying, early warning signs, youth suicide and background on cyberbullying and Internet slang.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

There is also an anonymous, confidential reporting tool that allows students to report bullying and other harmful behaviours without the fear of repercussions. That tool can be found at reportbullyingbc.ca. This is just one more way that students can reach out and ask for help any time, anywhere via computer or mobile device.

Because of the success of the ERASE Bullying strategy, new programs that specifically target schools to create student leaders have been adopted. Last month I was fortunate to speak at the ERASE Stand Up Symposium in Prince George. The goal of the Stand Up program is to teach a small group of students the leadership skills necessary to help build and promote positive school climates. The hope is that once they are armed with this knowledge, they will go out and inspire others in the school to do the same.

The Stand Up program has been a great success, reaching 5,500 elementary and secondary school students and mentoring 240 safe school ambassadors, who have developed safe school action plans. Stand Up was delivered in seven school districts throughout northern B.C., and I am happy to report that thanks to a $100,000 grant from the Ministry of Justice, the program will continue to build student leaders who can empower others to take a stand against bullying and other harmful behaviour.

The ERASE Bullying strategy has also put in place codes of conduct in 60 school districts across the province. Schools are signing formal protocols that will help guide educators and community partners as they work together to address student safety concerns. There are also designated safe schools coordinators and teams in every district to help address safety concerns. In North Vancouver our coordinator is Mr. Brad Baker.
[ Page 5966 ]

We also established the ERASE student advisory, which is responsible for drafting and launching provincial social media guidelines for schools and districts and will continue to advise the Minister of Education on bullying and student safety issues.

ERASE also focuses on early intervention and prevention. To that end, the ERASE provincial advisory council has created a committee to develop the provincial guidelines for violent threat risk assessment. This assessment, which will be used in conjunction with the codes of conduct adopted by all school districts, will help administrators identify students who have made threats or engaged in threatening behaviour.

These guidelines will also help administrators clearly define the difference between conflict and bullying and identify the conditions of bullying activity which involve an imbalance of power, intent to harm and repeated behaviour.

Bullying is not a rite of passage. At every school, every child should feel safe at home and at school. As parents and educators, we do our best to ensure that our children are happy and healthy. By empowering students to work together and take a stand against bullying, intolerance and harassment, we can build safer schools and increase safety in situations where we aren’t there to protect them.

D. Routley: I thank the member for bringing forward this very important issue today in the Legislature. This is an issue that affects so many children, so many people generally, and plagues them not only in their school years but throughout their lives.

One of the last comments by the mover of this topic was that we need these systems that she has described in order to protect children when we aren’t there. I think that’s the key element — when we are not there. In my experience as a school trustee, having watched the supervision in schools be reduced to the point where we cannot, face to face, confront the root causes of this bullying, I’ve seen that this is a significant issue.

[1010]

We can have programs, we can have mechanisms, but without people, we are not able to intervene. In schools in our province, I know through personal experience, having seen my own daughter bullied quite a few years ago in elementary school…. The lack of supervision in the schoolyard was a significant factor that led to the continuation of this. The bullies aren’t stupid. They know where the schoolground supervisor is. They move in a pack around the opposite side of the school, while the limited supervision takes care of what they can see.

People try as hard as they can to protect children and to work within the boundaries of what they’re permitted and able to do, but without people, we cannot prevent bullying. Cameras don’t prevent bullying. Computer programs don’t prevent bullying. People prevent bullying. We need to have adults that are able to identify when these things are beginning in order to intervene in a way that affects children and can teach them why and how to avoid these situations.

Waiting for a situation to develop to the point where things are being said and done on the Internet or in the schoolyard that can’t be pulled back, that could be perhaps mitigated but can’t be stopped…. We can’t unring a bell. Once something is out there in social media, it’s out there. This is something that we must prevent before we get to that point, and the way we do that is with real human intervention.

People are able to judge for themselves when they see these activities beginning in a school ground. When a child goes to explain what’s happening to them, often they aren’t able to adequately explain, so there’s a lag and a misunderstanding. It is common. I’ve seen it many times as a parent and as a school trustee. But if we have people supervising and able to offer adult supervision and intervention, we can prevent much of this from ever occurring in the first place, rather than having to mitigate its effect through expensive programming later.

This is an important issue. I know that it was a terribly traumatic time for my daughter when this happened to her. It took a long time to sort it out — something that could have been, I think, sorted out, and intervention could have occurred in a very simple and real and effective way, had there just been some adult eyes and sensitivity on the situation in the first place.

Without being partisan and blaming the government for education funding issues, I think that we need to consider how well we’re supporting students in schools with human, adult intervention and involvement.

I know that many of the members on the other side have experience in the school system as trustees, and I know that one of the members here has had a long and successful career as a teacher. I’m sure that he could verify that his effect as a person on children’s lives would have been far more effective than an intervening program on line — not that those programs aren’t important. But making them less necessary is, I think, the most effective thing that we can do as human beings, as adults and as people responsible for the safety of children.

J. Thornthwaite: Helping children deal with bullying, both on and off line, when adult supervision is not around, is precisely what the ERASE Bullying strategy is all about.

In June of last year I had the opportunity to work with social media expert Jesse Miller to produce a video about on-line safety. The video was created to explore the many other issues facing youth today, particularly cyberbullying. It’s our hope that our video can be used to raise awareness and start a dialogue between youth, parents and educators on how we can all become responsible digital citizens.

The video consists of a presentation Jesse makes to schools across the province, highlighting the dangers
[ Page 5967 ]
and pitfalls of social media. For example, what can happen when a proud teen posts a picture of his or her driver’s licence on line? How are your job prospects affected by employers looking to your on-line profiles to get a glimpse of your character?

[1015]

The video also includes interviews with students after Jesse’s presentation, giving them a chance to explain what they’ve learned and how this new information will change how they act on line.

For anyone curious about Internet safety or cyberbullying, I encourage them to check out the video on my website or check out the two videos with Jesse and Theresa Campbell answering parents’ questions on how to communicate with their children and help them be safe on line.

Promoting safe on-line habits and combatting cyberbullying are a large part of my job as an MLA. I first came to the issue personally because my kids introduced me to an app called Snapchat. They said when you take a picture, it would disappear after somebody looks at it. It doesn’t.

Like any parent, I want to keep my kids safe and ensure they think about the implications of what they do on line. I found the best way to do that was to educate myself about on-line safety. I encourage all parents to do that by checking out the ERASE Bullying website.

Technology changes so quickly, and it’s hard for anyone to keep up and still think about how to keep safe. Learn as much as you can, get savvy with the new technology and Internet lingo, and have an open, judgment-free discussion with your kids to keep them safe on line.

REDUCING THE RISK OF DIABETES

J. Darcy: Late last month most major media outlets in the province carried a very disturbing health story. A B.C. study of Caucasian, South Asian and Chinese youth found that type 2 diabetes had drastically increased among young people in all three of these groups.

Unlike type 1 diabetes, which is a genetic disease, type 2 diabetes is generally considered to be a disease associated with aging. But it’s a disease, as we know, related to unhealthy eating, physical inactivity and smoking — a disease that develops over time.

According to Dr. Calvin Ke, one of the authors of the Providence Health study, youth are being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes as early as 20 years of age, while screening for the disease doesn’t start, generally speaking, until the age of 40. This particular study showed that 62 percent of Caucasian youth with diabetes now have type 2 diabetes. That number rises to 86 percent for South Asian youth and 87 percent for youth of Chinese origin.

While type 2 diabetes has drastically increased among young people in general in this country and this province, according to Dr. Parmjit Singh Sohal, a report co-author, the number of young South Asians affected is twice the rate of that of Caucasian youth.

We know from previous studies in British Columbia and nationally that the incidence rate of diabetes amongst aboriginal people is three to five times higher than for the population as a whole and that First Nations people are diagnosed with diabetes at a younger age. It’s not an overstatement to say that we have a diabetes epidemic in this province and in this country.

The results of this recent study came as a shock to many people, but the findings are not ones that the Canadian Diabetes Association found surprising. They’ve seen these trends developing over many years, and they’ve been sounding the alarm.

The Canadian Diabetes Association estimates that 8.6 percent of the population of B.C. is living with diabetes today. That’s 442,000 British Columbians. These warning bells are ones that we ignore at our own peril, because diabetes is a life-threatening illness. It doubles the risk of heart disease, of stroke, of kidney failure, of adult blindness, of amputations. The mortality rate for people with diabetes is twice that for people without it.

It’s also a disease that costs B.C.’s health care system close to $2 billion a year in hospital admissions, MSP costs and PharmaCare costs combined.

There is absolutely no room for complacency when it comes to tackling this disease. It is true that British Columbia has the lowest diabetes prevalence rate of any province, and we have had for many years. That’s because we have the lowest obesity rate and we do well on other risk factors, too, including smoking and physical inactivity. That has also been the case for decades.

However, a recent Conference Board of Canada report gave B.C. only a C grade on mortality due to diabetes, and it ranked B.C. fourth among the provinces. We clearly have some work to do.

[1020]

We do have many excellent initiatives in place at the local level, at the regional health authority level and provincially. What we don’t have is a coordinated and comprehensive provincial diabetes strategy.

The New Brunswick government, to its credit, has recently adopted one. The Canadian Diabetes Association has called for one. A provincial diabetes strategy in B.C. is long overdue.

We need to bring all of the best minds together, from the diabetes association, from health authorities, medical officers of health, First Nations, doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners, dietitians, pharmacists — all of the best minds to develop an integrated strategy.

We also need a provincial strategy that targets young people in particular. If that wasn’t crystal-clear before this latest study, it certainly is now that urgent action is needed to prevent and treat type 2 diabetes amongst our youth. Again, in this case, we need to bring all the best minds together. But for it to be effective, we also need to
[ Page 5968 ]
bring youth together so that it can be a strategy that effectively reaches them.

What does a youth diabetes strategy look like? Well, I’ll leave that to the best minds of the province. Obviously, education, education and education at all levels is key; promoting healthy eating; promoting physical activity — not just in our schools but also in colleges, in universities, in skills-training programs and also in workplaces. We have an epidemic of obesity amongst our young people, and it’s getting worse. Take stronger action to discourage smoking, including prohibiting the sale of flavoured tobacco. In B.C., 30,000 young people start smoking every year in, and half of them start smoking with flavoured tobacco. We can do something about that.

Also, according to the authors of this Providence health study, early screening is absolutely essential — as early as 20 years of age, according to Dr. Sohal — especially for the highest-risk groups. That’s something that we don’t do now. Most British Columbians are routinely screened for diabetes at age 40. That means we have an awful lot of people — an awful lot of young people, especially — walking around not knowing that they may have diabetes. Estimates run as high as 20 percent. By the time they are diagnosed, the disease has advanced, and they are already potentially developing complications.

Access to primary care is also a critical piece of the picture, and when hundreds of thousands of British Columbians don’t have access to a family doctor or nurse practitioner.… The fact is that young people are even less likely to have a family practitioner. You know, young people tend to think they’re invincible. They don’t necessarily need one; they rely on walk-in clinics.

Interjection.

J. Darcy: The hon. member thinks I am looking at him.

The fact is that young people aren’t even on the radar when it comes to gathering statistics about looking for a family doctor, which is the term this government prefers to use when measuring how many people don’t have the GP for Me that they were promised by this government by 2015. Access to primary care — to team-based care that involves doctors, nurse practitioners, dietitians, pharmacists and others — is critical to detection, to prevention and to treatment.

A poverty reduction strategy is also an essential element of a provincial diabetes strategy. Every major study of diabetes tells us that being poor is a determinant of poor health, and of diabetes in particular.

D. Plecas: On behalf of my constituents in Abbotsford South, I am pleased to participate in this morning’s private member’s statement entitled "Reducing the Risk of Diabetes." Last June I attended the Telus Walk to Cure Diabetes in my riding. I was totally impressed not only with the turnout that they had but the fact that there were people there of all ages. I was also impressed by the concern and commitment demonstrated by participants. Thanks to people like Marilee Byers and Dave Ramdial plus many other volunteers in my community, people suffering from diabetes can take comfort in the fact that people do care and people do want to make a difference.

Earlier this month the Conference Board of Canada released a report ranking British Columbia third in the world for health performance. We beat out other countries such as Norway, Finland, France, Australia and Germany. Only Sweden and Switzerland ranked higher. The top ranking reflects the high priority this government places on health and quality of life in this province.

[1025]

In terms of diabetes, the report also notes that British Columbia has the lowest diabetes prevalence amongst provinces. Only 4.3 percent of the population was known to be living with the disease between 2011 and 2013. The report also indicated that B.C. has the lowest rate of obesity in Canada and does well on other diabetes factors, including smoking and physical inactivity. Yet the report also notes that our province only earns a C grade on mortality due to diabetes and ranks fourth among other provinces, as the member opposite already indicated. This is quite puzzling, and it warrants further investigation on behalf of the government.

For the present it is clear that we need to do more in terms of prevention. Prevention and treatment involve a healthy diet, physical exercise, not using tobacco and being normal body weight. For those afflicted by diabetes, we as government will continue to provide services and support. Currently, these include extended coverage of insulin pumps for patients 25 years and under, in order to support diabetes patients transitioning into early adulthood; and it includes developing new provincial standards for diabetes care in schools. This will include training and monitoring for school district staff to administer insulin for children who cannot yet do it themselves. We will also provide training for staff to administer glucagon, an emergency measure to raise blood sugar levels.

British Columbians are covered more broadly than any other province for diabetes medications and supplies. In fact, in 2013-14 the Ministry of Health spent more than $75 million on diabetes medication and supplies through the PharmaCare program. That is a 96 percent increase over the last decade. Notably, PharmaCare covers 13 effective therapies for the treatment and management of diabetes. That includes nine oral medications and five classes of insulin. PharmaCare also covers insulin vials and cartridges for pumps and pens. It also supplies insulin pumps, reservoirs and infusion sets for both children and adults. PharmaCare also covers needles and syringes as well as blood glucose test strips.

In conclusion, I wish to thank the hon. member for New Westminster for raising this topic for debate this
[ Page 5969 ]
morning. Thank you for allowing me to respond on behalf of the government.

J. Darcy: Let me just conclude by saying that yes, we do, in fact — as I indicated — have the lowest rate of diabetes in the country. At the same time, we have the best health outcomes, which we have had — as I pointed out previously in this House — since the 1990s. That’s the good news. The bad news is that we still have an epidemic of diabetes, and that epidemic of diabetes is getting worse amongst our young people. That’s what was so particularly shocking about this report that was released recently.

One of the key factors is about poverty. The lowest-income men, according to a study by the public officer of health, are at five times the risk of developing diabetes as people in higher-income groups. For First Nations people, many of whom live in poverty, there’s a clear connection between the lack of access to healthy and nutritious food and the incidence of diabetes. If you’re young or unemployed or working in a job without adequate benefits, you likely can’t afford to pay for the testing devices, or, much less, many of the expensive drugs that you require.

We clearly do need a provincial and coordinated diabetes strategy, something the Canadian Diabetes Association has called for. We need one that is particularly targeted to youth, I believe. The reason it needs to be coordinated provincially…. We have a lot of best practices out there. I see the Minister of Health agreeing with me on that score. We have some excellent programs provincially, locally and regionally. What we need to do is to bring all of those best practices together in a coordinated way, in an integrated way, in the same way we do in the areas of cancer, HIV/AIDS, cardiac services, and so on, all of which are coordinated provincewide. That is, in fact, a major gap in B.C. health care.

[1030]

For a provincial strategy to be effective in reaching young people, we obviously need a targeted and a creative communication plan to reach out to youth — a plan that includes social marketing and social media, a plan that speaks to different groups of youth using messages that resonate with our diverse communities, a campaign or an outreach plan that really does say to youth and to everybody in our province: “We have an epidemic that we can’t ignore.”

We can be proud of our record, but we absolutely cannot be complacent, not when we have an estimated 8.6 percent of the population living with diabetes and when we are seeing a steady and rapid increase of diabetes amongst our young people. We need an action plan. We need a provincial strategy that targets youth, that is about prevention, that is about education and that is about treatment. That’s about ensuring a healthy future for our young people. It’s also about ensuring the health of our economy and the health of our health care budget.

INCLUSIVE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES
FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

D. McRae: I rise today reflective of my 13 years in elected office. Now, it’s not all in this chamber. I was fortunate enough to serve — I was elected three terms — in the Comox Valley, in the city of Courtenay, as councillor. I’ve also been fortunate enough to serve in this chamber for the past almost six years.

In the course of my political career, I’ve had many ways to serve residents. I had the opportunity to serve as minister for residents of British Columbia in three portfolios, but I’ll challenge in this chamber that the one that was probably the most impactful on me was the one I served in last. From June 2013 till this past January, I had the distinct pleasure to serve as Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation.

Maybe people will ask why, because perhaps it’s not seen by some as some of the more high-profile ministries. It was impactful because that ministry and the clients that we serve need us. When I say, “They need us….” They need all British Columbians.

In the election leading up to 2013, there was a commitment by this government to make sure we were the most progressive jurisdiction for persons with disabilities in Canada. It is a goal which is absolutely desirable to me. It is a lofty goal and one that is going to require a lot of work by a lot of individuals — individuals in this chamber and beyond.

Now, as we went around…. One of the things that is so important for inclusion is: government doesn’t know everything. To craft the action plan going forward, we ensured that we would go around the province of British Columbia and talk with people in communities large and small — persons with disabilities, their family members, support organizations, community leaders. We visited communities — say, for example, Fort St. John in the north, down to my home community, the Comox Valley. We visited large communities and small communities.

We wanted to make sure we had a really robust level of engagement in society. From that, an action plan was created. One of the things that was common — whether it was in a large town, small town, rural B.C. or urban B.C. — persons with disabilities said: “We want to be included. We want to make sure we have the ability to socialize, to recreate and participate fully in society.”

One area that was so key and came up over and over again was the ability for employment or the ability for community inclusion or volunteerism. We are at a distinct, bizarre time in British Columbia. As we look forward and see some of the employment opportunities, it is better than it’s ever been in my entire life.

I’m a graduate of the 1980s, from high school. The baby boomers were firmly ensconced in their jobs, and you went off to post-secondary thinking: “What am I going to do? Will there be a job?” Sometimes there was,
[ Page 5970 ]
and sometimes that job took a little while to materialize. But to sit there in…. A situation in the next decade where we will need a million new employees in British Columbia is a distinct opportunity for young people, all British Columbians, going forward.

How will we fill that? Yes, of course our graduates will fill part of that. Our graduates are coming out of the school system, I will argue, with more skills and more world awareness and more employability levels than ever before. We can always do better, but I know they’re coming out well.

We’re going to have immigration from other provinces. Why? Because British Columbia is a great place to live. We’ll have new immigrants coming to our province, but one group that cannot be forgotten in this conversation and will not be forgotten — I know all members of this chamber will agree — is persons with disabilities. They want to make sure that they are front and centre, ready to take on the jobs that will be there going forward.

[1035]

Now, oftentimes I’ve learned in my time in the portfolio that it wasn’t so much misinformation; it was the lack of awareness. Oftentimes employers will say: “Well, it’s going to cost a lot of money for me” — a small business or a large business — “to adapt my environment for a person with a disability.” I want to say that’s actually not true. Most employers were shocked to find that if you had to adapt an environment for a person with a disability, for over half of the people looking for employment it costs absolutely nothing.

Now, for the next bulk of individuals, say the 35 to 40 percent more, it probably costs less than $500 to adapt the environment at the workplace. And yes, for that last little percentage point, it will cost substantially more. But employers were shocked to find out it is not that hard.

One of the individuals, as well, I had an opportunity to meet during my time as the minister was a gentleman who I think is well known to this chamber. He’s a gentleman by the name of Mark Wafer. One of the things that’s important is that government can’t always do the talking. Sometimes you need other champions. Mark Wafer is not from our province. Mark Wafer is from Ontario. Oftentimes I look at Ontario as a place I don’t want to find examples from, but in this particular case, he’s got it right.

Mark Wafer is a franchisee. He owns a large number of restaurants, and 25 percent of his workforce are persons with disabilities. When I asked him, “Why have you done this? Why the leadership?” he goes: “It’s the right thing to do. It’s the right thing for me as an employer.” But he also said many people are surprised to find it’s the right business decision.

“Every time I have to retrain an employee,” he said, “I lose $4,000 in lost productivity.” Persons with disabilities? “They stay, on average, in my business,” he said, “five years.” In the average fast-food…. I’ll call it retail sector. The average employee in his area stays nine months. Their attendance records are better than average. Their ability to create a safe work environment is better, on average. He did it because it was the right business decision. It is also the right inclusive opportunity in society.

We provide supports through Work B.C. Since 2012, 45,000 individuals have gone to Work B.C. looking for some level of employment supports, and of those 45,000, 10,000 individuals have gained employment. Those are individuals who’ve come to Work B.C. looking for assistance. I’m not talking about the numerous other individuals who have found that employment opportunity on their own.

I also had the opportunity in this portfolio to meet many times with a gentleman well known in British Columbia and across the world, Rick Hansen. Rick Hansen said that to have a truly inclusive society — I’m paraphrasing so I don’t put words in his mouth — everybody needs to get involved. You need to make sure that government is there. You need to make sure the businesses are there. And the individuals themselves need to be there.

I think, as we go forward in the year 2015, we’re at a renaissance time. Everybody is ready to come forward to make sure that not just British Columbia but Canada is a truly inclusive place for individuals across our nation. Opportunities are unbelievable.

D. Donaldson: I’m happy to take my place today to respond to the member for Comox Valley on his statement about increased employment opportunities for people with disabilities. I acknowledge his concern and his desire to make a difference in this subject area, especially in his previous role as a cabinet minister. I also agree with his scenario, his synopsis that it’s a distinct and bizarre time under this government. I think that’s a very good synopsis of what we’re facing.

The goal, obviously, to have increased employment opportunities for people with disabilities is so people with different abilities can earn more income. That’s an important part and, also, the inclusiveness that the member mentioned, the feeling of being able to contribute and to receive. That’s the essence of reciprocity — that everybody has something to contribute in B.C. and also should feel very privileged to be able to receive as well.

I think one aspect of this is to look at disability assistance rates. Of course, that’s not the only aspect. They haven’t arisen in B.C. since 2007. So when the member says that leading up to the 2013 election, his government wanted to be the most progressive jurisdiction — the goal — in this area, well, I think that’s a fact that speaks otherwise. That’s eight years of no increase in disability assistance rates.

[1040]

Again, people with disabilities want to contribute, and they want to earn more money. This government has increased the amount, on a family per-unit basis, that a
[ Page 5971 ]
person with a disability can earn before impacting their disability assistance. Other jurisdictions allow for that basic exemption level, but individuals can keep a percentage of income earned above that basic rate, which in the end provides for a greater earning exemption.

In other words, in other provinces you can have that basic rate and then earn even more, on a percentage basis. If the province wanted to be a leader, a progressive jurisdiction, I think they could look to other provinces, such as Alberta, for that public policy.

I wanted to, in my short time in response to the member from Comox on this important topic, also touch on the aspect of an ounce of prevention being worth a pound of cure. I say that in reference to the aspect of high school graduation rates and from the government’s own report from the Ministry of Children and Family Development stating that there is strong evidence that completing high school is conducive to general well-being throughout one’s life. I think we could all agree on that.

In fact, the Conference Board of Canada did a study of children in care and found that foster kids leaving the system at age 19 will earn $326,000 less in their lifetime compared to the Canadian average. The government’s own statistics released in January showed that after six months, over 50 percent of the children leaving care are on some kind of income assistance, and disability assistance is one of the major categories for that.

So what could we do to address this root cause — to look at an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of care? I think graduation rates for children in care is a good place to look. Under this government, 27 percent of kids in care graduate high school with a Dogwood diploma, a high school graduation certificate, versus 84 percent of the regular population in the province.

I think if we could put more emphasis into that aspect, then there would be more employment opportunities for people with disabilities. As we know, high school graduation rates mean a lot for future opportunities. In the ten-year period 2003 to 2013 we actually saw a decrease in meeting or exceeding grade 7 assessment scores in reading, numeracy and writing for children in care.

I think a great, a progressive, move, as the member for Comox Valley talked about, would be to look at putting more emphasis onto kids-in-care graduation rates. We know that over 50 percent of the 8,000 kids in care are from First Nations.

Finally, in this aspect as well, we know from the budget that $29 million will be clawed back from school districts. I think that could be used towards addressing this issue, as well, in the classroom.

D. McRae: While I’d love to respond to some of the comments by the members opposite, I want to stay on the actual topic of the morning, if I may.

Just so that members opposite know, one of the aspects is: what is government doing? I know the members opposite were wondering: “What have you done in the last little while?” I thought I’d spend this time here to tell them.

September of last year and the September before we declared Disability Employment Month across the province of British Columbia. That is an opportunity where government can get out…. We want to make sure we’re recognizing employers who have made that extra leap. We can make sure we can recognize inclusive employment opportunities, because there are great employers across this province.

For example, I had the opportunity to visit a grocery retail place in Terrace hiring, depending on the time of year, four to six individuals with disabilities. Long-serving employees, great employer. They were willing to step up and say: “It’s not that difficult. We are benefiting because of it.” They’re going to be sort of a beacon for other employers not only in their community but across British Columbia.

We’ve also provided $1.5 million to 20 post-secondary institutions to help learners with disabilities access training programs for high-demand job skills. That’s just another example where we make sure we make those investments to assist individuals to enter the workforce.

[1045]

Work B.C. assists persons with disabilities by investing $1 million annually in research and innovation funding to improve services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

As well, members opposite might have referred to the technology program in the past. Well, from 2012 to recent, EATI was able to provide 850 individuals with some level of technology supports to gain employment opportunities. I’m pleased to tell the members opposite — if they’ve been on B.C. Bid, they’ll notice — that an RFP for phase 2 of this program is coming out. It was posted on February 16, just recently. By April of this year they’re hoping that that project will be awarded, and there’ll be an opportunity, again, to make sure technology is being paired with the right individual to make sure they are able to find those employment opportunities, going forward.

We’ve also provided $150,000 to B.C. centre for employment excellence to develop an on-line mapping tool for persons with disabilities, their families, employers and service providers to share employment stories.

Another thing that was quite surprising…. The member across the way from Langara was part of the foundation of this. She began when she was in the office of SDSI, the presidents group. The presidents group is key employment leaders across the province of British Columbia — individuals like Tamara Vrooman from Vancity, and Craig Richmond from YVR. Individuals in agriculture, in recreation and the hospitality sector provide, basically, advice to government about what we can do to make sure they are more….
[ Page 5972 ]

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

D. McRae: I challenge all members to make sure British Columbia remains and is an inclusive opportunity for all people.

GROWING THE GREEN ECONOMY

G. Heyman: We hear a lot about the green economy in the media. We hear about it in this chamber. Many people are talking about it, so I thought it might be worthwhile to just look at one of the very many definitions we see about it. From the United Nations environment program, the green economy is defined as work that “contributes substantially to preserving or restoring environmental quality,” including jobs that reduce energy and decarbonize the economy.

In British Columbia — and I will confess that I would like to add this to the definition — I think we also want to look at jobs that simply have lower impact on the environment generally, such as tourism, such as value-added forestry. These are important parts of the B.C. economy, and they provide alternatives to many aspects of the economy which are more carbon-intensive and to which we seek better ways of doing things.

With that in mind, I am going to focus my remarks particularly, although not exclusively, on the technology sector as I talk about the green economy this morning. As I woke up this morning, I was listening to a CBC radio national news segment on the booming tech sector in Vancouver — how many jobs are involved, the tremendous entrepreneurship and innovation that we see in not just Vancouver but in the high-tech sector throughout British Columbia.

Let me contrast this, somewhat, with what we’ve heard from this government over the past couple of years. I attended about a year ago an LNG conference that was in Vancouver, and I listened to the Premier’s speech. One remark the Premier made struck me. It struck me, in particular, recently, because it stands in such contrast to what we’ve heard recently from the government. The Premier said — and I paraphrase as closely as I can — that there isn’t a single policy decision that we make in government without looking at it through the lens of what it does to further our LNG sector.

That seemed to me to be a very single-minded focus of government. Yet when I listened to the throne speech recently, following the crash in oil prices, and knowing that we will not have an LNG plant up and running in 2015…. We don’t have a single investment decision made. The Premier correctly pointed out that we have a diversified economy in British Columbia and that’s one of the reasons that we’re withstanding some of the shocks being felt in other jurisdictions in Canada.

That’s true, and that’s why a diversified economy is important, in addition to the other benefits it brings the economy — the fact that we can build good jobs. We can build high-paying jobs. We can diversify the economy throughout areas of British Columbia that have been dependent on resources, without creating the kinds of conflict that we see over environmental issues or First Nations issues. We can also apply technology to the resource sector to make it less carbon-intensive.

[1050]

The tech sector employs many people. In the past 20 years it’s grown sixfold. As of the last accounting in 2014, we have over 84,000 people employed in the sector in more than 9,000 companies — more workers than are employed in all of the resource industries combined. The sector is growing at double the rate of the provincial economy, and wages are 66 percent higher than the B.C. industrial average. That’s the good news.

We all laud the sector and its success in British Columbia, whether it’s in the Lower Mainland, in Victoria, in Surrey or in Kelowna. But a recent report card done by KPMG on behalf of the B.C. Technology Industry Association pointed out that compared to the rest of British Columbia industry, the sector gets an A; compared to other provinces in Canada, it’s only a C-plus.

The reasons for this are that per-capita GDP continues to be lower in B.C. than in other provinces with significant technology sectors, and significantly lower than the United States; per-capita employment in the tech sector is lower than in provinces with significant tech sectors; and B.C. lags other provinces in engineering, science and most other tech-related undergraduate and graduate degrees granted.

Recently an organization called Conversations for Responsible Economic Development issued a report titled Is B.C. Poised to be the Next Tech Hot Spot? I would hope we are. I would hope we would take the measures necessary and the measures that government can take to build the tech sector. But we don’t appear to be doing enough. We have heard a lot about resources, and liquid natural gas in particular. We’ve seen money and budgets devoted to that industry.

That may well be important, but we haven’t seen a corresponding investment in the tech sector. In particular, we haven’t seen a corresponding investment that matches the recommendations of the Technology Industry Association — recommendations that were made after some fairly significant consultation.

They said we need more early-stage investment. They recommended that the small business venture capital program be expanded to $50 million. Instead, in this budget we’ve seen a small increase — it is an increase — of $3 million to bring the total to $26 million. They also recommended that we partner with the federal government, $50 million and $50 million, to create a regional fund of funds under the venture capital action plan, which could boost investment in the tech sector.

Why is this important? It’s important because there
[ Page 5973 ]
are many start-up companies already going in British Columbia that will wither for lack of early-stage capital investment.

There are other areas in which we can invest and we should invest. Let me mention retrofits and energy efficiency, which help address the issue of major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The Pembina Institute has estimated that intensive upgrades of 100,000 homes would see 14,000 to 30,000 person-years of employment.

We have many choices ahead of us. This government and this chamber could lead the way. I hope we will.

S. Hamilton: I’d like to thank the member opposite for his comments. I think he and I both agree on a lot of things. The first and foremost is that the tech sector in this province is thriving and will continue to thrive. I will do what I can in my position in this chamber to help support that going forward.

I know this government has been accused of putting all of our eggs in one basket when it comes to LNG. I’d like to counter those statements with the fact that the member opposite did acknowledge the fact that we do have a diversified economy. But right now LNG is a serious focus, so we’re paying a lot of attention to it on this side of the House, as we have paid attention to the tech sector in the past and made that a very serious focus.

We’ve made forestry a serious focus, mining a serious focus and tourism a serious focus in the past when it was their time. These economies often begin to take on a life of their own and grow themselves as they go forward, but right now it’s LNG. That’s something we have to pay considerable attention to, at least from this side of the House, going forward.

[1055]

Again, I thank the member opposite for bringing this topic for debate. It allows us to highlight and reinforce what British Columbia’s role has been as a world leader in innovative technology and green energy in this province. They are powerful economic drivers, and they continue to create green jobs and new investments across the province. We believe the technology enables growth in all sectors of the economy, and growth means jobs for B.C. families.

The B.C. jobs plan is our province’s strategy to grow jobs and the economy. It focuses on exports, infrastructure and job creation. Technology is one of the eight key sectors targeted in the B.C. jobs plan, and it’s increasingly a key driver for our economy.

Technology has been the second-fastest private sector job creator over the past decade. Many large companies are moving to Vancouver and hiring local talent. Microsoft, Amazon and Twitter have all opened offices in B.C. and are employing local workers. There are also homegrown success stories, like Hootsuite, Global Relay, Westport and Stemcell Technologies, which are all competing at global levels. The technology areas showing particular growth are visual effects, software development, life sciences and aerospace.

Clean technology is quickly developing a subsector, crossing over many traditional industries and creating more efficient, effective and sustainable practices. The tech sector boasts other key sectors, including agriculture, LNG, resource extraction and health care.

The global market for clean technology and services is expected to grow to $3 trillion by 2020. Over the next decade producers of clean, renewable technologies have the potential to attract more than $36 billion in new investment in this province.

We’re currently developing a comprehensive B.C. technology and innovation strategy as an update to the 2012 B.C. technology strategy. Its goal is to strategically map out how to accelerate B.C.’s economic performance by supporting innovative commercialization and entrepreneurship. The strategy will be the government’s road map for supporting our tech sector, including building on regional strengths to create new opportunities.

B.C. largest tech hubs are Vancouver, Victoria, Kelowna, Kamloops and Nanaimo, and they’re all growing very quickly. This was reaffirmed by the B.C. Technology Report Card in 2014. The report confirms that technology has become a critical economic engine, not only driving tech industry growth beyond its $23 billion mark, but contributing to innovation and success in a range of provincial markets and sectors.

B.C.’s technology sector is responsible for significant revenue, job creation and the technological developments that are used in a wide range of sectors in this province. We’ve seen huge successes, as the report card acknowledges. It’s because of these factors that British Columbia is a role model and a world leader in alternative energy and green technology. It has solidified that we are a powerful economic driver that continues to create green jobs and new investment across the province.

As we go forward, it’s my intention to keep supporting this industry. It’s good for our province. It creates good, sustainable, long-term jobs for the economic benefit of everyone here.

With those remarks, I will conclude my statement.

G. Heyman: The member opposite and many members opposite continually point to their commitment to the tech sector, the laudable success of this sector — and there has been success. But the reason I raise this issue is that when you have a successful sector, it seems to me it’s a good indicator that more energy should be put into helping to grow jobs and that sector’s contribution to the economy.

That’s why the B.C. Technology Industry Association forecasts show that with early-stage venture capital investment, we could grow to $50 billion in industry revenue, account for 16 percent of the provincial GDP and be at 142,000 jobs by 2020. That’s 31,000 more jobs than
[ Page 5974 ]
the BCTIA says we will have — without targeted, supportive government action, without support for the companies and the pipeline, without support and leveraging private sector investment — with a commitment from government to provide more venture capital.

To the member’s statement about exports, the BCTIA says that with this investment, we will double our exports.

[1100]

We’ve seen, in the five years since 2013, a 37 percent increase in full-time Canadian jobs in the renewable energy industry. It makes sense that in B.C. we would head to where the puck is going, like hockey players do. We have a B.C. ICE fund on the books, but there are no longer any dollars or grants of any appreciable amount being used to spur innovation in this particular part of the green economy.

We’re currently having a referendum on transit investment in the Lower Mainland instead of the government stepping forward and working with the mayors to identify sources for that investment. Those transit investments, if made, will create up to 55,000 jobs in construction plus additional operations jobs. Yet where is the government on taking leadership on this?

Finally, B.C. is the last market for B.C. tech companies. Why won’t the government follow the lead of governments in the United States and create a connector program to both connect local companies with B.C. tech company producers and show the way by purchasing, itself, from B.C. tech companies, instead of leaving them to find markets anywhere else but here at home?

I hope and look forward to the day when the B.C. government treats this sector, the clean and green economy sector, with the same laser-like focus that is bestowed on LNG.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 7 in the name of the member for Penticton without disturbing the priority of other motions preceding it on the order paper. Is unanimous consent granted?

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 7 — BALANCED BUDGET
AND DIVERSE ECONOMY

D. Ashton: On behalf of our constituents of Penticton, I am pleased to move the following private member’s motion.

[Be it resolved that this House recognize the value of a balanced budget built on a diverse economy to support B.C. families and communities and to build a better, stronger province for future generations.]

As Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, I’m looking forward to this morning’s debate and to the comments of my fellow caucus colleagues, who will examine the various benefits attached to a balanced budget and why it is so important for the people of British Columbia.

Naturally, the rules of this House preclude any discussion of Budget 2015 because it is currently in the form of a bill at the debate stage. That being the case, after I have my introductory comments, my colleagues will contain their comments to the value of a balanced budget in general and how it will build a stronger economy in the future.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Our debate will begin with a discussion about the two critical elements that are essential to prerequisites of a balanced budget. First, the hon. member for Chilliwack will describe the benefits of a diversified economy and how it will contribute to achieving a balanced budget. Following that, the hon. member for Port Moody–Coquitlam will describe the importance of controlled spending and why fiscal prudence is also a prerequisite to the balanced budget.

Once we have covered the essential elements to balancing the budget, my colleague the hon. member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows will describe how British Columbians reap the benefits of a balanced budget through greater investment in health care. We can then look forward to hearing the member for Peace River South discuss the importance of investing in education and how balancing the budget gives us the fiscal freedom to make strategic investments in our future.

To wrap up the debate on the government’s side, the member for Burnaby North will describe how balancing the budget is more than just reconciling the books. Yes, a balanced budget exercises control over spending plus a commitment to start paying down the debt, but it also takes into account the demands for more social services. We can always do more, but with so many demands on the public purse, a responsible government must take into consideration the welfare of British Columbians most in need because they represent our first priority.

Of course, I will look forward to hearing the comments from all members of the House, at the appropriate time, and I look forward to hearing their feelings about balancing budgets and building a stronger economy in British Columbia.

For my part, I had the opportunity to participate in the current budget debate just last week. I described how my late father instilled in me the values of trust, generosity and an incredible strong social conscience. Those values have followed me through my whole career in public service, first as a city councillor, regional district chair and then mayor of Penticton.

During that career in local government, we faced many demands on local ratepayers, and we faced many heated
[ Page 5975 ]
debates on what we could afford and what we could not afford. I always thought about what my dad taught me and the importance of being fiscally responsible and financially accountable.

My dad always told me to look after the pennies, and the dollars will follow. We all know that you cannot spend a $1.10 when you only take in $1.

[1105]

The Minister of Finance in British Columbia faces the challenge of balancing the books on a budget worth approximately $45 billion, which is no easy task. But if we follow the values described by my father’s generation, British Columbia stands to prosper, with a stronger economy and a brighter future for many, many generations to come.

Thank you very much for allowing me the time this morning.

C. James: I thank the member for putting forward the motion this morning. In taking a look at that motion, the motion sounds wonderful: to support the value of a budget built on a diverse economy, to support B.C. families and communities to build a stronger province.

I would love to see a budget that actually was built on a diverse economy and supported B.C. families and communities in this province, because it certainly is not what we’ve seen from the other side in the budgets that have come forward over the last while. In fact, we’ve seen just the opposite in budgets that have come forward in the last while.

We have seen the priority of this government. When they determined that giving the top 2 percent of income earners is actually a priority…. How does that support families who end up getting nickel-and-dimed and face more costs and more fees and more expenses in this budget?

That, in fact, has been the direction of this government. It has not been to build a budget that actually supports B.C. families and communities, as this motion says. It’s just the opposite, although I suppose we have seen the B.C. Liberals on the other side choose to support some families. The top 2 percent of income earners are being supported, but not the rest of hard-working British Columbians.

I find it astonishing, at a time when jurisdictions across the globe are recognizing how important it is to have a strong and growing middle class — that that, in fact, is critical for a strong, growing economy. The Liberal budgets have done just the opposite. They’ve in fact squeezed families with increases in medical service premiums, with increases in ICBC fees, with increases in hydro rates — you name it. Those costs have gone up.

It’s not simply that the government has made it tougher for families when it comes to paying more. They’ve also closed the door to opportunity. I think this is the part that, for me, disappoints the most.

When you have families who don’t expect government to solve all their problems, who understand that they are taking personal responsibility…. They’re working hard. They want to provide opportunities. They want to give their kids the best start in life. They want to ensure that they’re able to go to post-secondary education for college or university. They want to upgrade their skills to get a better-paying job for their family.

These are hard-working British Columbians who are doing everything they can to be able to open that door to opportunity. Even there the government has made it more difficult by adding additional costs for people who want to go back and upgrade their skills — people who want to go to university or college and upgrade themselves or immigrants who have moved to British Columbia and who want to upgrade their English as a second language so that they can use the credentials that they were asked to come to Canada for. Now they’re having to pay for those costs.

It’s not simply that this government has added additional pressures on families. They’ve also closed the door to opportunity for those families. I think that’s the part, from my perspective, that is the wrong direction to go in when you’re looking at rewarding people for the hard work that they’re doing.

Many of these families, as well, have parents that they’re taking care of. They’re now paying more in care for those parents. They’re getting less services and supports.

You know, budgets have cut…. We saw it again last year. The budget was cut for post-secondary education. Again, I hear from the government often that training is important, and we need to provide opportunities for people to get those jobs. Well, in fact, that doesn’t happen if you continue to raise tuition fees, if you continue to cut post-secondary budgets, if you continue to make it more difficult, if you download costs onto school boards so that then they’re having to find scarce resources from the classroom for children — who, again, need a better start in life.

[1110]

“Wishful thinking,” I would call this motion that has come forward. Certainly, I would support the direction if we really saw a budget that was balanced and supported families and communities and was built on a diverse economy. But that’s not what we’ve had in the last number of years — almost 14 years — of the B.C. Liberals.

We’ve had anything but. We have had budgets that have made it more difficult. We have had budgets that have closed the door. We have had budgets that have not been built on diverse economies, that have not supported industries, as you heard from our colleague earlier, like high tech that are doing so well in British Columbia.

I offer a huge appreciation to all of those industries. Despite this government’s laser focus — as the Premier described it — on LNG, industries have continued to contribute to British Columbia.
[ Page 5976 ]

J. Martin: On behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack, I am pleased to take part in the following motion moved by the hon. member for Penticton: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the value of a balanced budget built on a diverse economy to support B.C. families and communities and to build a better, stronger province for future generations.”

As the hon. member for Penticton indicated in his introduction, I would like to describe the benefits of a diverse economy and how this has contributed to balancing two previous budgets in British Columbia.

A steep decline in the price of oil is wreaking havoc on provincial treasuries across Canada, especially in Alberta, where the provincial economy is so heavily dependent on a single sector, that being oil and gas. The primary destination for Alberta energy exports is south of the border to the United States — one single customer.

Well, in British Columbia it’s quite a different story. Now like Alberta, we rely on exports for a large share of our public revenues. The difference lies in the diversity of our provincial economy.

As recently as 2001 the U.S. accounted for 70 percent of B.C. exports. Since then this government has been serious about seeking out new markets and new trading partners. We opened 11 trade offices in Japan, Korea, India, east China, north China, south China, Hong Kong and Europe. The Premier has travelled throughout Asia on numerous trade missions.

Now, while primary industries like forestry and mining have found new markets in China and India, other industries such as agriculture have followed suit. In fact, the agricultural sector has grown by $1 billion over the last three years, with revenues of $11.6 billion. Provincewide this sector employs approximately 60,000 people in areas as diverse as major farm operations to craft brewing.

Agriculture and related producers are major employers in my own riding of Chilliwack. As a matter of fact, if I may, Chilliwack’s Old Yale Brewing recently won best beer at the 12th annual Canadian Brewing Awards in 2014 for its famed Sasquatch Stout.

The fact is we wouldn’t be able to balance the budget without promoting a diverse economy. So I am somewhat mystified by how the opposition views trade promotion, especially in the agricultural sector. During estimates in May 2011 the opposition for Agriculture made the following statement: “…there’s another reason why I don’t support the move towards a more international market. I think it’s very volatile, and it puts our growers into an unstable situation. As we’ve seen with the economic collapse over the last few years, this is something that could happen again, and if we’re set up to do trade and to market internationally, that’s the market that’s going to collapse.”

Well, it certainly doesn’t sound to me as though the opposition supports trade promotion or seeking out new consumer markets in the agricultural sector.

The critic goes on to say in May of 2011: “The other concern I have with going to an international market, to have a focus there, is that it really flies in the face of the climate change requirements we have to reduce emissions in this province.” Who knew? Who knew all along that apparently grape growers are responsible for global warming? Well, quite the revelation by the Agriculture critic.

In conclusion, I can assure you that this government is happy to promote international trade, because international trade leads to greater diversification of our provincial economy. It only makes sense because a thriving, diversified economy is a prerequisite to a balanced budget.

[1115]

N. Macdonald: Let’s be clear first. There is absolutely nothing balanced about a B.C. Liberal budget. It is completely skewed to meet the desires of the most privileged of British Columbians.

First, let’s dispel the myth that this budget is to lessen some future burden on British Columbian children. That’s rubbish. When the B.C. Liberals came to power, the total burden for future British Columbians was $33 billion. Now, when you include contractual obligations, it’s up to $168 billion. It increases in this budget another $4½ billion.

You are not eliminating debt. You are adding to it. In fact, no Premier has increased the burden on future generations as much as this Premier. It is an all-time record. That’s a fact.

“Debt-free” on the bus was not the biggest misrepresentation. That dubious honour sits with the LNG fantasy. No revenue this year from LNG, and don’t expect it for the decade to come. A $100 billion prosperity fund is as real as the promise to get rid of the debt or dump PST, which means it is not real. It never was real.

What are the choices this government makes? What is balanced about the choices this government makes? It’s $230 million in reduced taxes to the richest British Columbians, the 2 percent, leaving nothing for the 98 percent. The priority is the 2 percent every time. What is balanced about that?

Not enough funding to meet known costs for public education, but private schools get more money — significantly more public money for private, exclusive schools. Who does that work for? What is balanced about that? Why the priority for private schools? Why waste almost a quarter billion dollars a year in tax cuts to 2 percent that could have gone to educating our children? All of our children, not just a select few — all of our children.

With that $230 million, we could have reduced post-secondary tuition. Did you know that this government collects more from students than they collect from corporations through income tax? They collect more than they collect from natural gas revenue, more from students in tuition. That’s a fact. What’s balanced about that? What is fair about that?
[ Page 5977 ]

With that $1 billion over the next four years that went to the richest 2 percent, we could have done something on the Trans-Canada that was real. Nothing real for the next three years on the Trans-Canada. A hundred people have died and ten times that number have been injured on the Trans-Canada. The Premier promised it four lane and divided by 2022, but there is nothing for the next three years. What is balanced about that?

The member for Shuswap, when he was running, said the Trans-Canada was his priority. There’s nothing there for the next three years. Some priority. Some balance.

It’s $230 million a year. The member for Penticton…. We could have stopped the infestation of our lakes with zebra and quagga mussels. It would have cost a tiny fraction of the $230 million to do what we need to do to start, right now, stationing people at the entry points to British Columbia — a fraction. Instead, the decision that member made was to support a $230 million tax cut per year for the richest 2 percent. What is balanced, fair or reasonable about that decision? Nothing.

What do you do? You come in here with a script that’s been laid out for you by the Premier’s office, and you just read off the script. What about representing your members? You promised the Trans-Canada fixed, and you support a budget that does none of that. You have an obligation to protect the lake that your citizens live on, and what are you doing? Nothing. Instead, you read through the script.

Justice for women. What would $230 million do for women in this province? What have the Liberals done? Twenty-four of 68 courthouses closed, ten jails closed, 85 percent of the legal aid offices closed, 75 percent of legal aid staff cut. You closed the Law Line. But you’ve got a slogan: “Violence-free B.C.” Is there anything to it? Is there anything that could be done with $230 million? There’s plenty.

[1120]

When you talk about balance, my balance would be different. I would put resources for children, for seniors, for those in need first. That would be a truly balanced budget. That’s what civilized places do. There’s no balance here. It’s for the rich — full stop.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Member, take your seat.

All Members, please note. All remarks must be made through the Chair.

L. Reimer: It is with great pleasure that I stand before you today and continue this important debate. My colleagues before me have reaffirmed the need for fiscal prudence. The hon. member for Chilliwack explained the benefits of a diversified economy and how it contributes to achieving a balanced budget. Now I have the task of explaining the importance of controlled spending and why fiscal prudence is also a prerequisite to balancing the budget.

First, I must make note of an important fact. Through strong fiscal management not only has this government delivered now three consecutive balanced budgets and is projecting three more consecutive balanced budgets, but we’ve done so without raising taxes because we made the tough but necessary choices to get spending under control.

Our government has remained true to the promise that government should not spend more money than the taxpayer can provide. Choosing to go the route less travelled was a difficult decision, but ultimately, it was the right thing to do. Investors crave stability and economic certainly. I believe that is exactly what our government’s fiscal prudence led to — a strong financial standing in today’s unforgiving economy.

Fiscal management is a major component of continued growth that allows B.C.’s economy to remain diverse. Through hard work, diligence and fiscal discipline, British Columbia has been able to do what few other jurisdictions can boast in previous years and today: a balanced budget.

Through continued spending discipline, our government has managed to generate modest surpluses, which have allowed us to ensure that new spending is put into priority areas. The audited public accounts for 2014 confirm that government did balance its Budget 2013 and delivered a modest $353 million surplus in fiscal 2013-14, despite lower than anticipated forecast revenue.

By controlling spending, the province is able to attract investors, which allows the government to provide opportunities so British Columbians can be first in line for well-paying jobs.

The Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act holds ministers responsible individually and collectively for ensuring that ministries operate within their budgets, government meets its overall financial commitment and ministers of state and ministers with non-financial targets and the Minister of Finance meet their targets. The act requires a holdback of 20 percent of ministerial salaries until release of the public accounts for that fiscal year.

It is through these modest surpluses that our government is able to fund programs to benefit families all across British Columbia and make life more affordable while stimulating economic growth and job creation.

Our government has been able to achieve such a promise through initiatives such as the core review, which examined all government programs and services in an effort to respect the taxpayers and make the best possible use of resources to achieve a strong economy and a secure tomorrow.

Our government is not only committed to controlling spending at the provincial level but also at the municipal level. We established the first Auditor General for Local
[ Page 5978 ]
Government to ensure taxpayer dollars are used efficiently and to strengthen local government accountability.

Through the elimination of a deficit and reducing the need to borrow, British Columbia will be able to begin driving down taxpayer-supported debt-to-GDP ratio. By staying our course, we’ve maintained our triple-A credit rating, which reflects the strong fiscal flexibility of the province and its track record of prudent fiscal management.

In fact, since 2004 British Columbia has received seven credit rating upgrades and continues to maintain the highest credit rating possible with Moody’s Investors Service. Moody’s had highlighted B.C.’s debt management. Its strong fiscal management and performance in recent years enabled British Columbia to reduce its debt burden to a level that is below the median of Canadian provinces, supporting an even higher degree of fiscal flexibility than most provinces.

Moody’s also pointed out our government’s track record of prudent fiscal planning, a flexibility to adjust revenues to meet fiscal challenges and a large, diverse economy that supports a productive tax base.

[1125]

It should also be noted that Moody’s is not the only investor service that has affirmed B.C. as having the highest credit rating available. Standard and Poor’s affirmed a triple-A credit rating for B.C. following Budget 2013, and Fitch affirmed B.C.’s triple-A credit rating in April 2014.

These are significant accomplishments — accomplishments that have shown strong leadership and resolve to not live beyond our means. We truly believe that borrowing more money than you make is not a sustainable way to run an economy. Our pledge to employ fiscal restraint, coupled with our triple-A credit rating, means that we spend less on interest payments and servicing our debt and, therefore, have more funds available to serve our province.

The members for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows and Peace River South will elaborate on the benefits of our fiscal constraint for British Columbians.

B. Ralston: The B.C. Liberals firmly have their hand on the remote, and they’re trying to change the channel desperately. I’ve heard more about the diversified economy in the last two months than we’ve heard for the last three or four years, particularly from the Premier.

Let’s have a look at what she said, because it’s always helpful to hear from the top as to what the central preoccupation of the government is. Let me quote the Premier on May 22, 2014 — not that long ago. “We do know what we can do today, and that is to make sure that as a government we look at every decision we make through the lens of whether or not it furthers our purpose in creating an LNG industry here in British Columbia. This is our central preoccupation, so I personally chair a special cabinet committee devoted to making sure we coordinate our decisions across government with a view to moving as nimbly as we can to create an LNG business here.”

Now, suddenly, the tag line “diversified economy” seems to have been revived, and I’m not surprised that the member for Penticton would speak about the diversified economy. As a former mayor of Penticton, he would well know that were he to focus with laser-like focus only on the tourism industry in Penticton and neglect manufacturing and innovation, public services, trades and professional services, the Penticton chamber of commerce would rightly be up in arms. The citizens of Penticton would rightly be very dismissive of that approach. So he well understands the benefits of a diversified economy when he’s talking about the community of Penticton.

Indeed, the Penticton economic development services — this is perhaps a report that he’s familiar with, an industry evaluation report. It’s a bit dated, August 2011, but I don’t think the economy has changed appreciably there in terms of its diversity. It speaks about that range of sectors within Penticton. Indeed, the Penticton economic development commission is focused on developing that range of a diversified economy.

It’s somewhat, I suppose, ironic that the member for Penticton ran with a leader who was focused with laser-like focus on a single industry, given what he knows. His political success, I’m sure, in Penticton is somewhat due to his understanding of the needs of the diversified economy in Penticton. I’m sure he’ll agree with me. So it is somewhat ironic to hear these professions of attachment to the diversified economy when we know what has taken place in terms of political rhetoric coming from the other side over the last couple of years.

I want to use this opportunity to talk about the benefits of the diversified economy in Surrey, in my riding. I’ve talked once before about FINCAD. I had the opportunity to meet just last week with Robert Park, who is the president and CEO, and Nancy Petersen, the chief financial officer, of FINCAD.

FINCAD is a financial services company that develops software that makes transparency the modus operandi of derivatives trading space. They have their headquarters in Surrey, in Central City — in my riding, I’m proud to say. They have branch offices recently opened in Beijing. They have a branch office in Dublin, a branch office in New York and a branch office in London — perhaps the wave of the future.

I did have an interesting conversation with Robert Park about diversifying the economy, attracting more head offices to the region, and he had a lot of good ideas based on his own experience.

[1130]

Someone like Robert Park — he’s not political in any way; he’s a very capable business person who’s running a successful business — I don’t think has had much attention from the government at all, at least nothing that he was able to tell me about. I think that’s rather typical.
[ Page 5979 ]

So there’s an opportunity to grow our economy. Indeed, Jock Finlayson of the B.C. Business Council has spoken how there is a submerged manufacturing sector in the Lower Mainland that, again, doesn’t get a lot of attention beyond companies like FINCAD and high tech. The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association, speaks rightly about manufacturing as being the third-largest employer in the province.

D. Bing: On behalf of my constituents of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, I’m pleased to take part in the following motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the value of a balanced budget built on a diverse economy to support B.C. families and communities and to build a better, stronger province for future generations.”

I would like it start by thanking my caucus colleagues for outlining two major prerequisites for a balanced budget. This includes getting a handle on public finances by controlling spending and by promoting a diverse economy. A diversified economy is far more resilient to market fluctuations. If one sector suffers a major setback, it won’t create a crisis because other sectors in the economy will compensate. Since government relies on revenues from exports to pay for things like education and health care, a diversified economy protects the public from unexpected shortfalls.

We have all seen how the Alberta treasury has been thrust into a huge deficit by plunging oil prices. In British Columbia it is quite a different story. We have been successful in controlling government spending and promoting a diverse economy. By doing so, the government has been successful in balancing the budget for the past three years.

I’m aware that Budget 2015 is currently up for debate in the form of a bill, so the rules of the House preclude me from singing its praises. I must therefore contain my comments to the previous two balanced budgets and how getting our finances in order has enabled us to (1) do what many critics said we couldn’t do, and that is to reduce the growth rate of health care spending to an annual average of 2.9 percent, which is down from nearly 8 percent in the mid-2000s; and (2) to take those savings and reinvest them into the health care system.

For example, the government invested $118 million last year in post-graduate medical training. This is up $43 million from 2003-2004. This means that our government has been able to double the number of seats available for first-year medical students from 128 in 2001 to 288 this year. This year our government also provided $136 million in funding for nurse practitioners. As of March 2014 there are 278 fully licensed nurse practitioners in British Columbia.

By balancing the previous two budgets, we have also been able to invest approximately $1.38 billion in mental health and substance use services. This represents a 63 percent increase from 2001.

By improving our finances, our government has increased spending on cancer care, through the B.C. Cancer Agency, 600 percent since 2001. This represents an increase from the $206 million in 2001 to $617.1 million in the 2013-14 fiscal year.

The fact is that health care represents one of the most cherished public services that the government can provide. By balancing the budget, we can ensure that stable funding and sustained growth in health care without letting the budget run out of control.

A balanced budget also means we retain a triple-A credit rating, and that is important because capital investment is an expensive proposition. Building a new hospital or even adding a new wing requires borrowing, and we would be paying considerably more finance costs without a triple-A credit rating.

In conclusion, B.C. was one of two jurisdictions in Canada to balance its budget in 2013-14. This year we may be alone in balancing the budget. It was a commitment we made to the voters of British Columbia in the last election, and it is a promise we intend to keep in future years.

[1135]

B. Routley: It’s interesting. I had to listen real careful to see if there were any gems in there, but unfortunately, there just aren’t any gems when it comes to this government’s statements about a diverse economy. They’ve suddenly actually discovered the word “diverse.” For a long time all we heard was LNG this, LNG that, LNG…. Well, until LNG became lots of nothing going on.

That’s basically where we’re at today — lots of nothing going on. Why? This government went and overcommitted to the people of B.C. in the election. They were running around saying it was going to be so wonderful. There was going to be trillions of dollars, billions of dollars, a prosperity fund, fun to be had by all. It was going to be so wonderful, thousands of jobs. It was going to be so good. Now we talk about just a chance.

Where is this diverse economy that you’re talking about? Try going to forest communities that have been gutted by their mills closing down. There are more mills planned to go in the Interior as a result of the pine beetle situation. More mills go down, and where’s the value-added plan? There is no value-added plan.

You recently heard the value-add producers pleading, saying: “We’ve watched our jobs in British Columbia cut in half, plant after plant.” Value added? That was diversity. That was real diversity when the day was that we used to have yellow cedar components for Buddhist temples made right here in B.C., when we used to make value-added products. Now we’ve watched and this government has sat by and watched plant after plant close, more and more — thousands — of not only forest workers but value-added producers in British Columbia lay off their crews and send people home.
[ Page 5980 ]

This is a mean-spirited government, in my opinion. What we see in this budget’s planning is Robin Hood in reverse. We’re going around picking the pockets of the poor. We’re going to be mean-spirited. We’re going to take money away. We’re going to have $230 million for the richest people in British Columbia. I saw the number here. I couldn’t believe it — $17,000 tax break if you’re a millionaire. Think about that. And this government is so proud of it.

It’s so: “Oh well, we told them we were going to take it away, but that was only going to be temporary.” There’s nothing temporary in the costs for ordinary seniors, for people living on a disability pension that haven’t seen an increase in more than seven years. Shame on a government that is so cold, so brutal, so hard that they’re happy when they have an opportunity to balance the budget at the expense of those that can least afford it.

Think about the children living in poverty, with no poverty reduction plan. I still remember the experience I had when I was in Kelowna, of all places. There was this young mom. The grandmother, her mother, was there with her talking about their child with autism and the fact that they couldn’t find enough money for speech therapy. So there you go. There’s your diverse economy. There’s how you’re taking care of people.

There are children in British Columbia that can’t find a speech therapist, that can’t get even an assessment to get the help that they need, children with autism, on the autism spectrum. Having a grandson myself with autism, I know how critical it is.

To hear that young mom say: “All I want to do is see the day that I hear the words, ‘I love you, Mommy.’” But instead, we hear the B.C. Liberals say: “I love you, millionaires. I love you, the folks that make $150,000. Oh, we love them so much we’re going to lavish a $230 million tax break on the people that least need it.”

[1140]

Meanwhile, we can’t get enough speech therapies for children living with autism. It’s deplorable, and we need a government that’s going to do something about it.

M. Bernier: On behalf of my constituents of Peace River South, I’m pleased to respond to the motion brought forward today by the member for Penticton. As mentioned, we were elected to control spending and balance the budget, and that’s exactly what we’re doing. By doing this, we’re setting the stage for a strong future.

Like the member for Penticton who spoke about lessons from his father, I, too, had a similar message given at me at every turn from my grandfather. He used to always tell me that you never buy something today that you have to pay for tomorrow, as not only will it cost you more, but you should only have what you’ve truly worked for. My grandfather was quite successful and always bragged about the fact that he never even had a credit card or a personal loan a day in his life. He was a tradesperson and was never unemployed. He showed me the importance of working hard and having an education.

Putting that together, I see why balancing the budget gives us the fiscal freedom to make strategic investments in our future in important things like our education. Since 2001 our government has committed more than $4.2 billion on capital maintenance projects for schools across our province. We’ve completed 108 new schools and replacements, 152 additions and 29 renovations, and we’ve carried out 29 site acquisitions.

Student and staff safety is also one of our government’s top priorities, and we take pride in the work that we’ve been doing in our seismic upgrades for our schools. We’ve committed or spent $2.2 billion to seismically upgrade or replace 213 high-risk schools across British Columbia.

We’re also dedicated to building new schools and additions to create additional space for students in school districts with increasing enrolments. Currently there are 37 projects underway, including seven new schools, eight facility replacements, two additions and 15 seismic upgrades. We’ve committed approximately $848 million for these projects. We’re able to accomplish these projects through fiscal prudence.

By controlling spending, our government is able to attract investors, which allows us to provide opportunities for people here in British Columbia and provide for well-paying jobs. We know that here in B.C. we are a province in high demand for tradespeople. It’s estimated that LNG alone could create over 100,000 jobs, especially in trades such as welders, heavy-duty-equipment mechanics and industrial electricians. In northern B.C. we’ve been seeing this growth for years — and the opportunities for people to have an education and good-paying, family-supporting jobs.

The government is committed to ensuring that B.C. has a well-trained workforce that will be ready for these jobs. That’s why I’m proud to see the investments that we’ve been making in our colleges and in our students. We’ve been investing in post-secondary institutions, providing grant opportunities for students to relocate, if needed for their education, and funds to help to purchase tools that are needed.

We have also been successful in our high school dual-credit programs. Graduation rates are going up, and students are getting hands-on training in trades at an earlier age, helping them make decisions on what they see themselves possibly pursuing as a career when they get older. What’s important is setting an example. As a government, when we can educate the next generation to be part of a thriving economy, when we can help the next generation to be productive parts of our society, that is something we need to do.

The best example we can show is the one that my grandfather taught me — showing others how we can live within our means and still prosper, for us to be able
[ Page 5981 ]
to make investments in education, make investments in the future and do that while showing fiscal restraint and balancing our budgets. That sets an example of what can be done.

In closing, we are committed to focusing on fiscal discipline and balancing our budget, preserving our triple-A credit rating. This means government can spend less on financing debt and more on paying for the services that British Columbians value, such as education, here in British Columbia.

[1145]

M. Elmore: I am very pleased to rise and speak on the motion this morning with respect to Budget 2015 and the role of a diverse economy in British Columbia. When we look at Budget 2015 and identify what the main priority is, the main message of this government that they’ve laid out for British Columbia in this coming year in terms of the economic priorities, we see that on the face of it, it’s characterized and summed up by looking at prioritizing the richest 2 percent and benefiting the wealthiest 2 percent in our province with a lavish tax cut of $230 million on the one side. How is that being balanced? Who’s paying for that?

We see a $230 million tax cut for B.C.’s wealthiest income earners, and who’s paying for that? That’s being balanced by the remaining 98 percent of British Columbians paying increased hidden taxes and fee increases, through medical service premiums being increased and increases in ICBC rates, which are going up this year and projected to increase again next year and the following year. We’re seeing increases in tuition — indeed, a doubling of tuition since this government came to power — increases in ferry fares and also increases, in terms of costs off-loaded, to seniors being able to access services in care homes.

We’re seeing really the priority of this government, with Budget 2015, in terms of who they think needs the biggest help in this province. According to them, it’s the wealthiest 2 percent. They give them a tax cut of $230 million and burden regular British Columbians and working families and even families in poverty, working and really struggling — low-income earners. These are the British Columbians who have to pay to offset that tax cut to the wealthiest in British Columbia. That’s the clear priority and message of Budget 2015.

Now let’s look at the claim of value in recognizing B.C.’s diverse economy. Well, that’s a revelation. We’re hearing that in the chamber from the government really within the last little while. The last several years we’ve heard nothing but how our liquefied natural gas industry, which has been a consistent sector of our economy, is going to deliver us great riches — a prosperity fund that’s been laid out, trillions of dollars, thousands of jobs, eliminating the debt and sales tax.

But when we look under that at the reality of our economy, B.C.’s diverse economies, our diverse economy has suffered from neglect from this government, through over a decade of neglect. We’ve heard from our colleague about the hollowing out of one of the mainstays of our diverse economy, our forestry industry.

While B.C. is rich in natural resources, the role and responsibility of the government is to marshal those resources that belong to British Columbians, to add value and develop those industries, provide opportunities for British Columbians and maximize the benefits for British Columbians. We have seen this government abandon that, abandon our forestry sector and undermine our value-added sector in forestry.

Let’s look at other aspects of our economy that have suffered under the misguided leadership of this government. We’ve got our manufacturing industry, which is another important value-added sector that has not really developed fully. We have our mining sector. We hear the government claimed to open a number of mines, but it’s really come out, on the balance, that we have not seen more mines open than close. We have also seen cutting of staff in permitting and deregulation in our mining sector, which has undermined the reputation and the success due to the tragedy at Mount Polley.

[1150]

We have seen, as well, a lack of support, a lack of leadership and a real disappointment in terms of this government not supporting our economy in British Columbia and providing opportunities for British Columbians.

R. Lee: Thank you to the member for Penticton for this motion so that we have the opportunity to discuss the value of a balanced budget built on a diverse economy to support B.C. families and communities and also to build a better, stronger province for future generations.

As we have heard from many members, the government has shown a commitment to introducing a third consecutive balanced budget. Through strong fiscal discipline, we are able to find room for more of these investments that strengthen and encourage growth in key economic sectors, sustain core public services and make life a little bit easier for families and those in need. We have heard from my colleagues regarding how a diverse economy has helped our good fiscal position. With controlled spending we can make investments in health care and education.

I would like to talk about some of the investments in social services and housing in our province, which are made possible because of the strong fiscal discipline. We are able to find room to invest so life is a little bit easier for those in need.

Since 2001 our government has invested over $4 billion providing affordable housing for low-income individuals, seniors and families, thanks to the Minister Responsible for Housing. As a measure to protect affordable housing stocks for the most vulnerable citizens, our government has purchased 23 and leased another three
[ Page 5982 ]
single-room-occupancy hotels since April 2007. Many of those SROs are in need of repair. Thirteen sites are currently being restored through a public-private partnership with the federal government. The total cost to the province is — listen to this — $87.3 million, with additional funding over a 15-year period. The federal share is $29.1 million, through the P3 Canada fund.

I’m pleased our government is also working with eight municipalities to create more housing and supports for people who are homeless or at risk.

In Vancouver our government has paid for eight predevelopment costs and provided capital funding for 14 city-owned sites that will provide over 1,500 new supportive housing units. Currently eight sites have been completed, with another five under construction, and one site is under development. I hope the city of Burnaby, actually, will work with the provincial government in the future to provide some housing in Burnaby.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Our government, through B.C. Housing, has been working through the community partnership initiatives to provide mortgage financing for a range of affordable rental housing and licensed care facilities, including the purchase and conversion of existing units — for example, in the city of North Vancouver, John Yeomans Place; in the city of Abbotsford, the Lynnhaven project; and also the McCauley Lodge in the capital region for adults living with mental health supports.

Our government is committed to providing the best care for seniors through the seniors rental housing initiative. We provide $123 million to oversee the creation of 1,200 new housing units for seniors with disabilities in more than 40 communities.

Thanks to the member for Comox Valley, and also with some help from the member for Vancouver–False Creek, our government did a three-month consultation so that we can focus on making British Columbia the most progressive place in Canada for people with disabilities.

Our government provided recently $2 million through the Ministry of Health for new technologies to enhance independence. We also helped people with disability assistance in terms of income — 175,000 people. We are providing a lot of help in community living as well.

Noting the time, I would like to stop right now. Thanks for the motion.

R. Lee moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. T. Lake moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: This House, at its rising, stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:55 a.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