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, March 23, 2015

Morning Sitting

Volume 22, Number 1

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

MONDAY, MARCH 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

INVESTING IN THE CREATIVE ECONOMY

N. Simons: Good morning to my colleagues in the House.

This morning I’d like to talk for a few minutes just about the importance of investing in the creative economy. But first, I’ll try and address the significant challenge in describing what exactly the creative economy is, because I think everyone who thinks about what creativity is and what the economy is has their own perspective on how you put those two things together.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

In my view, any discussion about the creative economy has to at least include the discussion around arts and culture. I think it’s important to recognize that arts and culture — the traditional arts of music, art, drama, dance — are essential in any discussion about the creative economy.

I think the creative economy is one that is described by different governments in different ways. I’d say that in the last 15 years or so it’s been a focus of many governments. I think that most governments have seen an opportunity to expand the base of their economies by putting an extra focus on ensuring that our communities are made up and comprised of people who either have an appreciation for arts and culture or are willing to invest in that particular sector.

Obviously, the creative economy includes discussions about the non-profit sector as well as the private sector. The private sector plays a huge role in our creative economy. They are essential, like film and digital media, gaming. All of those are part of one side of what we call the creative economy.

[1005]

We also have individuals and communities that play an essential role in ensuring that our creative economy is one that is strong and that is sustainable. Let me just read a list here so we don’t leave anything out.

Advertising and marketing agencies can be considered part of the creative economy, with the designers and the layout artists and the folks who actually create advertising and marketing schemes. Architecture. Visual arts and crafts. That, of course, includes museums, galleries and theatres, all of the curators and the artists and the artisans that are involved in those. Design, film and media, video game and software, music and performing arts. They, of course, are close to my heart.

My entire family, I think, is in some way involved with the creative economy, whether it’s in the administration of music programs or the delivery of music programs or participating as a student in programs that promote creativity. The question, I think, is not just what the creative industries and the creative economy are but why they are important.

I think many people try to list or compare the amount of investment with a potential financial return per dollar. That’s an important argument to make. I think it’s a valid one, when we talk about if we invest a certain amount in the arts, we’ll get — I think it’s one to seven — $7 returned for every dollar invested. I could stand corrected on that. Suffice it to say, most of us in our modern society will agree that the investment in creative economies and the knowledge-based economies, which I think are also intertwined, does much more than just improve our economic stature as a society. I think what we need to recognize is that the intangible elements of the creative economy are equally important.

When we have a society where children have an opportunity to be exposed to music and to art and to drama, their minds are developed in a way that those who don’t get exposed to the same things…. It’s different. I would say that an essential investment in the creative economy, in creative industries, is ensuring that children in our school systems have the exposure necessary to develop a mind of inquisitiveness, of exploration, of searching.

When we inculcate in our families and in our communities this desire for greater knowledge and for creative ways of thinking and creative ways of problem-solving, we’ve identified something more than just the economic benefits. We can even calculate those. When we see that a community is healthy and well educated, it’s also a community that looks after one another. It’s a community that’s safer.

We can certainly look at many studies that link opportunities for extracurricular activities with lower crime rates, with a higher quality of life, with longevity and with higher individual earnings, when people are employed in the sector.

My focus, I would suggest, if it’s not clear, is that the importance of investing in our creative economy is as important as investing in any part of our economy. I know that I share the view with most people in this House that our province has made some investments through the B.C. Arts Council and through Creative B.C. I would suggest that the most important place to invest in our creative economy is in young people and in schools to ensure that we not only have people who are able to produce later on in life, in terms of their ability to create new products or
[ Page 6764 ]
to market new products, but also to just ensure that our communities are safe and our communities are healthy.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing my colleague from the other side.

[1010]

L. Reimer: It is with great pleasure that I stand and respond to the statement by the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast — investment in the creative economy. This topic resonates with me in particular, as I represent Port Moody, the City of the Arts.

Through a visionary goal to be the City of the Arts, there is an evolving public arts program — much of which is geared to young people: a growing number of community events such as the Wearable Art Awards and the Mad Hatter Tea Party, Rocky Point Park summer music series, film festivals and art shows, as well as a weekend rock and gem show.

The arts are integrated into Port Moody’s environment. Facilities like Inlet Theatre, Kyle Centre, the Port Moody rec centre and the Port Moody Arts Centre, which now includes the Appleyard home and the Port Moody Station Museum, stimulate, educate and motivate engagement with the arts.

The city of Port Moody has an experienced staff that believes in providing economical and easy experiences for filmmakers and crews. A committed police force with familiarity shooting on location, a variety of distinct locations and a clear permit process set Port Moody apart as a film-friendly city.

Movies and television shows that have been filmed in Port Moody include Juno, Percy Jackson and the Olympians, the Twilight series, The Killing, season 4, Arrow, Aliens Versus Predator, Falling Skies. I believe a scene from Superman: Man of Steel was filmed in Port Moody as well.

To help further the programs in Port Moody, organizations in Port Moody received over $1 million in gaming grants in 2013-14 alone. As well, the Port Moody Arts Centre was a recipient of Creative Spaces funding in the amount of $25,000.

B.C.’s creative industry is currently recognized for having the highest number of interactive gaming companies in Canada, being one of the leading motion picture production centres in North America and producing a large number of successful and internationally renowned musicians.

British Columbia has a strong foundation for developing creative talent through well-established post-secondary institutions such as Simon Fraser University; UBC; the B.C. Institute of Technology; Capilano University; Emily Carr University of Art and Design and their innovative cooperative centre, the Centre for Digital Media.

In addition to the innovative nature of the creative industries in the province, the sector also makes use of a common talent pool. B.C.’s creative industries do not operate in separate silos but find common ground, as well as business opportunities, among firms and across sectors.

British Columbia is gaining global recognition for its digital media sector, hosting innovative wireless and mobile products, video gaming, animation and visual effects, web and social media. British Columbia is a key location for film and TV production in North America and a leading hub for digital animation and visual effects.

Industry advised us that they wanted to go to one place for film, digital media and the creative industries. This is the reason that we created Creative B.C. in April 2013 — a non-profit society to serve as a one-stop shop for B.C.’s growing film, television and digital media centre. Creative B.C. is also responsible for developing the province’s wider creative sector, which includes magazine and book publishing and the music industry.

As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development, I’m proud to reiterate the great investment that goes towards developing the diverse talents of emerging and established artists, as well as supporting primarily not-for-profit organizations in over 200 communities.

With an annual investment of over $57 million, the ministry has provided funding to the B.C. Arts Council, the arts legacy fund, arts and culture programs, arts branch operations, the Royal B.C. Museum and $17.5 million in arts and culture community gaming grants. Culture represents $4.78 billion of B.C.’s GDP, a 2.5 percent share of the provincial economy, with culture jobs totalling 78,051 in 2010.

In 2013-14, 195 not-for-profit cultural organizations funded by the B.C. Arts Council leveraged $200 million from the $11 million annual provincial investment, through earned private sector and other public sector revenues.

In summary, this government is working hard to foster creativity and to help it grow. It adds heart to our communities and is an important economic driver.

N. Simons: I thank the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam for that insight into the government’s role in promoting the creative sectors. I appreciate the facts and figures, which were absent from what I had spoken of, but I think it’s important.

[1015]

And I think it’s important to recognize that those investments are thought through and are targeted and are part of perhaps a larger plan. We’re not entirely sure.

What I would like to emphasize is the importance of…. The people who consume the products and services that have been described by the minister need to be an appreciative audience. That appreciative audience comes from a community that continues to nurture young people in those particular activities as well.
[ Page 6765 ]

My emphasis on education and promotion of cultural activities and imagination in young people also ties somewhat to the importance of post-secondary education, as mentioned by my colleague from Port Moody–Coquitlam. I think that while we do have institutions of higher learning in this province that do a very good job with respect to helping to develop the talent that exists in our community, we do need to make those opportunities more accessible to more people.

When you look at the tuition rates…. I’m not about to launch into the problem of tuition rates. We need to make sure of access to not only the arts and culture that our community creates — it’s important — but access for those who wish to continue their pursuits in those areas. I think we benefit because of the innovation that comes from the creative side of our community.

I think it spreads really well into technology and into other areas of innovation when we think outside the box, when we promote creative and critical thinking. I think that all comes from a strong foundation in creativity. As long as I’m the opposition critic for arts and culture, my focus will be to ensure that the institutions and organizations and services that exist in this province are adequately supported and continue to feel like they have the ear of the government.

I thank the member opposite for her comments. That’s a nice way to start a Monday.

FOOD BANKS

S. Hamilton: On behalf of my constituents in Delta North, it gives me great pleasure to stand before you and speak to the important topic of food banks and the importance of helping to get more food in the hands and on the plates of the people who need it.

The first food bank in Canada opened its doors in 1981 in Edmonton, Alberta. While food banks were originally intended to be a temporary measure, the need for them continued and, in fact, grew. Today there are more than 800 food banks and 3,000 food programs in Canada.

Most people are aware that food banks offer food assistance. They may not be familiar with the variety of different types of programs offered. These include sharing hampers of food and personal care products, preparing and serving meals from soup kitchens, operating snack programs, providing post-secondary campus food programs, running community kitchens and organizing community gardens.

In addition, the people who turn to food banks often need other types of assistance. Food banks have responded, and many now provide advocacy and support — providing skills training such as food preparation skills; helping people to search for jobs and transition into employment; raising community awareness about hunger and poverty; assisting with the search for safe, affordable housing; helping people find good-quality, affordable child care; and providing referrals to other service agencies and support services.

Most food banks and food programs depend heavily on volunteers for much or all of their operational activities. In fact, close to 40 percent of food banks are run solely by volunteers. Their important work is made possible through contributions from corporate sponsors, individual donations, community support, parent organizations and the provincial and federal governments.

I’d like to make particular mention of the Surrey Food Bank Society, which also serves my community in North Delta. In June 1983 it was formed and opened up in a dilapidated building on King George Highway. The location and the society itself were deemed to be a temporary measure until the economy turned around and people could get back on their feet.

What began as a temporary solution to a temporary problem has grown to a 7,000-square-foot warehouse in Whalley, a fleet of four vehicles, a lift truck, 100 active volunteers and a core staff of 13.

The Surrey Food Bank Society currently distributes approximately 2,000 food hampers each week and has expanded support on many other internal programs and agencies and is affiliated with many different food security programs, such as harvest box and the Food Action Coalition. At the Surrey Food Bank they say: “We give people a hand up, not a handout.” It’s true, and I thank them for their contribution to this province.

[1020]

Another example that I’m proud to share with this House is the great support from my community of North Delta, where Delview Secondary School recently hosted its 22nd Thanks for Giving food drive, the largest single-day food drive in B.C. More than 450 students at the North Delta school were involved in the food drive, with 90 teams of people, including staff and parents, coming together to canvass the neighbourhood for donations. Together, and in under three hours, they collected 10,000 cans and other food items, with all proceeds going to Deltassist and the Surrey Food Bank.

The B.C. government is working to help make life more affordable for British Columbians and to support vulnerable families. Government has provided low-income families with enhanced supports and is increasing opportunities to improve their economic well-being.

This year, in 2014-2015, the B.C. government is investing more than $51 million in the CommunityLINK program and $11.2 million in an additional vulnerable student supplement that supports meal and snack programs, child and youth workers, inner-city and community schools, literacy and healthy school programs for vulnerable students.

No discussion of hunger is complete without acknowledging the root cause, which of course is low income. Under the B.C. jobs plan, we remain focused on the long-term fundamentals to grow B.C.’s diverse economy and support job creation. With near record employment of
[ Page 6766 ]
almost 2.3 million people working, it’s clear that we’re seeing results. B.C.’s unemployment rate is consistently below the national average.

As of two weeks ago, this government also raised the minimum wage to $10.45 an hour to keep B.C. in line with other Canadian jurisdictions — a modest increase, admittedly, but one that adds certainty to the business community as well as certainty to the people who are going to require the wage increases going forward to help support and sustain their families.

I just wanted to conclude my first portion of this debate with a sincere thank-you to all of those who tirelessly work in their communities to strengthen our province’s 95 food banks so that chronic hunger in our local communities is alleviated while we all work to find long-term solutions to hunger.

M. Mungall: It’s my pleasure to be able to respond to the member’s comments on food banks and the great work that they do throughout this province and, indeed, throughout the entire country.

I have firsthand knowledge of what food banks do. From 2003 to 2005 I had the privilege of running the Nelson Food Cupboard. I was their manager, and I was the manager of one staff person but 50 volunteers. The member noted that no food bank could do its great work without the work of volunteers. We relied on about 50 volunteers each week to contribute their time and energy to making that “Little food bank that could” do its work.

We operated out of the basement of the Nelson United Church, and we provided all of the service that the member noted. We did food-security workshops, where people learned how to freeze, can and preserve food. We did workshops where people learned how to cook.

Some of the things that were available at the food bank…. As everybody knows, the offerings at any food bank are very limited and normally regulated to non-perishable items. So how do we cook without fresh fruits and veggies and so on? Or how do we use fresh fruits and veggies that perhaps are less costly than a pineapple in February, for example, or how do we maybe use celery root in the middle of winter? We did all of that work.

We did food drives, and the member mentioned the food drive done in his community that received 10,000 cans of food. We did food drives, as well, in Nelson, and they do food drives all over the province. But the reality is that no matter how successful your food drive, the demand will always outstrip the supply.

I cannot begin to tell you how, every day, a single mom or a single dad would come in looking for extras, like granola bars, fruit rollups or cereal or fruit cups for their children. Sometimes I’d say, “Yes, we have it,” and sometimes I’d say: “No, we don’t.” That meant that their child wasn’t getting a proper breakfast in the morning, and I had to know that, every day. Every volunteer and every staff member at a food bank knows that.

[1025]

I also know that there is no other organization, countrywide, that is more dedicated to putting themselves out of business. If food banks didn’t need to exist, the first people that would celebrate that are the very volunteers and the staff at food banks. They know that they’re only there…. They were supposed to be there for a temporary measure, and yet here we are, thirty years later, and we’re still relying on food banks.

People who have income supports like disability and welfare in this province are consistently directed by the ministry offices to go to food banks to supplement their food needs. We know that rates are too low. Twelve percent of those helped by food banks are actually working, so we know that a job isn’t the only solution, as members opposite suggest.

In British Columbia 30 percent of people who rely on food banks are children. And 97,369 was last year’s HungerCount total for British Columbia. The change from 2008: 2014 is up 19,268.

This government continually lauds the activities that they undertake to reduce poverty, but they have no plan — still the only province without a plan in the entire country — and no wonder poverty keeps going up. That’s what this government has offered to the rest of Canada: to be No. 1 in poverty rates in this country, No. 1 in child poverty rates for a decade.

When we see the work that food banks do…. They are the stopgap measure to this government not having a poverty reduction plan and a fulsome, true plan that addresses poverty, that makes sure that when parents need cereal, need fruit rollups, need fruit cups and need granola bars, they have the income necessary to go to the grocery store and purchase those items to make sure their children are going to school with a full belly so that they can learn and access every opportunity available to them in life.

S. Hamilton: I thank the member for Nelson-Creston for her comments. You know, with regard to her assertion that we have no poverty reduction plan, it’s my firm belief that this side of the House does have a poverty reduction plan. It’s called putting people to work.

When you can provide good-paying, sustainable jobs for the people in this province and you put people to work — good jobs — they bring home food, they support their families, they put their children through school, they do everything that’s expected of them as good parents, and what’s more important, those children grow up to be good citizens and good contributors to this province as well.

As I said, we can’t talk about hunger without acknowledging its root cause. Yes, I agree. Low income is a root cause, and that’s why this government has worked tirelessly for more than a decade to position B.C. where it is today — a diverse, strong and growing economy. It’s a significant accomplishment in an uncertain global economy.
[ Page 6767 ]

I alluded earlier to the other tools that this government has implemented to support families, including tax policy, social supports, education and training. Government has improved extended and added tax credits and programs to help support B.C. families and keep life affordable, including for 2015 we’re providing a small enhancement to the B.C. tax reduction. This will mean that a single individual earns more than $19,000 a year before paying any provincial personal income tax.

Now that’s modest, and this measure will benefit roughly 500,000 people in this province — 500,000 taxpayers — letting them keep more of their hard-earned money, so they can spend it on their families.

Last week you also heard about the other measures the government is taking to remove barriers and open new opportunities for British Columbians to move up the income scale.

We announced a significant change to the income and disability assistance program that will help single parents secure meaningful jobs by allowing them to stay on assistance for up to 12 months while they train for their new job, including their benefits and including child care.

This major program, a $24½ million investment over five years, recognizes how challenging it can be as a single parent in this province, especially when transitioning to the workforce.

[1030]

The government raised the earnings exception last Tuesday from $200 to $400 for single parents on income assistance, allowing a person to earn more money from a job without jeopardizing their full provincial support payments. Families with children who receive income assistance double their monthly income exemption from $200 to $400 a month and it increases from $300 to $500 a month for families who have a child with a disability. Effective September 1, these changes won’t affect their income assistance rates. Families will also be able to keep their basic health supplement coverage for a full year when they leave income assistance for employment.

I could always say more, but thank you very much for your time. I’ll conclude my debate. Cheers.

HEALTHCARE NOT JAIL CELLS

S. Hammell: In every corner of the province over the last ten years there has been a significant increase in mental health–related calls to the police. This is occurring up and down this Island, in Vancouver, in its suburbs, in the Fraser Valley, in the Interior, the north, the Okanagan and the Kootenays. In every corner of the province police departments have been scrambling to find solutions and voicing their concerns in the media regarding the time and resources they are putting into addressing these calls, as they are not receiving the necessary supports, they believe, from the province.

Victoria’s police chief called the numbers alarming. Victoria police have seen a 356 percent increase in disturbed-persons calls over the last five years, from 226 calls in 2008 to 1,031 calls in 2013. The biggest spike was between 2009 and 2010, when such calls more than doubled, from 314 to 674 calls.

“Victoria police chief Frank Elsner called the numbers ‘alarming.’ ‘More and more people are presenting with mental health issues, and their first point of contact is with police….’ ‘Is that the most appropriate place of contact? My view is absolutely not. Often we don’t have the resources, we don’t have the training, nor are we the appropriate agency to deal with people who have health issues, be it a mental one, but it’s a health issue, not a criminal issue.’”

He said some nights the vast majority, if not all, of his officers are tied up with mental health calls.

“‘Rightly so, governments have moved away from institutionalizing people with mental illness to a community approach,’ Elsner said. ‘The problem is it has been drastically underfunded for years. So I think what we are seeing now is a result of that drastic underfunding.’”

A major police chief is crying for better funding for mental health. If we switch the focus from a major city to a small city, the Nelson area has also seen a dramatic increase in police calls involving emotionally disturbed individuals. The police department is struggling to keep up. In 2014 the Nelson police department received 1,050 calls related to mental health, compared to 986 in 2013.

The response is: this is not sustainable. “This is not sustainable,” said police chief Wayne Holland, who plans to present his findings to the mayor, the city council and the Nelson police board.

“‘We’ve noticed a real spike. What we’re seeing now, for the fifth year in a row and for the same reasons that this was happening for the last four or five years, is we’ve become a centralized repository of services for people with mental health distress. They’ve come to Nelson to avail themselves of our services.’ He said this means the police are dealing with a number of mental health calls unmatched in the province, comparable only to the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, where he used to work.”

[1035]

Sgt. Dino Falcone also says the police force is feeling the strain. “There have been double the number of calls involving emotionally disturbed people in January 2015 compared to January 2014.” We’re still talking about the tiny city of Nelson. “And we haven’t even finished the month yet.” That was when this comment was made. Falcone and his fellow officers have been making trips back and forth from the hospital, ferrying suicidal, depressed and hallucinating residents. “It makes it really challenging. We’re always the last resort, and we’re not trained mental health professionals.”

I know it’s a tough time of the year — winter. Holland does say the police force wants to help troubled individuals but needs better tools and resources.

So not only in Victoria and Nelson, but in Delta, a city of nearly 100,000 people, the municipal police force deals with numerous cases of mental health issues, handling 850 cases per year, about 20 to 25 percent of all their calls.

In Prince George in 2013 the RCMP received 1,016 calls related to mental health. That represents a 40 percent increase from the number they received in 2006. In
[ Page 6768 ]
Richmond the answer is the same: their detachment is experiencing an escalation.

What we cannot condone and we cannot continue to support is mental health issues being treated by the police instead of an effective mental health care system. This is not what people deserve with mental health issues. They deserve the same care and respect as any other health care issue, and it’s time for all of us to confront the stigma surrounding mental health, the mental health of our citizens and create a system throughout the province that provides mental health services when and where they are needed.

M. Morris: I’ve had, my whole life, experiences dealing with people with mental issues of one kind or another, particularly during my career as an RCMP officer. In every community that I policed in this province there were individuals suffering from some type of psychosis or mental health issue, often compounded with addictions, whether it was drug, alcohol or some type of substance like that.

In all those communities that I policed over the years, mental health has been a troubling issue to deal with for police from a resource perspective and from a community perspective, as well, because many of these communities didn’t have the necessary resources in place to deal with that.

Oftentimes police officers…. This is as true today as it was when I started policing back in the early ’70s and throughout my career. When you go to a community, you very quickly, as a police officer, identify those individuals who are suffering from some type of mental disorder, who are suffering from some addictions that are compounding that issue. We develop relationships with those individuals, particularly in the smaller communities, because we’re very prevalent in the communities. You establish that level of trust. You also establish a relationship with the families so that when these individuals go off their medications, the families often would call us on days off to go and help them convince and cajole or whatever we needed to do to get the individuals back on their medication.

I know that exists today. I’ve got two sons in the RCMP, and they carry on the same types of work that I did during my career as well, dealing with people with mental illness and addiction.

[1040]

That leads me to another point. When we have people that have severe addictions and they’re also suffering from some type of mental disorder, oftentimes the addiction compounds the issue to the point where it’s very difficult for any health authority to establish an accurate diagnosis and a treatment or a therapeutic regime that will bring these people out of that situation.

It’s the police that respond. Everybody in this country…. We have a great country, where people are free to make their own choices regardless of their abilities and their mental capacities. These people make choices. They go off their medication, and when they’re off their medication, they’re not in the same frame of mind that they would be normally. They make decisions or choices when they’re in that capacity that make them commit crimes. Oftentimes it might be simple shoplifting at a local pharmacy to take cough syrup off the shelf that might feed their addiction, or some other drug or narcotic.

Needless to say, they make those choices which put them in contact with the police — nobody else. It’s a criminal offence that’s taken place, and the police have to intervene and deal with that situation.

The province has addressed that in recent times. We have what we refer to as assertive community treatment teams, or ACT teams. We have them in Vancouver. We have them in Surrey. We have them in Victoria. And we’re looking at models throughout the province, including areas like Prince George, where if the police do come across somebody like this, we’ve got the whole community — the health officials and whatnot — behind that individual, behind that police officer, that will go in and provide that intervention.

I don’t know how we’re ever going to get away from the police being the first responders to deal with people with mental illness and addictions who are making choices that lead them towards criminal activity. The police are the only ones that deal with criminal activity.

But we are putting the systems in place behind the police officers and within the communities, where we can treat these people more effectively and, hopefully, get them on a medical regime that stabilizes them, makes them contributing people to the community and keeps them out of harm’s way — keeps them out of the headlights of the police officer, for example, and provides the police more opportunities to deal with the other, more pressing, matters in the community.

Mental health is something that everybody has to turn their attention to. Everybody in the community has to do their bit to try and help these individuals who are making these poor choices that put them in harm’s way — help the families and help the institutions that are providing these types of services to the mental health people in the community.

S. Hammell: I do respect and appreciate the comments made by the member opposite. I do also understand the nature of his previous employment and that he was on the front line with some of the issues. But what we’re talking about is not only the most severe kind of issues around mental health but a general approach where the officers are the first line of contact. Often, as even identified by the blue-ribbon report that has been presented from the opposite side, jail is not the solution and front-line police trying to deal with the issue is not necessarily the answer.
[ Page 6769 ]

One of the officers in charge that I spoke to in one of the small towns in British Columbia was clearly distressed over this issue and said: “We are now not enforcing the Criminal Code, but we are trying to deal with the dysfunction in the community.” This is not people who are at the far end of a psychosis that need serious intervention but just a general malaise in the community that is not being dealt with effectively by our system.

Another key concern with a lack of services for people with mental illness and addiction came from the report on the blue-ribbon panel. We just don’t have enough services to deal with these people, either upstream or downstream, when it comes to mental health issues. We’ve not given mental health that kind of serious priority and rather have let the police pick it up and deal with it even though they’re not trained.

[1045]

In one small town they described how a young girl was jailed, put in a cell, because she was having a psychosis and also had some issues with drugs, and the hospital could not take her. So we are defaulting to a jail system for our mentally ill.

We know from the reports from this government that 56 percent of the people in our jail systems have some issues with mental illness and addiction. What we have done is we’ve gone full circle from where we kept people in asylums to where we are now keeping them in jail due to behaviour that often flows directly from mental illness. In all understanding, it would be better if we got upstream on this issue, tried to work with people before they became issues of the police.

CANADA’S RENMINBI TRADING HUB

R. Sultan: I would like to make a statement supporting the initiatives of British Columbia, Ontario and Canada to establish an active renminbi hub in Canada. This will build upon the accords and initiatives entered into by Prime Minister Harper in his visit to Beijing last November as well as building on the trade mission to China by our own Premier accompanied by the minister responsible for international trade and our Asia Pacific strategy.

This took place soon after the provincial election in November 2013. One purpose was to express the deep interest of this government in strengthening relations with the Vancouver-headquartered Agricultural Bank of China and with Chairman Tian of the Bank of China, who subsequently moved his own international financial centre from Toronto to Vancouver, a signal accomplishment which received little attention at the time, I might say. These are all important ingredients for success of the fledgling renminbi hub.

My remarks today will further expand on those I made several weeks ago in this Legislature confirming this government’s support of the renminbi hub concept and endorsing the years of promotion effort by our own international financial centre, a cooperative financial industry effort now relabelled Advantage B.C.

Why is the renminbi hub so vital to British Columbia? Well, I can count at least four fundamental reasons.

One, China has become, as has been said before in this House, our second-largest trading partner — something that happened, actually, on the watch of this government, so that’s something to acknowledge. Anything which reduces the foreign exchange conversion costs inherent in that trading relationship between our two countries will improve our efficiency and our cost-competitiveness.

Two, we also now have opened up to us the opportunity to become a similarly important foreign exchange centre for trade between all of North America and China, and this involves staggering figures on the quantity side. Of course, with these quantities, as I said in my previous remarks, come very attractive earnings and profits.

Thirdly, not only will our local exporting industries benefit; new jobs will be created. A recent study published in the Toronto Star reveals how important employment in the financial services sector is to the Toronto economy. We have a chance to emulate them. A recent Vancouver study put our financial services sector employment in the 50,000-to-60,000 range in Metro Vancouver. Toronto, a city with a metropolitan area approximately double ours of Vancouver, has a financial services employment base about five or six times greater.

Why is this? It would not be beyond the realm of possibility to aspire to double our own financial service sector employment base in the Lower Mainland, particularly if we play the renminbi hub well.

Why are financial sector jobs so attractive? Because they pay well, are relatively secure — a secure tomorrow — and incorporate the higher education in human capital which British Columbia creates in abundance. And not incidentally, these people pay a lot of income taxes, which helps government pay for a lot of social programs.

[1050]

The fourth and final reason for strongly supporting the renminbi hub is the fact that it builds upon B.C.’s financial strengths. There is an important and often overlooked synergy between our government’s solid financial performance, our existing banking system’s reputation for conservatism and strength, and the perceived attractiveness of Vancouver as a financial centre.

This is as much a reputation game as it is a numbers game. Guess what. The reputation of London, England, at the moment as a financial centre internationally is drifting downward a little bit because of what some would call the mismanagement of that country’s financial affairs. And guess what. Toronto is now suffering the same fate, and we all know about Ontario’s struggles with their fiscal dimension. Meanwhile, Vancouver’s reputation as an international financial centre is climbing. Astonishingly enough, it easily surpasses Calgary. That surprised me.
[ Page 6770 ]

So the stars have aligned. The basics are in place. The rest is simply education and marketing. Let’s do it.

B. Ralston: I want to thank the member for West Vancouver–Capilano for his comments. Indeed, as we speak this morning, Canada’s Finance Minister and the Chinese Ambassador to Canada will officially inaugurate the opening of a Canadian offshore trading hub for Chinese currency by signing a memorandum of understanding at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre this morning or later today. So the choice of today as a date for discussing this initiative is an entirely appropriate one.

A number of the players appeared before the Commons Finance Committee. Of course, the parliament has an operative committee system. There Rob Stewart, who’s an assistant deputy minister in the ministry of trade, explained briefly what the RMB hub is intended to do for Canadian trade.

There’s an offshore pool that trades in RMB — typically out of Hong Kong, but there are other centres in London, Luxembourg, Singapore and Frankfurt — and there’s an onshore pool that trades only in mainland China. In the spot foreign exchange markets the onshore pool is larger — $17 billion U.S. average daily turnover compared to about $13 billion for the total offshore average these days.

What the RMB trading hub does — it’s not really a physical location; it’s a virtual location — is it will give access to the onshore RMB market in addition to the offshore market. China has designated the Industrial and Commercial Bank as the RMB clearinghouse here in Canada. It will be able to access directly the People’s Bank of China payment systems to clear RMB-denominated transactions to and from Canada.

As a practical matter for those who import from China, historically Canadian companies have done business by using U.S. dollars to pay Chinese suppliers. That was a currency that, of course, the Chinese suppliers would accept. This arrangement adds the opportunity to purchase directly and denominate those transactions in RMB, the Chinese currency, which reduces the transaction costs — that is, the cost of converting from Canadian dollars to U.S. dollars to RMB — by 5 to 8 percent. That adds significantly to the cost of imports into Canada and changes the dimensions of the problem appreciably and will grow Canadian trade.

Mr. MingXuan Zhu, the president and the chief executive officer of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of Canada, also said that there is some urgency to this. He expressed challenges. One of those is that there’s “a limited time window for us to implement it because China is liberalizing capital accounts. I’m guessing in the future, in three to four years, China will be liberalizing this more, so we only have four years, with respect to an RMB carrying centre, to fully utilize our competitive advantage.”

[1055]

There’s low awareness of this among Canadian business — he estimates 5 percent — so there’s a job of explaining that to people. To generate the trading volumes that are necessary, it will be important to draw in American companies and give them the knowledge and opportunity to avail themselves of the RMB trading hub in Canada in order that they can take advantage of the significant reduction in exchange costs.

In addition, there’s a need to develop tailor-made RMB products, which Chinese banks and Canadian banks will be developing. So it is an opportunity to reduce the cost of trade and thereby expand trade with what is our second-biggest trading partner, the People’s Republic of China.

R. Sultan: I’d like to thank the member for Surrey-Whalley for his, as often is the case, well-researched and thoughtful remarks.

I will wind up with a few comments on what I see, in a very rough and ready way, that it will take to really make the renminbi hub take off. As the member opposite has pointed out, time is of the essence.

In my view, three L’s, starting with location. Due to our location on the Pacific Rim, if we can’t outhustle the rest of the continent in doing business with China, we’d better turn in our frequent-flyer cards.

Two, language, the second L. The same holds true in language and culture, but on that score, where is our education system when it comes to teaching Mandarin? French-English bilingualism is great. It’s built into our constitution. It’s part of our national heritage, but it shouldn’t necessarily be our very top language priority in this province. This is my contention.

Third L, love. We need a bit of love here.

How do we inject more love? Well, for starters, let’s stop demonizing banking. When I went into politics, it was suggested that I really didn’t want to mention the disquieting news that I had been a senior vice-president of the Royal Bank of Canada and a full-fledged member of their operating committee. “Too controversial. Don’t mention that, Ralph.”

This town is still trying to live down the rhetoric surrounding Davey Barrett’s — you remember him? — introduction of a capital tax on the banks, those dastardly banks, and its subsequent dissolution by Carole Taylor. Read the blogs. They’re still there to peruse. “Something fishy is going on here.” That’s the common complaint. A capital tax — which, by the way, the member opposite resuscitated and mused about in the period running up to the previous election….

Finally, we should get out of court on our tax disputes. If there’s anything that our current Attorney General has stood for, it’s negotiated settlement of these disputes which arise from time to time.

I could go on. To sum up, the ingredients of success are quite elementary — location, language and love.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, the member for North Island is seeking the floor. Unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 10 without disturbing
[ Page 6771 ]
the priorities of motions proceeding on the order paper. Is unanimous consent granted?

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 10 — FERRY SYSTEM AS
PART OF PROVINCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE

C. Trevena: I’m very pleased to speak to this motion.

[Be it resolved that this House agrees that B.C. needs a ferry system that is part of the provincial infrastructure, working for the benefit of B.C.’s economy and communities.]

I’m hoping that we do get unanimous support on this motion because I do believe it is long overdue. It’s been 12 years since we’ve seen, effectively, what I would describe as an ideological attack on our ferry system. This, I think, is extremely unfortunate because it has for many generations been seen as part of our infrastructure.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

If you go back to when B.C. Ferries was first established under the Socred government of W.A.C. Bennett, it was seen as essential to our economic growth and our physical infrastructure. That has been the case right the way through up until the election in 2001 of then Premier Gordon Campbell and this iteration of the B.C. Liberals.

[1100]

For more than 12 years we have B.C. Ferries neglected. We’ve seen it downgraded. We’ve seen fares increase, and we’ve seen services cut. There we have the mantra. Fares go up, services are cut, and ridership goes down. But this is an extraordinarily complex province. This is one of the things that I think that the government has been missing.

I hope that we’ll have a healthy discussion here. We are a very large, very complex province, with many, many coastal communities. You can’t forget that we are here on an island — the capital of our province is on an island — and that we have had, for generations, a ferry system that links the mainland to this island and to other islands so that we can benefit from, and our economy can benefit from, that link.

Many of our natural resources are on our islands. Even some of the resources that built this wonderful building come from Haddington Island, which is just outside Port McNeill and which you pass through when you’re going on the ferry from Port McNeill to Alert Bay.

As I say, we have a complex structure. We have much of our forestry communities, our coastal forestry communities, on islands that rely on the ferry system. We absolutely need to have an understanding of the complexity.

We also have to have an understanding of what infrastructure is. Last week, when we had the Ferry Commissioner announcing the next four-year plan, from 2016 to 2020, for our ferry system, he announced that there would be yet again an increase in fares of 1.9 percent — on average, of 2 percent — across the system for four years. This is on top of years of increases.

At that time I mentioned that maybe what we needed was to have more government investment in our ferry system. I think it is really one of the ways to tackle this, to make sure that instead of users paying 100 percent of the operating costs, as they are on B.C. Ferries — every person who uses our ferry is paying 100 percent of the costs — we get some of that from government investment, both federal investment and provincial investment. The Minister of Transportation had the audacity to deride that and say: “Where does the member think you’re going to get the money from?”

Nobody questions where you’re going to get money for the physical infrastructure of roads, of bridges, of highways. The day before, the minister had announced a ten-year transportation plan. Nobody questioned where the money for that was coming from. It was taken for granted that you’re going to have investment in your infrastructure because it’s good for our economy. It’s good for our communities. It’s good for our growth.

Likewise, investing in our ferry system is good for our economy, it’s good for our communities, and it’s very good for the growth of B.C. We really need to be looking at how we inject money in rather than turn it around and say to those people who are using the ferry system that you pay ever-increasing tolls.

We’ve seen the ridership go down to all-time low levels. We see that the fares are going to continue going up. We see that there is no solution. If we really want to grow B.C. and grow the economy, as I think everybody in this House wants to…. We want to have a healthy economy in our province. We want to have a healthy future for ourselves, for our children, for our grandchildren. We want to make sure that we are attracting investment from around the world and allowing investment to grow here in B.C. To do that, you need to invest in your infrastructure.

I thank you very much. I know that there are many people who want to participate in this debate, and I’ll take my seat.

M. Hunt: British Columbia’s coastal and inland ferry systems are an important part of the province’s integrated transportation system. Certainly, the ferry system transports goods, connects British Columbians to friends, family, work options as well as opportunities, while welcoming visitors to explore this wonderful province.

Our government is committed to charting a new course when it comes to the future of coastal ferries, and the guiding principles behind all future decisions that affect coastal ferry service will be based on affordability, efficiency and a sustainable system which protects basic service to coastal communities for future generations. Our government is
[ Page 6772 ]
committed to taking actions so that the fare increases will trend towards the consumer price index.

[1105]

Now, we talk about the principle of affordability, because obviously, that responds to the top priority that was expressed to us during the public consultation and engagement process. Efficiency obviously describes a ferry system that embraces innovation, adopts new and emerging technologies, continues to find operational efficiencies and strives for continual improvement. Sustainability obviously speaks to a commitment to ensure that future generations have safe, reliable transportation connections to the coastal communities.

We’re standardizing vessels for greater — I hate these big words — interoperability, and there will also be more no-frills vessels when we have the shorter runs. Also, we’re seeking federal infrastructure funding to renew the fleet and to contribute to a sustainable system.

Now, these guiding principles are the framework for B.C. Ferries, as well as for the B.C. Ferry Commissioner, as they consider implementing changes to increase the efficiencies throughout the system.

B.C. Ferries has 35 vessels and 47 terminals which are operated by 4,400 trained and experienced staff members who are responsible for providing the service to residents, business travellers and visitors, as well as cargo. Unlike roads, which only have capital and maintenance costs, ferries require staff and fuel costs no matter how many paying customers they have on board.

Our government has provided $1.9 billion over the last ten years to support the coastal ferry service. Contrary to what the member opposite just said, our government, in fact, provides the inland ferries $22 million, which is a subsidy of $18 per vessel. The total B.C. Ferries budget is $740 million plus. So $23 per vehicle that goes on the system is subsidized by the provincial government.

Obviously, on-board sales are a part of this as well. In 2014 there was over $75 million in revenue from on-board sales, which translated to $45 million in profits. I do know that the member opposite also wants to get rid of this profit centre and replace it with more subsidies.

B.C. Ferries has an on-time performance rating of 92 percent. We’re constructing new ferries. We’re doing all sorts of things to improve the system, to make it better and to make it more efficient, including liquid natural gas on the new ferries. The retrofit of those is going to be saving about $12 million a year, as we continue to expand the system and continue to grow it. We’re also looking at the feasibility of replacing a ferry which goes from Gabriola Island to Vancouver Island with a bridge.

When we are committed to creating jobs and looking at the future, I can assure you we’re not going to be taking lessons from the members opposite, who in fact…. When they were in government, $5 million a year was the subsidy, whereas our subsidy this year is $180 million.

Between 1991 and 1999 the NDP raised fares 71 percent. Fares are going up. As a matter of fact, in 2001 the Capital West Partners were commissioned to prepare an independent audit of the system, which was titled Review of the Fast Ferry Project and B.C. Ferries. Needless to say, he found that only five of the 26 routes actually made money. Of those five, only two were, in fact, able to sustain the capital expenditures.

I look forward to the proposals from our members opposite.

G. Holman: I’m very pleased to speak to this motion, coming from a ferry-dependent community.

This government has been managing B.C. Ferries, indeed, as a stand-alone private company rather than as part of a public transportation system. There’s no essential difference between B.C. Ferries and our provincial road network or public transit, for that matter.

[1110]

All of these forms of transportation infrastructure require capital and operating maintenance costs, needing some level of taxpayer support. However, unlike the road network in most parts of British Columbia, coastal communities pay tolls on the marine highway that, as my colleague mentioned earlier, cover 100 percent of the operating costs.

Another key difference is that our marine highway closes down for much of the day every day. Another comparison would be public transit. User charges for public transit in most communities in B.C. typically cover one-third of the operating costs. In larger centres, cost recovery for public transit may cover up to 50 percent of operating costs, again, compared to 100 percent cost recovery for B.C. Ferries. By the way, over the last decade ferry users have contributed $5 billion to B.C. Ferries’ operating costs.

There is broad public acceptance of the importance of taxpayer-supported public infrastructure. Residents of ferry-dependent communities certainly accept their responsibility to pay taxes to support the billions in infrastructure costs in the Lower Mainland, just as one example. But to this government, B.C. Ferries’ bottom line is more important than the communities it serves.

This management approach has resulted in more than a doubling of fares. It really does strike a discordant tone for the members opposite to be talking about affordability when fares have increased on minor routes by 120 percent over the last decade. This management approach has resulted in the lowest ridership in 25 years in the B.C. ferry system — never worse; never worse — with serious economic consequences for these communities and the B.C. economy as a whole.

I wanted to speak a little bit more about that. The Union of B.C. Municipalities and the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities commissioned a study, by Larose Research and Strategy, completed in the fall of 2015. This study found that fare increases over the past decade resulted in 31 million fewer passengers, a $2.3 billion reduction in B.C. GDP and — here’s the kicker —
[ Page 6773 ]
over $600 million in foregone tax revenues to local, British Columbia and federal governments. This government is cutting off its nose to spite its face, quite literally.

The study also found that the provincial tax revenue generated by the operation of B.C. Ferries every year is roughly equivalent to the service fee paid by the province. In other words, B.C. Ferries is essentially a self-financing operation. The Minister of Transportation was quick to try to discredit the work and yet has made no effort — still makes no effort — to evaluate the potential economic impacts of their failed policies on residents and businesses in coastal communities across British Columbia.

There is also a question of fiscal fairness. For example, a study on this issue, undertaken by Maradadi Pacific and entitled British Columbia Ferry Corporation and Fiscal Fairness for Ferry-Dependent Communities, published in January 2013, found and concluded that the current structure of B.C. Ferries fails the test of fiscal fairness and discriminates against those who live in coastal communities.

The study found…. By the way, this was undertaken by Mr. Gordon Wilson, who is currently working for the provincial government promoting LNG opportunities in British Columbia. The study found that B.C. Ferries serves an area with 20 percent of the B.C. population that generates 36 percent of B.C.’s annual tax revenue and yet only benefits from about 6 percent of capital spending on highways, including B.C. Ferries.

A number of studies have been undertaken by various well-known and very credible organizations that have clearly documented the benefits to coastal communities, in the B.C. economy, of managing the construction and operation of B.C. Ferries as part of a public system — benefits that have been foregone as a result of this government’s mismanagement. It seems that this provincial government has been willing to proceed on its destructive course with B.C. Ferries without any analysis or information on economic implications. The irony is that it’s foregoing hundreds of millions in provincial tax revenues.

D. Bing: On behalf of my constituents of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, I am pleased to respond to the following motion: “Be it resolved that this House agrees that B.C. needs a ferry system that is part of the provincial infrastructure, working for the benefit of B.C.’s economy and communities.”

[1115]

My landlocked constituency is not on any B.C. Ferries route. However, I ride the ferries, and I listen to my constituents who ride the ferries. I can speak knowledgeably to the fact that our government is ensuring B.C. Ferries delivers top-notch service.

Is B.C. Ferries perfect? No, but I could speak at length about our ferry system for what it is — that is, simply one of the best ferry services of its kind in the world. We shall see that it remains that way by insisting that B.C. Ferries be affordable, efficient and sustainable. Surveys of customers find that their satisfaction with B.C. Ferries is at an all-time high. Passengers enjoy amenities, such as the gift shops and the wide range of food options.

Critics of B.C. Ferries like to point out things like waste and a bloated management structure. However, the independent Ferry Commissioner, in his report just last week, found none of this. In fact, the commissioner found “a strong culture of efficiency.” The commissioner also noted: “Cost control has been achieved while obtaining good outcomes with customer satisfaction and passenger and employee safety.”

This government is committed to keeping B.C. Ferries affordable for British Columbians. B.C. taxpayers are providing an additional $86.6 million to 2016 to help reduce the pressure on fares. This brings taxpayer contributions over the past ten years to $1.9 billion. A cap to annual fare increases averaging 1.9 percent for four years starting in 2016 will bring cost certainty to British Columbians who use the ferries and live in our coastal communities.

Part of the credit for B.C. Ferries’ success can be traced to its 12 years of labour peace with the B.C. Ferry and Marine Workers Union — 12 years without a labour dispute. It seems like a rarity indeed in British Columbia, and this government is very proud of its partnership with the ferries union.

Together, B.C. Ferries and the provincial government are looking ahead to ensure an affordable, sustainable ferry system for the long term. For example, the ferry fleet is moving to LNG, which will be used on three of B.C. Ferries new intermediate-class vessels currently under construction and on the two Spirit class ferries following their midlife upgrade.

The cost savings from using LNG in the five vessels is expected to be $12 million per year in today’s dollars, based on current fuel price estimates. Conversions to LNG will result in an estimated reduction of 9,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year, which is equivalent to removing 1,900 passenger vehicles off the road each year.

The Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure is also working with the federal government to secure a larger subsidy for B.C. Ferries that is more in line with what Ottawa provides to the Atlantic ferry system.

Our government has a firm commitment to ensure B.C. Ferries meets the needs of British Columbians and ferry-dependent communities in a cost-effective manner. B.C. Ferries will continue to improve what is already a world-class system.

J. Rice: I have heard quite a bit this morning about the need or the desire for an affordable, sustainable ferry system, and yet I’ve seen little action on that side of the House on how we actually get there.

For example, we can use the recent Ferry Commissioner’s announcement on March 18 as well as the government’s ten-year transportation plan. There was absolutely no
[ Page 6774 ]
coordination between the two. In fact, there was hardly any mention of the ferry system in the Minister of Transportation’s ten-year transportation report.

So much for a transportation vision, and so much for any kind of coordination between the ferry system and the transportation network. What sort of provincial-wide transportation plan doesn’t include our B.C. ferry system?

Ferry ridership is at its lowest level. Since this provincial government launched its experiment to privatize B.C. Ferries, fares are going up and services are going down. Ferry fare increases have resulted in a $2.3 billion loss to our provincial GDP over a ten-year period. This is shameful — 31 million passengers have decided to not take a ferry due to these high costs.

In fact, I was talking to my brother last night, who wants to pay me a visit from Ontario and would like to meet me in Haida Gwaii. He was absolutely astonished that he could take multiple trips to Hawaii and back for less than one ferry route up the Inside Passage and on to Haida Gwaii. This is cost-prohibitive for the average citizen.

[1120]

The Premier has said: “Our number one focus is to make sure we preserve as low a fare environment as we can to make sure that we don’t let fares go up any more.” And yet, we’re going to see fare increases — by nearly 4 percent on April 1, a couple of weeks from now, followed by an average 2 percent increase.

For every dollar the federal government spends on B.C. ferry passengers, $350 is spent per passenger on the east coast with Marine Atlantic. The federal funding for the west coast ferries relative to the east coast ferries shows that Marine Atlantic ferries are subsidized $493 per passenger. B.C. Ferries’ federal subsidy is $1.41 per passenger. That is $493 in the east and $1.41 in the west.

What is the Minister of Transportation doing to advocate for us in British Columbia? This discrepancy should have the Minister of Transportation outraged. Is he advocating for us? What work is being done here?

In Bella Coola on the central coast they have now lost their ferry. The Queen of Chilliwack, which took over 100 passengers to the central coast, has now been replaced with the 16-passenger vessel Nimpkish. The minister has quoted this as a world-class tourism product. “We’ve reached our hand out to work in partnership with these communities and these organizations to promote what we believe is a world-class tourism product.”

I would agree that the communities of the central coast — Bella Coola and all the way across the Cariboo-Chilcotin — are a world-class tourism destination. But these communities have no way of making a living and taking the opportunity of this world-class area. The only tie that allows this has been severed, which is removing the Queen of Chilliwack ferry and replacing it with the humble Nimpkish.

These communities, let me remind you, over two decades ago were a heavy forestry industry…. These communities were told, basically, under the revisions to how forestry practices were conducted in the central coast, to reinvent themselves, to leave the forest industry and reinvent themselves with tourism. In fact, this government provided all sorts of funding for the central coast communities to reinvent themselves with tourism.

We saw lodges opening up. We saw bear tours. We saw rafting trips. We saw gorgeous ecotourism operations come into existence. Now the one tool that these communities have, the Queen of Chilliwack ferry, has been severed. I have constituents in the Bella Coola Valley looking to me with: “What do we do now?” What do they do next?

D. Plecas: On behalf of my constituents of Abbotsford South, it gives me great pleasure to respond to the motion put forward by the member for North Island, and that is: “Be it resolved that this House agrees that B.C. needs a ferry system that is part of the provincial infrastructure, working for the benefit of B.C.’s economy and communities.”

Certainly, B.C. Ferries is unique and an integral part of our transportation system. It is the largest ferry system in North America and the second-largest ferry system in the world. Comprised of over 35 vessels and 47 terminals, it’s nearly twice as large as Washington state’s ferry system. For example, the annual operating budget of Washington state’s ferry system is $210 million. That compares to ours at $450 million annually. B.C. Ferries operates a service comprising 1,600 kilometres. That compares to just 130 kilometres covered by Washington state’s system.

[1125]

B.C. Ferries provides a vital passenger and vehicle transportation system that connects our coastal communities to the mainland of British Columbia. This service is extremely efficient and reliable, allowing a unique lifestyle for island residents and people living up and down our coast.

That being said, B.C. Ferries and Washington State Ferries do face similar challenges. Ridership aboard Washington state ferry systems over the past ten years has fallen by 9 percent for passengers and 11 percent for vehicles. Ridership on B.C. Ferries is not too far behind — by about 7 percent for both. Rising fuel prices and declining ridership are significant challenges for both systems.

The response by B.C. Ferries has been to undergo a thorough review of its operations. In the process, it has found efficiencies that can save the travelling public and provide provincial taxpayers good value for their investment.

But there are many factors that are difficult to predict and control. Fuel prices are chief among them. While the cost of oil has plunged by nearly 50 percent — or more recently by 60 percent in the last few weeks — the fact
[ Page 6775 ]
that fuel prices remain volatile and are difficult to predict makes the whole exercise more difficult. Weather is another unpredictable variable. Weather delays can result in unplanned and significant overtime costs.

There are factors that B.C. Ferries can control. This includes controlling the cost of administration. Executive compensation has declined significantly, from $3 million in 2009 to $1.8 million in 2014. B.C. Ferries has also found savings in other areas of administration, for a total saving of $5 million since 2009.

In fact, an independent audit by PricewaterhouseCoopers indicated that cost controls have been achieved without compromising passenger safety or reducing customer satisfaction. Yes, service reductions have been part of that process. But B.C. Ferries has been able to achieve a net saving of $8 million a year by eliminating roughly 7,000 sailings with low ridership. These were sailings that often had more crew than passengers on board and nearly empty sailings that drove up the cost of running the system.

While these were tough decisions to make, B.C. Ferries is now turning the corner and getting costs under control. As a result, ridership aboard B.C. Ferries is no longer a case where people have to look forward to price increases averaging 4 percent a year. In fact, the latest report of the B.C. ferries commissioner indicates that a price cap on fare increases is being held to 1.9 percent a year or roughly the rate of inflation.

Clearly, we are talking about an organization that has undergone a deep review of its operation. As an MLA who frequently uses the services to travel between Victoria and my riding, I very much appreciate the fact that I am riding on one of the most efficient and safest ferry systems in the entire world.

N. Simons: I’ve got to say that there’s very little more infuriating in this House than getting people who absolutely have no idea what they’re talking about standing up and reading speeches that somebody else wrote, in words that they can’t even pronounce. This is about the lifeblood of coastal communities, and these guys are put in place to be a mouthpiece for the minister, who doesn’t know what he’s doing. That’s the problem with this government. The minister doesn’t know what he’s doing.

Fares have gone up higher than they’ve ever gone up before. Services have been cut for the first time, and they think everything’s fine. What do they not get? What are they missing? They’re missing a heck of a lot. And you know, the problem is that many of them think it’s funny.

I represent a constituency of 50,000 people. We have a huge, burgeoning forest industry. We have pulp and paper. We have mining. We have a lot of opportunities for this government to gather up as much revenue as they can. But when it comes back to putting appropriate services in place, they are absent.

They quote studies no one else has heard of, and they fail to read what everybody else on this side knows: that you’re killing our coastal communities. And you’re laughing while you do it. I’d offer you a violin to play, but I wouldn’t know if you’d know which side to put under your chin. This is disgusting, and the government thinks it’s a joke.

[1130]

We see in the newspapers: “Reduce the upward pressure. Increase the lower pressure on fares.” This is about our community. This is about our ability to survive in our coastal communities, and all they can do is read the front page of B.C. Ferries’ website and quote statistics that they….

Oh yeah, he takes the ferry. How many ferries has the member taken? Has he been on anything other than the Tsawwassen-Victoria route? I wonder. If he has, he’ll know that the vast…. “Oh, everybody loves the food.” If you get food. We’re lucky to get water on the Nimpkish, and that’s a problem.

It’s a problem that this government has to recognize. At this rate, they’re going to have to deal with the outcome of killing economies. It’s not us that’s telling this government what they need to know. It’s independent economic research. They say they represent their members from their valley communities in saying: “Well, we’re representing their concerns.”

It was unanimous at the Union of B.C. Municipalities. They strongly endorsed the report that said that this government was foregoing income, that this government was causing communities to suffer, that they had passed the tipping point. How far past the tipping point do you go before the thing actually sinks? We’re almost at the sinking point.

I’ve got 50,000 people in my constituency all reliant on the ferries, all dependent on food coming from the ferries, on their building supplies — everything — and this government thinks it’s a joke. This government doesn’t understand what it’s supposed to be doing. It’s lost its moral compass.

It’s about time that they actually took a trip on a ferry to see who is travelling with them. They’ll quote: “Oh, not enough people were on that ferry.” Imagine if you cut every bus, the least used bus in the bus system or the least used road in the highway system. It’s ridiculous. The next thing you know: the least used breakfast item served in the cafeteria. It’s not going to make a difference.

We need an investment in a public system that supports the economy as it was traditionally supposed to do, as it was originally supposed to do. This government thinks it’s going to be a little money-maker. “Oh, the vacation place makes a little bit of money.” “Oh, they serve a few extra triple-A burgers,” or whatever they’re called.

That’s not the issue. The issue is our communities that they are supposed to represent as government are suffering, and they’re not doing one thing about it except hoping and except diffusing the issue with pre-canned speeches that are written by people in the basement for their backbenchers to read out loud. These are our communities that are suffering, and it’s infuriating as a representative of a coastal community.
[ Page 6776 ]

I’ll tell them one more thing. This is the one uniter. This is something that will bring the Socreds, the neocons, the Cons, the Libs and the Greens together. Everybody is united in coastal, reliant communities to say that this government has failed coastal and island communities in this province, and they’ve done so for 14 years.

They have no excuse except to look at themselves in the mirror. This is causing harm to seniors, to families, to students, to every single resident and to every single business on the Sunshine Coast. They should be accountable for that, and in 2017 I hope the rest of the province realizes that too and that we’ll see an end to it.

D. McRae: I’m sure all members on both sides of the House will agree that government has a continual challenge to use its available resources to meet the needs of British Columbia citizens. Those needs could be health care, education, social supports, and yes, they can also be transportation.

I also know that the members opposite will acknowledge that the world has evolved in the last 15 to 20 years. In fact, I think one of the things we could pay attention to…. We talk about the rising cost of fuel, and it has gone up. I remember looking at a website not too long ago. In 1999-2000 the price of fuel was about 30 cents a litre. Today when I drove into Victoria, it was $1.20 a litre, and I’ve seen it as high in the last five or six years as a buck-50.

While the price of fuel may have gone up 300, 400, 500 percent in that time, I’m really proud to say in this chamber that the contribution of this government to B.C. Ferries, which was $5 million in the year 2000, is now $180 million. That’s a 20-fold increase. Again, we’re doing this with the balance of meeting all the other needs of taxpayer citizens.

[1135]

I know that the members opposite were in the chamber just last week or the week before when I was talking about how we have some changing demographics. The population of Vancouver Island has grown in the last 15 years. It’s grown by 100,000 people.

Interjections.

D. McRae: But the members opposite, when they are trying to talk over me, are forgetting to say that there’s a million people getting off the Island in a different mode of transportation. There’s a million people who leave and come to Vancouver Island every year. How? By airfare. These are individuals…. If you’ve ever taken an airplane…. I know all members opposite have. Airfare to leave either Courtenay, Nanaimo or Victoria and get to Vancouver or back — you’re looking at probably, on average, about $150 per person each way. And 900,000 people have made that choice. Why? Because sometimes they want the opportunity to get off the Island faster.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m proud of B.C. Ferries and the work they’ve done to provide life support for British Columbia citizens. I live on Vancouver Island. I know the members opposite know. I know they want me to say something silly, so I’m just going to say facts, actually.

Demographics have changed. Did you know that the population of Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands has changed? It’s aged. In fact, some of the oldest communities in all of Canada are on Vancouver Island, whether it’s Parksville, whether it’s Qualicum, Sidney or Nanaimo. These are all aging communities. As people age, their demographic needs change, and oftentimes they don’t travel as much. That causes populations to maybe make different choices.

We talked about making choices. I know the members opposite, when the government makes choices…. Like the member for North Island. I know she’s very, very supportive of the fact that government has made a choice to spend $300 million on the North Island hospitals project in her riding. That’s an important contribution. I know B.C. Hydro is a Crown corp, and the billion dollars that’s being spent on the John Hart dam project is something we don’t want to talk about — or the other $400 million on seismic work that’s going on in North Island. It’s important.

I knew there would be members opposite there…. I know the member from Powell River is right to justify and stand up here for his constituents. I know they have concerns. We all do that. I know your constituents are also very supportive of the Powell River–Sunshine Coast residential care facility. Why? Because this government has put $27 million into that project. Those are choices.

As well, I know the member from Nanaimo…. When I was Education Minister, what did we do? We put $20 million into seismic work into the Wellington Secondary School. And the Jubilee tower, which all residents of Vancouver Island could need at some stage in their lives. That’s, again, over $300 million of choices that we have to do. It’s finding that balance so we make sure we make the investment in transportation, in education, in social services.

It’s not easy being in government, but you know what? The members opposite provide constructive criticism for government. I’m really glad they’ve been able to do so for 14 years, and they raise those questions in the House. You know what? They promote really good debate. I’m looking forward to the members opposite staying in opposition, not for another two years but for another six years. When it comes down to election time, it’s really difficult to get elected when you don’t say anything. You need to actually have a road map of what you’re going to do. If you’re going to grow the economy, if you’re going to support economic growth, what exactly are you doing? We’re looking for it. It’s difficult to find. It’s so difficult to find.

I know the members opposite are passionate, just like we are passionate. We want to make sure we’re looking after the citizens of this great province. We want to look
[ Page 6777 ]
after the citizens of the north and look after the citizens of Vancouver Island. We have done a good job finding that balance.

Have we been perfect? I will never say we’ve been perfect, by any stretch. What we want to do is make sure the taxpayers are being respected. We’re living within our means.

The fact is that B.C. Ferries is actually still progressing in a fairly decent manner. Ridership is down. But let’s not talk about…. Under the NDP, actually, their fares increased by 70 percent. That’s 10 percent a year. Come on. It hasn’t changed.

M. Karagianis: I’m happy to stand and support the motion that has been put forward that the B.C. ferry system be recognized as part of the provincial infrastructure and that it is working for the benefit of British Columbians, their economy and communities.

I thought it was quite ironic that the first number of speakers here all admitted that they don’t live in ferry-dependent communities, that they occasionally ride the ferries. I hardly think that entitles you to have a serious opinion about whether or not this should be part of the core infrastructure for ferry-dependent communities.

Then, of course, I waited with great glee for one member on the other side of the House, who did stand up, from a ferry-dependent community. Of course, what did we hear? A lot of diversionary tactics, where we talked about many other things but not the importance of B.C. Ferries as part of the provincial infrastructure.

[1140]

I think the data is very clear, and I think it is important that we recognize that coastal transportation systems are just as vital a part of B.C. transportation infrastructure as are roads, as are bridges and all other infrastructure of this province.

We certainly have no difficulty in supporting roads and bridges in this province, because we do know how they contribute to the economy. Yet somehow marginalizing B.C. Ferries as a quasi-privatized, stand-alone model that must support itself seems to be the mantra of the government.

I do want to talk a little bit about some data and some real information that came down over the last number of days here. I want to make sure that I read into the record some very vital information that came from the ferry advisory committee chairs.

Now, I know the government has taken some comfort in recent data that has come out supporting some aspects of the ferry. But I think that there are a few key factors they have forgotten to include when they talk about rosy predictions of what’s going on in the ferry system.

The chairs of the B.C. Ferries advisory committees say that the small increase fails to address the fundamental problem, the crippling high cost of existing fares with B.C. Ferries. We have canvassed this in this House numerous times — that the high cost of ferry travel is a deterrent to ridership, and as the fares go up, the ridership has continued to go down.

The ferry advisory committee chairs continue to say: “The extraordinary fare increases of the past decade” — ten years under the quasi-privatized model that was brought in by this B.C. Liberal government — “have resulted in traffic collapsing to its lowest level since 1990. The decline in traffic, particularly since 2008, has resulted in a parallel withering of the economy and social vitality of coastal ferry-dependent communities. Ferries are the lifeline service for people and for businesses. There is no alternative.”

Those are pretty important facts, and I don’t hear the government acknowledging in any way that they’ve read that or acknowledged that kind of data. They’re very selective about the data. We can hear about how many ferries we have in the fleet and how many ferry terminals we have. But it’s irrelevant to the real issue of the crisis in the ferry system right now for coastally dependent communities.

The ferry advisory committee chairs go on to say…. This is with regard to striking a balance around the treasury, which we just heard — comparisons around the treasury and ferry fares.

“Ferry users, who contribute more than half a billion dollars a year in fares, have paid far too high a price,” says Keith Rush of Thetis-Penelakut ferry advisory committee. “It’s time the load is redistributed to provide some relief for those users who have seen their fares rise as much as 120 percent in an 18 percent inflationary period.”

Their report goes on to say: “The commission report shows ferry users are presently paying 100 percent of ferries’ operating costs.” That’s the kind of data that the government should, in fact, be including when they talk about the support or non-support for ferries.

The reality is that the economic impacts have been canvassed here by members of this House. We have seen a $2.3 billion reduction in B.C.’s GDP over a ten-year period as a result of high ferry fares. Fares are going up. Ridership is going down. What does the government do? Well, they cut service and raise the fares some more. That is the worst business model ever in the history of business. In grade 10, when you take a business admin course, it will tell you that that is not the way you run a business. That’s the way you run a business into the ground.

We have also canvassed in this House the fact that the government continues to plead poverty on this. Yet they have not made an asserted effort to go to Ottawa and ask for a more fair share of federal funding for British Columbia that we have seen given to the other side of the country, in the Maritimes. That’s a reasonable request, and it seems to me that the government is taking no real steps here and not using real data to make decisions.

S. Hamilton: Let me first provide an apology, in advance, to the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast
[ Page 6778 ]
if I have to refer to my speaking notes and my speech from time to time. I’m not as eloquent an orator as he is. Unfortunately, I have to write things down and sometimes read from them.

On behalf of my constituents in Delta North and, in fact, all British Columbians, it’s indeed a pleasure to respond to the following motion put forward by the member for North Island. For the sake of brevity, I won’t read the motion. We’ve had it read a few times here.

[1145]

I’d like to thank the member for bringing the motion forward, but frankly, I am profoundly disappointed that, despite all of the criticisms lobbed towards this side of the House for the past hour, the members opposite have offered very little in the way of an explanation how they would do things any differently.

Members on this side of the House have described how, in 2001, the government inherited a demoralized ferry system plagued with frequent interruptions and labour disruption. Our members have also described how the government turned B.C. Ferries around into an independently managed, publicly owned company that hasn’t experienced a labour disruption in over 12 years. That’s a significant, significant achievement.

All we hear from the opposition are rather vague descriptions of how they’d like to return to the past. “Let’s go back. Let’s go way, way back and do it better than we’ve ever done it before, because we used to do it better.” No, we didn’t. It was a heavily subsidized system back then, and we’re trying to move away from that model because it’s important for a growing economy not to rely on those types of subsidies to move people around. It’s just that simple.

Before we take that trip down memory lane, I think most British Columbians have a pretty vivid memory of how the NDP steered B.C. Ferries into the rocks while they were on their watch. Between 1991 and 1999 the NDP increased the cost of riding B.C. Ferries by 71 percent. Despite the claims lofted at this side of the House, it’s a fact.

When the Liberals assumed government in 2001, we commissioned…. Oh, I have another study for the member from the Sunshine Coast, by the way. I hope he enjoys it. We commissioned an independent audit of the B.C. Ferries by Fred Wright of Capital West Partners entitled “Review of the Fast Ferry Project and B.C. Ferries.” Wright found that only five of 26 routes in this province made money and that only two covered the cost of their capital expenditures.

I’m sure most British Columbians recall fast ferries very well — arguably the single greatest fiasco in this province’s history. Taxpayers paid $463 million for three vessels that were hardly used and eventually barged off to somewhere in Saudi Arabia — Abu Dhabi, I believe. If you don’t believe me, just ask the hon. Leader of the Opposition. During a speech in Vernon in July of 2014 the Leader of the Opposition described the fast ferry project as a crime. He said: “The crime was selling those boats for less than scrap four years later.” That’s a blast from the past.

Let’s return to the present and see how the NDP would do things differently. For our part, we have a plan. Our vision is an affordable, effective and sustainable ferry system that will serve coastal communities. Our blueprint for the future is clear. But there seems to be a vast gap of opinion between the Leader of the Opposition and his transportation critic.

The member for North Island wants to return B.C. Ferries back to the fold of the Ministry of Transportation. I’m not sure how that is going to solve anything. The Leader of the Opposition wants to take a more decisive, wait-and-see approach — until the next election. But he isn’t sure if B.C. Ferries should be tucked back into government or made a Crown corporation. It’s an epic power struggle. It reminds me of the Skipper and Gilligan fighting over the helm of the SS Minnow — straight into the rocks.

Before I conclude, I want to draw attention to a report released last week by the B.C. ferries commissioner. The report described how an external review of B.C. Ferries by PricewaterhouseCoopers discovered that the corporation is demonstrating good cost control and efficiency in reducing administrative costs. This includes cutting executive compensation from $3 million in 2009 to just $1.8 million in 2014.

The report also describes that food service revenue is now approaching $50 million a year. Call me crazy, but that extra revenue helps keep the cost of B.C. Ferries down. One has to wonder why the NDP transportation critic thinks food service aboard B.C. Ferries amounts to cruise ship amenities. During an interview on CKNW the member for North Island talked about ferries. “They don’t all need plush chairs. They don’t necessarily need food.” Well, cold coffee and wooden benches are not my idea of a good ferry ride.

S. Fraser: I’m happy to take my place in the debate on this motion. I thank the member for North Island for bringing it forward. It’s so important to coastal communities and island communities. I represent Alberni–Pacific Rim, and ferry service is key to economic development, to social well-being. That’s established, really, in any coastal community in the world that has a fjord-like coastline.

[1150]

Having a highway and bridges are certainly cost-prohibitive, so the most efficient and effective way to travel in a marine jurisdiction like this is by B.C. ferries. Indeed, many of these communities and island communities would not even exist if it were not for the foresight of previous governments in providing this vital service to help actually establish communities and economies in those
[ Page 6779 ]
communities to help build this great province. We’re seeing that that pattern has been broken by this government.

I note in the B.C. on the Move ten-year transportation plan that was just released, the quote, in dealing with ferries, was to “continue to pursue strategies to achieve the vision of an affordable, sustainable and effective coastal ferry service.” To continue to pursue these strategies — that’s the kiss of death for coastal communities. The government has missed the boat, so to speak. Please excuse my pun.

The government has not been listening to anyone but themselves. Coastal communities have represented themselves very well, and their local government associations, and then rising up the ladder to the Union of B.C. Municipalities. At the last meeting that I was at, there was a unanimous resolution endorsing a report done by the Union of B.C. Municipalities.

The minister had done no report, making decisions on the fly with no consideration for the impacts to coastal communities, to the people of Alberni–Pacific Rim, to people of the Sunshine Coast, the north coast, north Island, the Gulf Islands and all communities on the coast.

In the Interior, as we know, the member for North Coast referred to the Nimpkish being the replacement vessel. I think the best that we got out of the minister, saying how good it was as a replacement vessel, was that it was going to have potable water.

This is not a step in the right direction. I do not understand how a government can mismanage an organization so badly — a key organization to the workings of the economy of this great province.

The strategy, which they’re saying they’re going to continue to pursue, has been to raise rates that have gone well beyond the tipping point. We know that from previous reports done independently. The ridership drops when you increase the rates beyond the point where people can pay.

The reaction has been: “Well, we’ll raise the rates more, see if we can make more money, because we’re losing money because we’re losing ridership.” Then they raise the rates more, and then they lose more ridership. Then it’s like the next option is to cut services. This is economics 101. They’re failing. The boat is sinking.

I would note that the member for Comox Valley, toward the end of his statement, said that B.C. Ferries is “progressing in a fairly decent manner.” Well, that’s not a glowing endorsement for a service that the member is supposed to be promoting.

The member for Delta North called money coming from the government to B.C. Ferries a subsidy. Indeed, he said “heavily subsidized” in the ’90s. Right after he said, “There’s no use looking backwards,” he went backwards.

This is not about subsidies. This is a marine jurisdiction. The most effective way to travel in a marine jurisdiction is by coastal ferry system. A coastal ferry system has to be treated for what it is. It’s an essential form of transportation for this province, all along the coast, to contribute to the economy of the province.

These strategies that they’re talking about pursuing in the ten-year plan have led to a $2.3 billion reduction in B.C. GDP.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

S. Hamilton moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. T. Lake: After a lively debate this morning, I move the House now adjourn.

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.

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

Copyright © 2015: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada