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, May 11, 2015

Morning Sitting

Volume 26, Number 1

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

MONDAY, MAY 11, 2015

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

LOCAL TOURISM OPPORTUNITIES

D. Ashton: Let me ask: where in the world can you golf, ski, swim, sail, climb a mountain, catch a salmon, watch whales or find dinosaur tracks, among the other thousands of things that you can do? The answer, my friends, is right here under our noses in super, natural British Columbia.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

All of the marketing slogans apply to our province, because as we all know, we live in a four-seasons playground, which is the envy of the world. As I like to say about my region in the South Okanagan, we’re a lot more than peaches and beaches.

[1005]

I may be biased, but with respect to my good friend from the Shuswap, his area is nice, but boy, you sure can’t beat the Okanagan during the summertime.

The truth is that each of us in this House has the right to boast about the recreational, cultural and tourism opportunities offered in each of our ridings. We in British Columbia are very lucky. We have no reason to go beyond our borders when there is so much to see and do right here.

Tourism is big business in B.C. and is getting bigger. In 2013 tourism generated $13.9 billion in total revenue in British Columbia. That’s up 40 percent in the last ten years. The United Nations World Tourism Organization predicts that tourism will double over the next two decades. While B.C. residents know how good we have it, so does the rest of the world, but they have a lot more to learn about what we have to offer here.

We are seeing significant international growth in the tourism sector. In 2014 we had a 5.3 percent increase in international visitors over the previous year, almost a quarter of a million more people. The value of the visitor economy impacts communities all across British Columbia. Tourism helps drive a range of benefits, including increased trade and investment, international education and immigration.

These international visitors represent the tip of the iceberg for the investment that is coming to British Columbia. For example, two wineries in my area on the Naramata Bench are now owned by Chinese investors, and the Lake Okanagan Resort in Kelowna on the west side of the lake is now also Chinese owned. Why? Because these offshore investors and many like them recognize that B.C. is a special world-class place with an incredibly bright future in so many ways, including tourism.

It may surprise some to learn that one in every 15 jobs in British Columbia is in the tourism sector, and those workers are paid $4.5 billion a year in wages, a yearly increase of 3.8 percent. There are more than 19,200 tourism-related businesses in British Columbia, and more than 17,000 of them are small businesses with fewer than 50 employees who hire and buy locally and keep their profits in British Columbia.

In 2010 industry projected the number of jobs in the tourism and hospitality class sector would increase from 256,000 to 300,000 by 2020, adding about 44,000 new jobs to the B.C. economy. Over the same period of time industry expects there will be more than 57,000 job openings in the tourism and hospitality sector as a result of replacement needs. Industry, therefore, projects that the total number of openings by 2020 will be more than 101,000. That’s 10 percent of all of the expected job openings in the province by that year.

Our government invests $90 million annually in the tourism sector. We will keep supporting it, and tourism operators can continue to contribute as they always do to our local economy and our economic growth. Part of that government investment is in aboriginal tourism. In 2008 we provided $8 million in funding to the non-profit Aboriginal Tourism Association of British Columbia.

Today there are more than 200 aboriginal businesses in British Columbia, an 85 percent increase since 2006. I am proud to point to a very successful aboriginal tourism operation that’s located in the South Okanagan — Nk’Mip resort near Osoyoos, which is home to North America’s first aboriginal owned and operated vineyard and winery. Across British Columbia overnight visitors spent an estimated $45 million on aboriginal tourism activities in 2013, which is double the amount spent in 2006 — an indication that this level of spending will continue to grow.

Tourism in British Columbia takes no holidays. It’s a year-round industry. From the Victoria Day weekend, which is quickly approaching, most British Columbians are gearing up for their summer getaways. There are endless possibilities at home in British Columbia for a staycation.

I want to encourage everybody in this House and everybody in British Columbia to experience something new in our home province this year. Go off the beaten path and visit a heritage site like Barkerville or Fort
[ Page 8226 ]
Steele. Stay at a guest ranch and go horseback riding in the Chilcotin-Cariboo. Experience the unspoiled grandeur of Haida Gwaii or follow the footsteps of the dinosaurs in Tumbler Ridge.

In recognition of the first-ever Canadian camping week on May 19 to 24, sit around a campfire at one of our spectacular provincial parks or forest service sites. And this is important to remember. Please leave your campsite as you found it, and please protect those forests that are so valuable to us.

[1010]

Tourism benefits all regions in our province, and it contributes to a more diversified economy and builds much, much stronger communities. Yes, the tourism sector is big, and with Destination B.C., we are working very hard to ensure that it gets bigger.

D. Eby: I have limited time to respond to the member’s claims during his speech. Certainly, we’re all excited about British Columbia, those of us that have had the chance to travel around the province, including the member’s area of Penticton — a beautiful, stunning area. I imagine we have some people up in the gallery who are tourists visiting British Columbia as well.

For the member to take credit for the return of the American economy to prosperity, the emergence of the middle class in China, as growing tourism, I say good for him. Good for him. But let’s look at the track record of this member. He’s the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance. I want to tell you just one story about one tourism agency in B.C. where this member could make a real difference but has chosen not to.

It’s called Tourism Vancouver. It’s a small industry group in Vancouver that receives the hotel tax that’s charged on rooms when tourists stay in the city. Now, when that hotel tax was put in place, the government told the hotel operators: “This money is going to fund tourism in the city of Vancouver, and you’re going to benefit from this.” They said: “Great.” In recent years it’s brought in as much as $10 million. That’s a lot of money.

When this government built their convention centre in downtown Vancouver and they went over budget — not a little over budget, but a lot over budget; they spent almost $1 billion on it — they asked Tourism Vancouver to help them cover that. They asked for $100 million from Tourism Vancouver, and Tourism Vancouver said: “Yes. We’re going to benefit from this. We’ll kick in some money. We’ll kick in the $100 million.” It seemed like a reasonable deal.

But man, oh man, did they make a bad deal with this government. What should have been a break-even loan…. The government borrows money at 4, 4½ percent. But they charged Tourism Vancouver 6.1 percent on this loan. So the province is actually making as much as 2 percent profit on Tourism Vancouver. It doesn’t sound like a lot, but it amounts to $2 million a year taken out of Tourism Vancouver and tourism opportunities in Vancouver and put into general revenue for this government.

As the secretary for the Minister of Finance, what does this member do to respond to the fact that Tourism Vancouver has paid $7 million against our $100 million loan? Now the loan is $109 million. It’s going up. It’s not going down.

How did he propose to fix this? Well, he and the Minister of Finance brought forward an amendment that “provides the opportunity” for Tourism Vancouver to increase the hotel tax from 2 percent to 3 percent. He didn’t lower the interest rate on this loan. He allowed them to collect more tax, which means more money will flow into general revenue for this government from the loan that they made to Tourism Vancouver.

Now, because the government gets to pull one-third of all this hotel room tax from Tourism Vancouver, that’s an increase from $4 million a year that they pull from Tourism Vancouver to $5½ million a year. I see the Minister of Jobs over there whispering in the member’s ear. He is the secretary who is responsible for this decision. One would have hoped she would have done this before this change was put in place.

However, debt is abstract. A $100 million debt at 6½ percent — what does that mean? Let me tell what you it looks like. Globe and Mail headline, October 10, 2014: “Vancouver’s New Year’s Eve Festivities Cancelled Due to Lack of Funding.” It says: “Plans for a family-friendly New Year’s Eve celebration in Vancouver have fallen through because organizers were unable to raise enough money.”

How much were they looking for — $100 million? No, $100,000 is what they were short of their $300,000 budget. Why wasn’t Tourism Vancouver able to help them make that up so we could have a family-friendly New Year’s Eve in Vancouver? Because this member decided to make 2 percent profit on the hotel tax in Vancouver.

Deputy Speaker: Member, let’s not direct your comments to individual members.

D. Eby: I think that shows more than enough about this government’s track record on promoting tourism.

[1015]

D. Ashton: Well, good morning again. I just want to thank the member for Vancouver–Point Grey for his input. Some of these things are probably best left to estimates, but when I take a look around at what Vancouver has to offer, what Vancouver brings in on tourism — it’s usually on the footstep to the rest of the province — I can’t say enough about what transpires there.

Anyway, in British Columbia — I want to speak on something else very quickly — we have an incredible park system that is the envy of the world. We have over 1,029 provincial parks, recreation areas, conservan-
[ Page 8227 ]
cies, ecological reserves and protected areas in British Columbia. So many people that come through Vancouver stay in Vancouver a few nights, move to the Interior or move up to the north on their tourism areas and get to enjoy these incredible vistas that we have. Together, these cover more than 14 million hectares, or 14 percent of the provincial land base.

Over the past five years B.C. Parks has invested approximately $60 million in park facilities and $700 million in investments in infrastructure and required maintenance. To help pay for these investments and maintain these high levels of provincial parks, in March we announced an increase in the camping fees. It might not help the member from across the way, but I have to tell you, this is the first system increase in five years.

This increase comes after years of investing and delivering capital projects aimed at attracting young families and offering new recreational opportunities and increasing the attendance in these incredible parks. Fee increases are nominal to ensure that camping remains affordable for families and visitors visiting B.C.’s world-class park systems, which is one of the largest protected areas in the world.

While the fee schedule varies, the vast majority of provincial campsites will see a $2 a night increase. While others will see a slightly larger increase to a maximum of $5 a night, the increase is expected to generate $1.3 million this year for B.C.’s protected areas and the systems that they represent.

All of the revenue from the increased fees will be put back into maintaining and enhancing this park system. User fees at B.C. Parks are generally lower than most of the private campsites in the province and competitive with the public sector campgrounds in other jurisdictions.

For an example, camping at Cultus Lake Provincial Park will cost families $35 a night for a campsite with up to four adults, whereas a nearby operator charges $35 to $45 for a tenting site for two adults with a $10 charge additional for each adult. A private operator in the Shuswap will charge $30 to $60 a night, and B.C. Parks charges $32 to a night for up to four adults.

Our province has one of the largest park systems in the world and a highest percentage of land space dedicated to parks in all of the Canadian provinces. B.C.’s provincial parks generate more than 21 million visits every year. More than 133,000 reservations were made through Discover Camping. I’ll end on that, but what a wonderful place for a vacation.

ACCESS TO JUSTICE

L. Krog: Access to justice. I couldn’t phrase it better than the words from the West Coast LEAF report, where they said: “A justice system that is not equally accessible to everyone is not a justice system at all.”

Back when the present government came to power in 2001, they cut the money for the Legal Services Society, which administers legal aid in this province, by 40 percent. Notwithstanding population growth, notwithstanding inflation and notwithstanding all of the changes that have occurred in society in British Columbia in the last 14 years, we are still well below the actual raw-dollar number that was provided to Legal Services Society some 14 years ago.

With the budget announced, we know that’s not going to change this year. The grim reality is if you are poor in this province, your access to justice is, in many cases, nonexistent. Even if you qualify for legal aid, it’s extremely limited.

For example, a referral to a legal aid lawyer is only provided in the case of a serious family problem. That must include the need for “an immediate court order to ensure you or your children’s safety and security.” Even then, you’re going to get only 25 hours of general help.

What that means is, if you face a spouse on the other side who has access to better income, they obviously take the very wise tactic that everyone does. You simply run up the clock, wasting the legal aid hours on your spouse’s side. When they’re done, they’re going to be without counsel.

To give an example, if you’re just one person up against your spouse, your net monthly income in order to qualify for legal aid is $1,480. In other words, you’ve got to have had a net income less than $18,000 annually. For a family of four, it has to be below $36,000.

[1020]

The reality is that legal aid, as it was known in this province, particularly on family law matters, is essentially nonexistent. Does that represent the values of British Columbians? I don’t think it does in practice. I think it’s very interesting that the mandate letter directed to Tom Christensen, who was chair of the legal aid board, dated January 15, 2015, said in one of its paragraphs: “One of our government’s core values is respect for the taxpayer’s dollar.”

Everyone in this chamber respects the so-called taxpayer’s dollars, although I think it would be preferential to talk about the citizen’s money rather than taxpayers only. You may be a taxpayer this year, and you may be a recipient next year of government funds. But the reality is that we are all British Columbians. Surely, the opportunity to access legal aid in a reasonable way is appropriate, is what we expect in our society.

When you’ve cut the budget that much, and when you haven’t restored it and you’ve seen the changes, you come to understand the gravity of the problem. It wasn’t just that legal aid offices throughout British Columbia disappeared. It was also that community law offices, which delivered some of those services and provided assistance to all sorts of people facing other issues — poverty law questions, questions around receipt of unemployment
[ Page 8228 ]
insurance, assistance to deal with the Ministry of Social Development if you were denied access to social assistance — all of those services essentially disappeared. Now we see thousands and thousands of British Columbians struggling on annually.

Now, if you’re part of that elite group, the people who can’t afford any possible increase in income tax — those people making $150,000 a year or more — I suppose the provision of legal aid, particularly in family law matters, won’t be of much importance to you. After all, the government has such a sympathetic ear for you that, when you complain about paying a modest extra 2 percent of your substantial income, they’re prepared to listen to you, just as the government happily listened to the chartered banks of this country who were concerned, somewhat, about the corporate capital tax on large financial institutions.

We could give them a break. We can give the richest taxpayers a break, but the very poorest people who need access to justice in our family court system — somehow, their priority isn’t the government’s priority.

The report went on to say that British Columbia has veered way off course when it comes to ensuring access to justice and family law. The biggest and the most urgent crisis in B.C.’s justice system is the lack of public family law services and the consequent exclusion of women from access to justice.

The statistics bear it out as well, and it’s getting worse. It’s not getting better. The best and simplest statistic is this. Judges have expressed their concerns around this issue a number of times. What we know is that in 2013, 38 percent of litigants involved in family law matters at the B.C. Court of Appeal — the airy stratosphere of the B.C. Court of Appeal, where the vast majority of British Columbia lawyers never actually appear; this is where you expect good and able counsel to appear — were self-represented.

In 2014 that number is up to 44 percent. Nearly half of the family law litigants in this province are going before the province’s highest court without benefit of counsel. If that is access to justice, one really has to question it. I think it’s no better summarized than in the CEDAW West Coast LEAF report. That’s the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.

I’ll read the teacher’s comments, because after all, I come from a generation where report cards were so important. Under teacher’s comments: “Crises, shortfalls and chronic underfunding continue to plague the legal aid budget, leading to serious injustices for thousands of unrepresented litigants, particularly women in family law cases.”

On the subject of women and access to justice, what did the government get? We’ll use the old letter grade system; that’s what they’re using in this report. It got an F.

An F in a province that brags about a balanced budget, that has promises of eliminating the provincial debt, that glorifies the possibility of liquid natural gas paying off our provincial debt and making everything so much better for British Columbians. On access to justice, British Columbia got an F.

[1025]

L. Throness: It’s a pleasure to speak in support of more access to justice in B.C.

Of course, we have one of the best justice systems in the world. I think that’s an obvious thing. But there are strains on the system. These strains are national, and they are long-standing. It’s not confined to B.C.

In the Askov case in 1990…. It was a Supreme Court case about unreasonable delay, and 50,000 cases were thrown out of court in Ontario alone. They were thrown out across the country. Way back in 1990, 25 years ago, there were problems with backlogs in the courts.

We’ve added to that, since then, the duty of disclosure. It has added a huge burden to the courts. Let me give an example. For the Pickton trial, 1.2 million pieces of evidence were disclosed in that trial. We could add to that the proliferation of types and amounts of evidence, including expert witnesses. In the Pickton trial, for example, there were 600,000 DNA tests done and 3,000 witnesses were interviewed.

When you add to the growing size and scope of trials, we add to that multiple people being accused at the same time and tried at the same time. It makes trials even more complex, difficult, long and expensive. Back in 2007 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court spoke about these very real issues that are inhibiting the search for justice in Canada. Of course, they continue to persist.

But we are making significant improvements. Askov delays, or systemic delays in Provincial Court, are down to 15 in 2014 from 109 in 2011. That’s an 85 percent decrease.

Justice reform measures that we have put in place to support this reduction have been tough drinking and driving laws that have resulted in 6,000 fewer cases every year. We’ve appointed 31 new judges to the Provincial Courts since 2012.

But what is the long-term answer to this issue? The long-term answer is not to build an ever-larger bureaucracy. It’s to triage justice, something like we do in health care, to handle less serious matters in a less bureaucratic way, leaving the traditional courts to deal with more serious matters.

An example is residential tenancy disputes. We’ve dealt for decades with residential tenancy disputes through an administrative tribunal, and that has worked well for people of all incomes. We want to add to that. Family disputes, strata disputes, other kinds of lower-level conflict — stream them to administrative tribunals that are cheaper and faster and less formal. In particular, we want to encourage self-resolution of disputes.

I’m going to give you two examples. In March of 2013 the B.C. Family Law Act came into force. It allows agreements, it allows mediation, it allows parenting coordin-
[ Page 8229 ]
ation and, finally, arbitration, rather than long-running, expensive disputes played out in the courts.

The other example is from this session. On April 21, Bill 19, the Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act, was passed, mainly to deal with small claims and also with strata disputes, which before now could only be heard in B.C. Supreme Court. This will now be a web-based tribunal. It’s the first of its kind in Canada. It will be a website that requires on-line resolution of strata disputes, although it will still offer an option, as a last resort, for access to the courts.

We spend over $100 million every year on access to justice, $74.6 million on legal aid, 21 family justice centres, three justice access centres and the family maintenance enforcement program. We’ve provided the Legal Services Society with $2 million a year, starting in 2014-15. There are five innovative legal aid pilot projects. I don’t have time to go through them all, but I could give them to the member if he wishes.

We’re focused on providing an innovative, 21st-century justice system that helps British Columbians to navigate their legal issues more quickly and easily, giving them the tools that they need for access to justice 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

By offering venues like administrative tribunals, we’re going to increase access to justice and better our already world-class system of justice for all British Columbians.

L. Krog: Well, I’m fascinated by the response from the member for Chilliwack-Hope, talking about the criminal side of legal aid, when I’ve been talking about the family law side. Regardless, I do want to address just a couple of remarks in response, specifically, to what he had to say.

I think the most interesting turn of phrase he used was that the courts were now stuck with the “burden of disclosure.” What an interesting concept — that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is designed to protect the very liberty of our citizens, is now a burden of disclosure on the court system.

[1030]

That is a very interesting attitude. It’s particularly interesting that we heard it expressed here this morning in light of what has come out around the Ivan Henry case, which ended up in the Supreme Court of Canada, which is now giving Mr. Henry the right to sue the Crown over the way his prosecution was handled.

If the so-called burden of disclosure had existed in the way it does today at the time that Mr. Henry found himself charged with the most serious crime available under the Criminal Code, Mr. Henry might well not have spent, essentially, his lifetime in jail.

How shall I say it? That burden of disclosure would have relieved the taxpayers that the member is so concerned about, and certainly the Attorney General, in her mandate letter to the Legal Services Society, is so concerned about. It would have eliminated the enormous burden of the taxpayers keeping Mr. Henry in jail all these years, paying for the prosecution and defending this matter all the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada.

But that aside, I want to bring us back to my point this morning, and that is around access to justice for people facing family law problems in British Columbia. That’s the focus of my remarks.

Mark Benton, who has been the CEO of the B.C. Legal Services Society for a number of years, said it best. I’m going to give two short quotes. “We’re refusing very, very high numbers of people.” That’s a statement of fact. “Two out of three people who come through the door for a family problem are refused legal aid right now.” I quoted already, in my remarks earlier this morning, the financial qualifications that are involved and then the limited number of hours you receive.

Either access to justice is a public value worth defending in this province, and worth supporting, or it’s not. If the B.C. Liberals believe that it’s not worth supporting, then let them say so directly instead of continuing to underfund a system that, though not perfect, once functioned at a far better level. The reality is that spending on legal aid in this province is way below many other provinces in this country. We need to reform it.

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY

D. McRae: The world is evolving, and while many choose to concentrate on the negative, I think it is so important to say that it is getting better. In fact, I was reading a report just the other day talking about North America. When is the best time to live on the continent? There were many milestones dates. I think 1965 was one, and ’45 was another. The vast majority of individuals said the best time to live in North America is today.

I’ve had the honour to serve in elected office both in this chamber and in the communities for now 13 years. I would say by far the most impactful experience I’ve had was my time working with the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation. It’s an opportunity to really make sure you understand how people’s lives are impacted, the challenges they face and also the opportunities that they have.

I think it would be very important to raise in this chamber that persons with a disability, as a group, are often some of the most underemployed or unemployed people in British Columbia, in society, in North America. It is about 18 percent lower than the average population.

I think many individuals would also be surprised to find out how large this group is. By some measures, whether it is self-identified…. It could be as many as 550,000 in one study, up to 700,000 in another.

In context of how large that population is, that is larger than the ethnic groups, according to StatsCan. It is larger than everybody who self-identified as being of East Indian descent or aboriginal descent in British Columbia. In fact,
[ Page 8230 ]
if you take those two ethnic groups together and combine them, it is about the same number of individuals who self-identify as being a person with a disability.

I know, because I look around this chamber today, many individuals who attend today attended some of the consultations that Social Development and Social Innovation did in regards to the disability paper. I know one of the things, a common thread, that appeared in every single meeting we went to is that people who participated said they want to be included. They want to take part in social activities, recreational activities, and they want to make sure they contribute to the community, whether it’s through work or volunteer opportunities.

[1035]

This is a great message to hear. It’s a message for government, for employers, for families and for educators.

Now, we have talked in this chamber — and outside of this chamber…. There are one million job opportunities coming to British Columbians in the next ten years. It has also been said that those opportunities will be for B.C. residents, and it’s an opportunity for persons with disabilities to take their rightful place in our society and make sure they have an equal opportunity to participate in this new job environment.

One of the great myths that often is encountered in the disability community is that prospective employers say it’s going to cost too much. They don’t do it from a place of knowledge, necessarily. Often it’s a place of ignorance or a lack of experience.

On average, the cost to accommodate a person with a disability is under $500, and most people are surprised that to accommodate about 50 percent of persons with disabilities, it won’t cost a thing. For about 30 percent to 40 percent of individuals, it will be approximately $500 to accommodate. The last 5 percent or 10 percent — yes, it can be quite expensive, but this is not a bad investment.

About two years ago I had an opportunity to meet an amazing individual, one that I think that many of us in this chamber have encountered. He’s an individual by the name of Mark Wafer. Not a British Columbian — he’s from Ontario. So not all of Ontario is for naught — except for the Maple Leafs. Sorry, my apologies to those Maple Leafs fans in the chamber.

Mr. Wafer owns a number of franchises in southern Ontario. I think that he owns about nine or ten of them and has a fairly large workforce. Twenty-five percent of his employees are persons with disabilities. He’s very quick to say that one of the most — if not the most — important elements is making sure you pair the right individual with the right job. You want to make sure it’s a success for all.

He uses an example of…. He had a younger person who wanted to work as a baker in his organization. His franchise is a Tim Hortons. Obviously, doughnuts are something that need to be baked on a regular basis. The problem was this baker was often told: “Well, it’s hard to work in the kitchen because you can’t hear the buzzer when things are ready.” The baker said: “That not necessary. First of all, I know how long I put the timer on for, and there’s always a light on these industrial ovens. I can do the job.” Well, they explored, and that being said, soon thereafter, this person was working for Mr. Wafer.

He does it for a couple of reasons. He does it because it’s the right thing to do, and he does it, believe it or not, as a business person, because it’s good for business. And he uses this as his financial model. In southern Ontario the average person works in the restaurant franchise business as an employee for approximately nine months. Well, Mr. Wafer has experience that when he hires a person with a disability, a person who is rightly paired to the right job, he will have that person for an average of five years.

The absentee rates for persons with disabilities are often lower, if not much lower, than the general population. And when he gets to hold onto an employee for an extended period of time, he saves significantly in training. Each time he does this — each time he has to retrain an employee — he spends about $4,000. If you factor it out over four or five years, well, he could be saving anywhere from $15,000 to $20,000. It’s the right thing to do.

Now, technology is changing in the world, and as we look around, I know many people in this chamber will have experience with things like 3D printers. With new polymers, we have the ability to share code across the country, across the world, and create adaptive technologies that will assist individuals. Sometimes these technologies might be $25 or $45 and maybe take only an hour to construct. When someone designs the code in the Comox Valley or Victoria, that can be shared with someone on the other side of the world. And these 3D printers and the polymers that they use continually evolve.

I’m sure in a few minutes the opposition will have a chance to talk about some of the great opportunities for assisted technologies going forward. But after they have a chance to comment, I would like to make sure we have an element to raise some awareness about three recent announcements, just made in this building and beyond, that have made sure that persons with disabilities have a chance to better integrate into society, have a full life and integrate into the workforce — and making sure that they have equal opportunities to participate in our society, contribute to volunteer and make sure that they and their families have a better quality of life.

J. Kwan: There’s no question, as the member says, that the stories about people with disability and the courage in tackling all the challenges they face every day are inspiring.

[1040]

In my period as an elected official — and prior to that, as a community legal advocate — I have come across many, many people who have shown me and inspired me with their incredible personal stories. To that end,
[ Page 8231 ]
I’ve also come across many people who face incredible challenges and who actually could use some supports for them to succeed.

Like everybody in this chamber, like everybody in our communities, what do people want? They want to be able to fully participate in society. In some instances, and particularly for people with disabilities, it means that sometimes there needs to be some support that needs to be provided to them.

In fact, I will comment on this to the member. When he was the minister, there was a government program in place, and it was called the Equipment and Assistive Technology Initiative, EATI. That program was actually successful. It was a joint initiative with the federal-provincial labour market agreement, which provided some $19.5 million to spend on providing assistive technology to people with disabilities.

In fact, in British Columbia some 2,000 people accessed that program. It enabled them to get into the workforce in some instances; to get back to school in some instances. But generally speaking, it simply allowed for people to live a fuller life and fully participate in the community. Sadly, though, that program came to an end in August of 2014. In spite of the fact that many people needed the program and continued to advocate for that program, they weren’t able to access it. Why? Because the funding ended.

The member was the minister at the time, with this program coming to an end, and he says that he supports it and he wants to see the program come back. There was a process in the community in terms of consultation. People did raise this as a key issue, and there were promises made that the program would eventually be brought back. So I’m looking forward to hearing the member speak afterwards about the program coming back to support the various people that are needing to access this program.

I should also mention that the program was delivered by the B.C. Association for Individualized Technology and Supports for People with Disabilities, and they did a very, very fine job indeed.

Aside from this program coming to an end…. Some 90 percent of the people, the participants, who had access to this program stated clearly they were happy with the program. Nonetheless, the funding ended. So I’m looking forward to hearing about the continuation of this program, one that I’ve been advocating for, for a long time and one that I know that the community has been advocating for, for a very long time.

Aside from that, I’m very, very much hoping that this other program that has been on the chopping block because, again, the funding ended…. It’s the Giving in Action Fund, the family fund. This was an important program to provide to people with disabilities so that they can renovate their homes, so that they can move back home and live in the community with their families. It was, again, another wildly successful program; some 1,200 families in 113 communities across British Columbia had access to this program.

This program also ended its funding, and the community has been advocating for the reinstatement of this program as well. In that time, $42 million was injected into this program in terms of job development, into our economy. It provided some 150 contractors and vendors in terms of employment opportunities. It’s a sound program that was delivered by the non-profit sector in partnership with government.

In fact, in my tenure here in this Legislature, as well as when I was formerly in the non-profit sector…. Some of the best programs in their delivery are, in fact, those kinds of partnerships, where government stepped up and facilitated and gave the capacity to the non-profit to do what they need to do and to deliver the various programs to our community.

I’m looking forward to hearing the member’s comments.

[1045]

D. McRae: Seldom am I so opportunistic as to take advantage of introducing the member opposite to the evolution of the EATI program. She asked what was happening. Well, I assume that she must have missed the announcement that was made in this very building just one week ago. In fact, it was just one floor below us in the rotunda.

Assistive technology is essential to help persons with disabilities achieve their employment goals. That’s why I was so pleased last week to see the Minister of Social Development and the Minister of Advanced Education announce a new partnership with the Neil Squire Society.

Now, for those of you not familiar with the Neil Squire Society, it has been in existence for over 30 years. It is the only not-for-profit organization in Canada with a track record spanning — get this, Mr. Speaker — decades that combines technology and knowledge to empower Canadians with physical disabilities. In their existence they’ve helped over 30,000 Canadians, persons with disabilities, benefit from this work — an unbelievably great organization with great people in it.

Under this new partnership between the Neil Squire Society and government, $3 million a year for the next three years, for a total of $9 million, will be invested to support employment opportunities for persons with disabilities through — and, again, to the member opposite and for anybody else at home watching — a program called technology at work. Technology at work will provide mobility supports; assistive devices such as alternative keyboards, voice inputs equipment and hearing devices; and workplace modifications.

One other thing that is also really important is not only do they have the experience with technology, but they will also complement programs that now exist working with the employment program of British Columbia. Technology
[ Page 8232 ]
at work, with the Neil Squire Society, will be an invaluable supporter that will provide employers and organizations with information and connect them with assistive technology to help them better support their employees.

As well, the member opposite, since they may have missed the technology at work announcement, might have also missed the announcement of $1.2 million of government funding to be provided to post-secondary institutions to assist in developing training and resources for post-secondary students with a disability who are pursuing training in in-demand areas. This work is not just being confined to one small institution in a corner of the province. In fact, it’s being offered to over 20 institutions. From Selkirk College in the east to North Island College in the west to BCIT and in northern British Columbia, it’s an opportunity for post-secondary institutions to develop resources and programming and training that will better support persons with disabilities.

It was funny. I was driving down this morning from the Comox Valley after celebrating Mother’s Day with my family yesterday. I was pleased to see that the Minister of Health was there making announcements for more investments in technology at an organization based in this very community, in Victoria — the University of Victoria, which has done amazing work and produces amazing graduates across the province.

One of the things that they were talking about today was the organization CanAssist. CanAssist has the opportunity to work with technology and to provide $3 million this year to increase their ability to provide adaptive technology. This government will continue to work to make British Columbia the most inclusive place in Canada.

CHILD LABOUR

M. Elmore: B.C. has the dubious distinction of being a province, a jurisdiction, with one of the most neglectful child labour laws, not only in North America but, indeed, in the world. We compare ourselves…. We often think…. British Columbia and Canada like to hold ourselves in high esteem, but, in actual fact, countries such as Afghanistan and Haiti have more protective laws on their books.

There’s a need for the B.C. government to immediately raise the work-start age from 12, which it currently is, to comply with the minimum age standard and other protections set out in the United Nations convention on the rights of the child in order to better protect B.C.’s children from further risks related to workplace injuries and exploitation. If we were to do that in B.C. — amend the employment standards and raise the minimum work-start age to 15 — we would actually be joining over 156 countries around the world who have signed on to such an international treaty that bans the employment of children under 15 and requires signatories to raise the minimum age to 16 when conditions permit.

When we look back, how does British Columbia…? In 2015, how do we find ourselves in this place of the jurisdiction with the worst protection for children and working? We have to go back to 2003, when the government of British Columbia passed Bill 37, which amended the Employment Standards Act and eliminated the requirement for employers to obtain a permit to employ children between the ages of 12 and 14.

[1050]

The amendments also removed the role of the employment standards branch in the Ministry of Labour in predetermining the suitability of a worksite for a child employee in the same age group. A permit is still required to employ a child under the age of 12. Current legislation requires only that children under 15 years have written permission from one parent or guardian in order to be employed at a particular workplace.

These amendments establish B.C., as I mentioned, as the jurisdiction with the youngest work-start age in North America and, in effect, place parents in charge of determining worksite safety.

Two subsequent studies have found that, beginning in 2004, a year after the law was changed, WorkSafe B.C.–accepted injury claims began to increase in all age groups under 15 years. Prior to 2005, accepted injury claims for all age groups, 14 and under, 15- and 16-year-olds, fluctuated between 1998 and 2004. No particular trend was visible. For all age groups, injury claims were significantly higher after 2005 than they were at any previous time.

No government agency, including WorkSafe B.C., the employment standards branch or StatsCan, tracks the participation of under-15s in the workforce. The only data we can look at to see when, where, at what tasks and in what industries children are working are surveys and interviews with young children themselves and accepted injury claims when a child’s workplace injury is reported to WorkSafe — they’ve seen it — and a claim is approved. Both reports made numerous recommendations to government that have not, to date, been implemented.

We can see that by placing few protective limits on the hours and the kinds of work employers can demand of children as young as 12, this puts children in an explicitly vulnerable situation. Adding to that is, hand in hand, the problem that the new self-regulated system is complaint-driven and that government officials are informed only after the fact of instances of injury or exploitation.

This is clearly not acceptable. We need to ensure that children and youth have protection in the WorkSafe. Indeed, we can cite any number of international conventions and treaties, including NAFTA’s side agreement on labour, where Canada, the U.S. and Mexico agreed to maintain the standards of their respective domestic employment laws, which explicitly mentions upholding current restrictions on labour by children and young people. Now we’ve moved away from that to having the lowest child labour standards in North America.

In addition, problematic with this, hand in hand, is
[ Page 8233 ]
that the B.C. government has transferred the role of assessment and supervision of B.C.’s employers to parents. Certainly, it’s an understanding and I think a social contract of the role of government and the responsibility of government to oversee employers and the workplace and to be proactive in determining and assessing the safety and the appropriateness of industries and employment and, in particular, to have an additional responsibility of ensuring that children are protected. It should not be left up to individual parents who, although well-meaning, of course….

All parents have the best interests of their children at heart, but it can hardly be expected that parents have the experience and the know-how to assess and go on site and determine the suitability of a manufacturing plant or a restaurant and have the expertise to determine if it is, indeed, a safe worksite. This is certainly an area that is left up in the air, and it’s putting children at risk.

We’re seeing that in terms of the injuries, the rate of injuries that have been reported that have been on the rise and that are increasing — that that goes hand in hand. We have in our society…. I think British Columbians would agree that child labour should be strictly limited. We’re not talking about, you know, certainly, opportunities for children to make extra money on the side or participate in some capacity, to volunteer. But when we’re talking about entering into industrial worksites, into dangerous occupations, these are areas that need oversight and need to be regulated to ensure the safety of children.

[1055]

Fundamentally, it should not interfere with schooling, and children have the right to time for play and relaxation. Children are not little workers, and that is a collective responsibility that we share. We need to see this changed, we need to see improvements made and we need to see a commitment to ensure that children are safe in our province.

L. Larson: Young workers have the same protections under occupational health and safety as any other worker in British Columbia. B.C.’s employment standards require parental consent before 12- to 14-year-olds can work. It also prohibits working during school hours and requires adult supervision at all times. Employers who violate the regulations face penalties of $500 to $10,000. Children under 12 still require a permit to work in B.C.

In 1989 my husband and I moved out of the city to a rural community and purchased a corner store. Our three daughters, aged 17, 15 and 13, reluctantly settled into life in a small town, and all three became part of a very demanding small business. They worked after school and on weekends. They learned customer service, basic math and met other young people who became their friends, giving them a positive connection to the community.

My granddaughter went to work at 15 at the same business under a new owner, and my grandson at the age of 14 at the local golf course.

I live in an agricultural area that, for generations, has had entire families, from the very young to the very old, all participate in the businesses of running their farms, and they continue to do so. These generational farms are the backbone of our agricultural industry. The friends of my grandchildren all work for and with their families on their farms or in other related businesses after school and on weekends.

We all know of instances around the world where child labour takes on a very different face, stories about children in factories and fields who are there not with the support of their families but out of basic necessity for their own food and shelter. However, this is not the case in B.C.

The regulations created in 2003 protect young workers by requiring parental consent, limited hours and adult supervision. Worker safety is paramount in B.C. For the last ten years, WorkSafe B.C. has focused on young workers, using a comprehensive approach to injury prevention through partnerships with schools, employer associations, organized labour, parents and the community at large. One injury is too many.

In 2007 WorkSafe B.C. introduced new orientation and training regulations for new and youth workers. High school students throughout B.C. learn to stay safe each year with WorkSafe B.C.’s Right to Know campaign, and two websites are devoted to young worker health and safety — the Young Worker Portal at WorkSafe B.C. and raiseyourhand.com.

The current injury rate for those under 15 is less than the average, and injuries in the under-15 age group have dropped dramatically, from 47 in 2009 to 11 in 2013.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

Parents are primarily responsible for their children, and they decide whether it is appropriate for their 12- to 14-year-olds to work. Their explicit permission indicates that they approve of the location of work, the hours of work and the type of work to be performed.

To help parents make informed decisions, the employment standards branch has an on-line guide that outlines issues for parents to consider when making this decision. Assistance is also available over the phone and in person.

We need to encourage and support our youth entering the workforce by ensuring that their first experiences are positive and injury-free. All of these young people are gaining social skills and work ethics that will follow them all their lives, creating good employees and the great business leaders of the future of British Columbia.

M. Elmore: The response from the member is not good enough. Certainly, when we hear, wanting to self-righteously draw the distinction: “Well, child labour in British Columbia is not quite the same as child labour in developing countries….”

[1100]

Well, I’ll tell you what. It’s not the same, because B.C. has the distinction of having the worst protection for child workers, not only in North America but around the world in some of those developing countries. That’s the reality.

When we talk about: “Oh, child workers have the same protections and rights under employment standards….” Well, when we look at the ability of children — of a 12-year-old, a 13-year-old, a 14-year-old — to be able to speak up about their rights in the workforce, to know what their rights are, to have…. As well, many of the members have children in their teens, and British Columbians. Unacceptable.

Children are more vulnerable. They are not as knowledgeable about their rights. It is not good enough that there are on-line websites that children can go to or that parents can call.

Part of the problem is that we lack a regulatory and legislative framework to ensure that children are protected in our province. We also have an abdication of responsibility, of employment standards being complaint-driven. We need a proactive system so that parents and citizens of our province, British Columbia, can be assured that our government takes seriously and respects children and ensures that they’re safe not only in their homes but at work.

It’s a shame. It’s a disgrace. It’s marked by the callous nature of this government in terms of having…. We’re seeing it. The proof is that we have seen injury rates skyrocket — critical injuries — ten times…

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

M. Elmore: …since these changes have come in place. It’s unacceptable and clearly a distinction between valuing and respecting children and their right to be children, to enjoy their childhood, to be safe and protected in the workplace. It’s a shame.

We need to ensure that children are protected, that we bring back protections for children and ensure that there’s proactive monitoring in place to ensure that they are safe, free of injury. We have seen the trend, and it’s continuing. It is on this government — feeling and experiencing, with children seeing more injuries…. This is not a joke. Smiling from the Minister of Transportation. It’s not a joke for children being injured. We need to see a commitment to protect children in our province.

Hon. T. Stone: I now call private member’s Motion 16.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required in order not to disturb other motions on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 16 — INVESTMENT AND
EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION

M. Hunt: I move:

[Be it resolved that this House recognize the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy.]

I love to use the example of Endurance Wind Power in Surrey. I use that because Endurance has sold over 1,000 wind turbines worldwide and actually holds a 75 percent market share in the U.K. small wind market, which is machines that are dealing with 50 to 100 kilowatt hours of power. Endurance has a factory in Surrey as well as one in Worcestershire, England, and employs 150 employees, 75 of whom are in Surrey, another 75 over in the U.K.

The interesting thing is that this company has expanded now in opening a new office in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, and is continuing to grow and expand their business which is here in British Columbia. The reality is that I believe there is not one commercial wind turbine that operates in the Lower Mainland, yet we have this business functioning and flowing there. They import parts from China and also from Europe. They assemble them, manufacture them here in British Columbia. Why? Because British Columbia’s attractive fiscal climate, our business incentives and our diversified economy offer significant opportunities for growth and investment for businesses.

[1105]

British Columbia’s trade relationships have a direct impact on the growth of family-supporting jobs here in our province. This is why we are committed to the expansion and the diversification of our markets through overseas trade missions, growing our trade and investment networks and working new partnerships and memorandums of understanding.

We’re committed to working hard to attract investments that create jobs and grow the economy. This is why we are supporting trade agreements that benefit the province of British Columbia. Trade and investment with Asia is critical in ensuring that we continue to grow the B.C. economy.

Our government is focused on building stronger relationships with Asia, and we are using the B.C. Business Network and our expanding international trade and investment networks to connect export-ready B.C. businesses with opportunities to find new markets for their products.

Maintaining, of course, our triple-A credit rating sends a powerful message to investors that B.C. is a safe harbour for investment and that we’re open for business. British Columbia’s proven track record for fiscal prudence and meeting our fiscal targets over the past ten years, as well as the province’s large, diverse economy, have all be praised by Moody’s as part of contributing to B.C.’s strong credit rating.
[ Page 8235 ]

Our trade missions are an important part of B.C.’s international engagement and to support the economic growth that is happening through the B.C. jobs plan and meeting those objectives. Missions secure B.C.’s entry into priority markets and provide the momentum required to leverage partnerships and international investments and to expand potential trade deals.

Export markets are fiercely competitive, and what often sets us apart in these types of deals is that relationship that we have with these people, especially in Asia. Trade missions give us an upper hand in bringing face-to-face meetings with key stakeholders as we continue to nurture our existing connections and develop new ones. The badge of government is what supports these B.C. trade and investment objectives, and it’s crucial for opening doors for B.C. businesses overseas, especially in highly competitive export markets.

Our missions are designed to work in key priority areas, such as Southeast Asia, China, Korea, Japan, India, Europe and, of course, the United States. These trade missions have been part of promoting B.C.’s competitive advantage to increase our exports and trade in key areas, such as energy, agrifoods, clean technology, digital media, life sciences, international education and resource development.

The groundwork in Asia is leading to increased trade and investment in job creation for British Columbians. Trade missions are a very cost-effective way of our B.C. businesses being able to participate in these discussions within these export markets on a firsthand basis. Recently the Minister of International Trade travelled to China and Indonesia to build successes on previous trade agreements.

B. Ralston: Well, one always has to chuckle when one hears the words “export diversification” from the members opposite, because it was not that long ago — in fact, maybe a year ago or a year and a half — that the Premier was focusing with a laser-like focus on LNG.

Diversification is something that the B.C. Liberals only seem to have discovered by default. While they talk about global markets, they didn’t seem to understand the global market for LNG. Certainly, there may be some final investment decisions. We shall see. But in terms of the laser-like focus of the Premier, clearly she set back any strategy of diversification. It’s nice to see that they’ve revived the word “diversification” and are starting to think about their mistaken priorities that they pursued from 2013 until fairly recently.

The members opposite talk about and trumpet what they claim are their successes, but let’s look at what a more objective observer might say. One of the measures of export success is what’s called export intensity — that is, ranking the provincial economy, the value of exports, per capita.

[1110]

Jock Finlayson, B.C. Business, in a piece, July 31, 2013, asked the question: how does B.C. stack up as an exporting powerhouse? He said: “The answer is that our record is mediocre at best.”

This is not a New Democrat or God forbid…. This is the research analyst for the B.C. Business Council, the leading business organization in the province. While the Liberals are trumpeting their success, here’s what an objective observer is saying: the “record is mediocre at best.” Certainly, in order to pursue our competitive advantages, more effort is required.

The member opposite talks about Endurance Wind Power. I’ve toured the Endurance Wind Power plant. The CEO is perhaps a little bit more candid with me about some of their challenges in this jurisdiction and also uses that as an example of why we’re going to penetrate Asian markets. Yet, ironically, the example is that they were doing very well in the United Kingdom, and that’s their primary export market.

There are other companies in Surrey. Singer Valve is one. I toured a wholesale business called Kitply just recently with the Surrey Board of Trade. There’s a whole group of companies somewhat below the surface in Surrey that are pursuing export opportunities. But they’re not doing that with any particular assistance or support from the provincial government.

We know that the member has talked about trade missions, for example, and calls them a “cost-effective mechanism” for promoting British Columbia in foreign jurisdictions. I think one of the most recent trips of the Premier cost $750,000 for ten days. Is there any accountability? Are there any details forthcoming? Can you get them through estimates? Can you get them through FOI? Can you find out what that money was spent on?

A flight to Tokyo and Korea return may be a thousand bucks in the low season — maybe $1,300 or $1,400 in the high season. Then a hotel…. Probably, most people could do the trip for a couple thousand bucks. But no — $750,000 for the Premier and her entourage to travel. I don’t think it’s a very cost-effective way. We’re not being told what the Premier is doing there in any great detail.

It’s very difficult to assess the efficacy. In fact, academic experts suggest that perhaps the trade mission route…. I know it’s the favourite of the Premier, and perhaps there are reasons for her to be absent from the jurisdiction as much as possible, but I’m not sure. But certainly, this is not a cost-effective way to pursue trade opportunities for the citizens of British Columbia.

This is not only a problem in our traditional export industries, because there has been expansion of wood products — for example, lumber, plywood, veneer and raw logs. Certainly, the market in China has expanded, but it’s a very traditional form of British Columbia exports particularly, although with a huge expansion in raw logs to China. That’s a change, but not necessarily the most effective one.
[ Page 8236 ]

With that, I conclude.

J. Thornthwaite: I’m pleased to stand and support the member for Surrey-Panorama. “Be it resolved that this House recognize the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy.”

I’d just like to comment on the member for Surrey-Whalley. I can assure you that our Premier is our biggest supporter and our biggest salesperson for British Columbia, and that is why she does these trade missions.

British Columbia’s trade relationships have a direct impact on the growth of family-supporting jobs in the province. That is why we are committed to the expansion and diversification of our markets through overseas trade missions, growing our trade and investment networks and working new partnerships and memorandums of understanding.

The trade missions are an important part of British Columbia’s international engagement strategy to support economic growth in priority sectors and the B.C. jobs plan priorities. The missions secure B.C.’s entry into priority markets and provide the momentum required to leverage partnerships, international investments and expand potential trade deals. They give us an upper hand by bringing us face to face with key stakeholders so we can continue to nurture our existing connections and develop new ones.

[1115]

B.C. is focusing on diversifying markets in Asia, like in the film industry, TV industry and digital media. In fact, last October in India, the Premier and the Minister of Advanced Education travelled to New Delhi, Mumbai and Chandigarh, where they focused on a number of strategic areas, including film and digital arts.

While there, the Premier announced the appointment of Arjun Sablok, a special envoy for film to India to help promote British Columbia to one of the largest film-producing countries in the world. Arjun, a Canadian who has lived in Mumbai for the past 25 years, takes on the unpaid role as ambassador for the B.C. film industry.

B.C.’s film and entertainment companies, North Shore Studios and Vancouver Film Studios, signed MOUs with India-based film and entertainment giant, Ramoji Film City. Both parties agreed to promote each other in India and British Columbia and support each other for the purpose of shooting and productions. At the B.C. Film and Digital Roundtable in Mumbai, the Premier congratulated international film special-effects giant Double Negative for its decision to open a new state-of-the-art facility in Vancouver, gaining the city even more recognition as a digital hub and paving the way for more well-paying jobs for British Columbians.

The industry has advised us that 2015 will continue to be a busy year for film and TV production and animation in visual effects in B.C. Last week all the members of the House were at a special event celebrating the launch of B.C. Creates. There we had an event where the industry stakeholders were showcasing their green screens and other digital animation events at the Legislature in the rotunda. Some people attended the screening and reception of the B.C. Creates Canada film day. On May 2 and 3 the Digital Days Conference and Expo for film and animation at Capilano University was also celebrated in that week.

The proclamation that our Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training presented at that event said: “B.C.’s film, television, music, book and magazine publishing, and digital media creative industries employ thousands of skilled B.C. professionals in industries that produce a wide range of products and services, many of them interconnected and all highly innovative, employing cutting edge technology.”

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker — an event that I attended last Friday at Capilano University, where the dean, Bill Thumm, was retiring. He was happy and sad for two reasons. One, that he had a great amount of people there from faculty as well as students that were celebrating his retirement. But he was sad because there were a lot of his students that couldn’t attend that event. Why? Because they were currently working on Steven Spielberg’s adaptation of the Roald Dahl children’s book, The BFG — or Big, Friendly Giant — currently being filmed in British Columbia. That’s good news that, in fact, they couldn’t attend the party because they were working.

Our film industry in British Columbia continues to be successful in part because of these wonderful trade missions that the Premier has been involved in, in the past.

J. Shin: Thanks to the member for Surrey-Panorama for his motion for this House to “recognize the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy.” As always, it is my pleasure to rise in the House to participate in this debate on behalf of Burnaby-Lougheed.

I’m happy to support this motion, with my colleagues on this side of the House, and I have been calling on the government to do just that since the election, to balance its all-eggs-in-one-basket infatuation with the LNG industry and, of course, lend a fair share of their support for the other dimensions of international economic activity, such as tourism, immigration, trade and services, foreign investment as well as transportation.

As we are all aware, British Columbia is a trading province with a wealth of natural resources. But not just that — we also have agricultural goods, technological and professional services from all regions of this province available for export. We also have our geographical advantage to capitalize on as Canada’s natural Pacific Gateway. Of course, there is no arguing in that we should be seeking strategic opportunities globally for international business investments and diversified export markets.

[1120]

What we should be reminded of is that, while exports are a highly coveted part of any economy. With new revenues coming into the jurisdiction and, of course, associated industries typically performing above-average with productivity levels and paying better wages and benefits, B.C. is still not the biggest exporting province in Canada, with our merchandise exports representing the smallest share of GDP of any province.

Much of this is attributed to, of course, the years of feet-dragging that we saw — which put us behind Europe, America, Australia — the diverse industries in B.C. having been sidestepped, over LNG, by this government in its previous budget. The latest report from the Business Council of B.C. confirms just that. The fact is that our province, as much as it likes to tout, in the recent months, of its diversified orientation, still has an export base that remains heavily tilted toward resource-based products, with 72 percent of merchandise exports being related to the province’s wood products, coal and metallic minerals.

I am certainly delighted to see, and I’m sure the stakeholders are relieved likewise, the government’s change in tune and acknowledging that B.C.’s services and non-resources export sector are becoming increasingly important, with the expansion of the enterprises now offering financial business and professional services, research and development, educational services and tourism. They proved their resilience without much in the way of support from this government in the recent years.

I do want to touch on our tourism sector which has not kept pace with the rest of the economy, with its growth well below the average of other industries, even though the industry started recovering since the downturn. Considering that more than a third of our GDP in accommodation, food services and transportation is generated by tourist spending and that the tourism industry is considered to be one of the export markets — and, of course, one in 15 British Columbians depend on jobs in this industry — we should be more sensitive to the businesses right here on our soil. Their livelihood depends on steady and growing international traffic, as well as the providing of the provincial infrastructure and resources needed to cater to the growth, beyond just taking credit for the lowered Canadian currency lending a temporary boost to this industry at the moment.

We all know that the contribution of the high-tech sector to the economy of this province is also paramount. While it is great that the sector has seen growth steadily over the last few years, we still import four times as much as we export. We still have a relatively small market share compared to all other provincial and American jurisdictions, so our potential is really far from being fully realized.

The stakeholders in the industry have long called for investment in local initiatives so that we can grow the domestic market as well, so that we can have the kind of economic scale required to compete with the U.S. jurisdictions that have nationwide market access, as well as local usage and export opportunities.

Really, what this motion is calling for, be it to advance our export markets abroad or to strengthen our domestic consumption locally…. It’s going to boil right down to our labour readiness with the trained workforce.

With B.C. having the worst young adult employment rate — with one in five of 25 to 29 year olds not working or studying — and a record high rate of people leaving the province that doubled since the ’90s and the number of temporary foreign workers in the last six years being double the national average at 29 percent, we need to make sure we focus more on supporting our local labour market.

S. Gibson: Good to be here today to have a chance to speak in support of the following motion, proposed by a colleague from the riding just across the way, from Surrey-Panorama: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy.”

I know families in my riding support a growing economy and job security, so it’s very easy for me to be enthusiastic about this.

Most of us are familiar with the difficulties facing Alberta. Ninety percent of Alberta’s exports go directly to a single market — the United States. And virtually all of Alberta’s exports are a single commodity — petroleum products. The sudden and surprising drop in oil prices plunged the Alberta government into a very serious economic situation. Indeed, the deficit problems in the order of billions of dollars are problematic.

[1125]

Alberta is now forced to borrow just to provide vital services such as health care and education. The British Columbia advantage — I even have that underlined on my notes here.

Recently the Bank of Montreal predicted that British Columbia will lead all provinces in economic growth in 2015 and 2016. A young person might even say that British Columbia rocks, and we couldn’t agree with that and could not say: “Wow. That’s the way to speak about our economy.”

There are several reasons why. B.C. has balanced its budget three years in a row by controlling public spending. We have maintained a triple-A credit rating. B.C. has expanded its horizons and is now no longer dependent on a single market, which I noted earlier.

In 2001, 70 percent of B.C.’s exports went to the United States. By 2014 the U.S. still remains an important trading partner, but trade with Asia has expanded to account for over 39 percent of all B.C. exports. Trade missions are an important segment and component of our government. Numerous trade missions have been led to specific sector support of our economy, including agriculture.

For example, in 2014 the Minister of Agriculture was joined by his federal counterpart and led an important
[ Page 8238 ]
trade mission to China. B.C. industry representatives were Christine Dendy of the Cherry Association of British Columbia; Debbie Etsell of the B.C. Blueberry Council, one I take a particular interest in, given the availability and in significant crop of blueberries — I might note that the member from Pitt Meadows–Mission will also be very excited to hear about that trade mission, as it went very well — and Donald Leung of Donald’s Fine Foods.

The trade missions had some specific objectives which are important to note here: reinforcing B.C. as a reliable supplier of a diverse range of high-quality agrifoods products to Chinese buyers, distributors and importers; highlight brand awareness and increasing demand for B.C. agrifood products in the Chinese market; collecting market intelligence from sellers, buyers and others and importers for opportunities for B.C. agrifoods products to China; and demonstrating the important liaison coordination between federal and provincial government collaboration.

This is very important as we look internationally into Asia. The result of one particular trade mission was spectacular, and I want to just record that here for the record: an agreement between the governments of Canada and China that will lead to full, unimpeded access for fresh B.C. cherries into China.

In 2013 B.C. shipped $3.9 million worth of fresh cherries to China for the first time. With the new agreement, B.C. cherry growers will estimate up to $20 million in new revenue annually in the next few years — very good news indeed for the cherry growers, especially of the Okanagan region of the province.

Ongoing progress towards fresh B.C. blueberries being approved for sale in the Chinese market. We’re aware that China has a real appetite and a real interest in receiving our blueberries. It is estimated that B.C. growers could be looking at up $65 million worth of exports a year once the agreement is fully implemented — tremendous news for our province.

The trade mission built on the already successful partnerships across the agrifood sector, including pork, beef and value-added products, such as syrups, concentrates and sauces.

Thank you very much. It was good to speak to this today.

N. Macdonald: I just want to say to begin with that Monday mornings, I think, should be used to debate private members’ bills. If we were going to make use of this time, I would suggest that that would be better use of the time. Burnaby-Lougheed, Delta South, Saanich South — there are all sorts of good ideas that come to this House from backbenchers and from opposition members. They should be debated properly. I just want to put that on the record first. That would be a better use of this time than doing this.

The motion that we have in front of us basically parrots the latest B.C. Liberal talking points on the economy. Let’s be clear about that. It is what…? “To diversify trade” is the new term you’re using.

[1130]

It does, however, contradict the B.C. Liberal talking points that were in place the last four years, right? Because previous to the collapse of the idea on LNG — right? — it was all LNG, all of the time. The talking points, then, for the past four years were one thing. Now we’re onto something else, and we’re going to talk about it for the morning. Let’s just remember what the talking points for LNG were.

It was about the 15 or so LNG plants that were going to be built — the first one this year, by the way, and up and operating, 2015. That was a promise. We had a $100 billion prosperity fund, which I haven’t heard as much about. A $100 billion prosperity fund — that’s what members were up talking about with the previous talking points. Now we’re on to this, diversified trade.

We had $168 billion in debt gone. That was the talking point then. Now we’re talking about this. We had sales tax eliminated. We had 100,000 jobs, somehow, that were going to be put into place and a trillion dollars in economic activity. We have a parliamentary secretary for LNG literacy. Did I miss anything? I’ll ask that parliamentary secretary. Did I miss some of the things that were on the table the past four years in sessions Monday mornings?

Now we’re talking about diversified trade. I guess this is how the B.C. Liberals spin the failure on LNG. “This is how we do it. Now it’s diversified.” As the member for Surrey-Whalley put it, it’s sort of by default, right? “Good thing the LNG failed because now we’re diversified. We don’t have that incredibly strong LNG sector to worry about.”

What is diversity, and what is actually diversified here? We sell, in British Columbia, raw resources to richer countries, who use them to manufacture goods. That could be a description of the economy 100 years ago. It could also be an accurate description of what happens now. That’s what we do.

China — a planned economy, by the way — is growing economically at an incredible pace. Even as it slows down, it is still at an incredible pace. We have India. We have the more developed economies of Korea, Taiwan and, of course, Japan.

When the U.S. economy collapsed in 2008, combined with a strong Canadian dollar, our trade patterns changed. You had massive growth in Asia, and you had a combination of factors in the United States. Not surprisingly, the trade exports from B.C. changed a little. Did B.C. and the B.C. government have anything to do with that? No. We are a small, small jurisdiction swept around by whatever happens in the world economy.

You know what’s going to happen now? And I guess, get ready to take credit for it. American imports of our goods are going to increase because the B.C. economy is impacted tremendously, especially in forestry, with the strength of the Canadian dollar. As it weakens — in the
[ Page 8239 ]
Interior, especially — we’re going to be able to sell more into the States. Will the B.C. government have anything to do with that? No, but I’m sure you’ve got people ready there to spin it, and we can maybe have a Monday talking about that, when that happens.

What we do control in B.C. here is the ability to get fuller value for the natural resources that we sell. That is how we get full benefit for a public resource. That is how we get family-supporting jobs.

The Premier has the worst record for job creation in 50 years. That’s the truth of it — the worst record for job creation in 50 years. That’s Statistics Canada, by the way. Between 1991 and 2001 the average monthly job growth was 3,000 jobs added on average per month. For this Premier, between 2011 and now, the period this Premier has been in charge, it’s 900 jobs. Other countries, other provinces, would do things differently. So should we.

G. Kyllo: I think what’s predictable is the continued negativity from the opposition. B.C. has a great history of a diversified economy. The B.C. jobs plan focuses on eight sectors — definitely diversification as well as diversifying our markets. We’ve done an awful lot over the last 13 years to grow markets with Asia.

[1135]

Our exports. The GDP used to be 71 percent to the United States. We’ve been very fortunate and successful in actually reducing that to just 51 percent — again, by focusing on the opportunity of growing exports with Asia.

It’s definitely a pleasure to rise today in support of the motion put forth by my colleague from Surrey-Panorama: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy.” Opening new markets for B.C.’s goods and services and expanding existing ones, particularly in Asia, are pillars of the B.C. jobs plan. Part of that plan is also to attract investment to expand British Columbia’s priority sectors.

In the jobs plan our government made the commitment to double B.C.’s international presence. Since the jobs plan was released in September of 2011, our international network has grown to 11 trade and investment offices and 64 people that are based in priority markets across Asia, Europe and the United States. We now have more people to support B.C. companies and communities to attract investment to grow exports.

Despite the criticism that was identified regarding trade missions by the member for Surrey-Whalley, you can’t build relationships on the end of a telephone line. You have to actually take the time and actually invest and meet with folks in order to grow business opportunities for British Columbia.

We believe that expanding our access to priority markets such as China, India, Japan, South Korea, Europe and the United States gives B.C. businesses and communities the potential for immense growth and an opportunity to strengthen local economies and provide jobs. We’re negotiating trade deals. We’re forging agreements and partnerships and expanding and diversifying exports in support of all the B.C. jobs plan sectors. We’re also attracting international investment that supports job creation, economic expansion and increased competitiveness.

Looking at the progress that’s been made under the B.C. jobs plan, we supported more than 460 inbound and outbound trade missions since April of 2011, including three major missions by the Premier to Asian markets that resulted in business deals and partnership agreements valued at more than $1.8 billion.

In our government’s most recent trade mission at the end of March and early April of this year, the Minister of International Trade travelled to China and Indonesia to build on the successes of previous trade missions, to further strengthen B.C.’s long-standing relationships with key Asian markets and to open doors for new ones. For example, we strengthened B.C.’s relationship with Jiangsu province through signing a memorandum of understanding on economic cooperation in the tech sector.

This trade mission also served as an opportunity to connect B.C. tech companies with Chinese companies through a number of seminars and networking events.

Our government has created a major investments office to support international projects that deliver significant economic benefits to B.C. We’ve attracted 37 foreign head offices to B.C., including Sony Imageworks, which will create up to 700 new jobs. We’ve removed 170 barriers that restricted trade opportunities for business. We’re also contributing to new trade agreements with South Korea and the European Union.

B.C.’s international trade reputation stands out in a number of areas. There’s a growing recognition that B.C. is a North American trade hub and the most multicultural jurisdiction for Asia-Pacific business. B.C.’s special representative in Asia advances trade and investment priorities on behalf of government and gives investors high-level access to an official representative on the ground.

B.C. is an open trading economy, with one in five jobs and 20 percent of our annual economic benefit generated through exports. Our west coast location is pivotal, giving us enviable access to Asia’s growing markets. We’re well positioned to be North America’s hub for international trade, with advantages including a stable economy, a business-friendly climate, shorter shipping times to Asia from Vancouver and Prince Rupert compared to our American counterparts and a multicultural, highly skilled workforce.

The changing nature of global trade investment means B.C. must be ready to take full advantage of growing opportunities. In particular, initiatives such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and integrated trading blocks such as the European Union will benefit B.C. by opening up access to new markets. More foreign investment is necessary to create new jobs in B.C.
[ Page 8240 ]

L. Popham: It’s an interesting topic today. I think we’ve heard a lot of examples of why having a diversified export market is very important. I completely agree.

[1140]

It’s interesting to listen to the members across the way talk about trade missions and how important they are. Basically, what they do is they go over to a different country, and they say: “Hey, we’ve got some stuff. Do you want to buy it?” Well, have I got a deal for them. I have got probably the least expensive trade mission that they can buy into. Instead of $750,000 to get over to Asia, I’d even lend them $2.50 to catch a bus out to Abbotsford. Instead of going over to another country and asking them if they want to buy our stuff, we have countries that want to buy our stuff.

The example that I mean is the B.C. hazelnut industry. If you want to diversify your industry, there’s one industry that is begging for support so that they can go out and they can be in the international market. Most of the members in this House know about the B.C. hazelnut industry, because the B.C. hazelnut industry sent us all a package of hazelnuts last week. We all enjoyed them, and we all were able to read their strategic plan which they’ve developed. In case some of the members in this House ate those nuts but forgot to read the plan, I’m going to just give them the highlights of that plan.

The B.C. hazelnut industry has existed in this province since the 1930s. It works very well with our climate. Unfortunately, there has been a disease problem with the hazelnut industry. Eastern filbert blight has kicked in, and it is destroying the crops that we currently have, but there’s a plan to replant those trees.

The reason why we want to replant those trees is because the nut market is increasing globally. It’s an incredible opportunity that we have, and it’s quite inexpensive — $1.2 million over the next five years. How could anybody walk away from that sort of investment?

There’s a seven-point plan that the industry developed. In 2015 industry studies…. The hazelnut industry development plan shows the hazelnut industry can survive and it can thrive. The B.C. hazelnut industry is under threat of a disease, eastern filbert blight. It is clear the industry needs to follow an industry development transition plan.

Many in agriculture understand what these are. There are often problems that come into different sectors of agriculture and if you don’t have a transition plan to get out of them, then you’re not going to survive. That’s the state that the hazelnut industry is in. This plan was developed, in part, due to a lack of formal B.C. policy on eastern filbert blight. With these seven actions, the industry can be rebuilt.

The first part of the plan is to rebuild the B.C. supply base of hazelnut orchards with EFB resistant trees. We are very fortunate that there has been some development of EFB resistant trees in Oregon state. We have a nursery here in B.C. that is growing a stock. But, of course, they need support as well. We have orchards that need to be ripped out and replanted. The stock that’s being developed right now is part of that plan.

Build hazelnut grower awareness and promote the industry. The hazelnut industry has not been that well organized up until now, but they are now very organized. I think they’re on fire.

Understand world markets and how to access these markets. The world market for nuts is really an interesting topic. There are many countries in the world where hazelnuts grow. It’s actually concentrated in Turkey, Spain, Italy and the U.S.A. There are about 30 other countries growing smaller quantities.

Now, when you look at how many nuts the average Canadian eats…. The hazelnut industry has given those statistics. If you look at 2007, the consumption Canada-wide was about 3,200 megatons of hazelnuts. In 2010 that went up to 7,885. That’s an enormous jump. Then in 2011 we’re over 10,000 megatons of hazelnuts. So as you can see, just in Canada the amount of hazelnut consumption is increasing.

We all know that Ferrero Rocher is an international company that uses hazelnuts in its products a lot. They are currently investing in hazelnut farms just so they can secure their marketplace and have the supply that they need as the demand for their products increases. I think we’re also very familiar with Nutella.

[1145]

D. Bing: My constituents of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows want a secure and prosperous economy. That is why I am pleased to support this morning’s motion put forward by my colleague from Surrey-Panorama: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy.”

We have a mature and diversified economy here in British Columbia. That means we have deep roots with well-established markets for our traditional industries — forestry, mining, fishing and agriculture. These sectors have been the mainstay for the B.C. economy since we joined Confederation in 1871.

Just within the last 13 or 14 years, our provincial economy has evolved dramatically. It marks a distinct departure from our reliance almost exclusively on North American markets to a modern, highly diversified and global economy. It is the policy of this government to encourage further diversification, because it protects our economy from sudden price shocks.

In 2001 more than two-thirds, or 69.8 percent, of B.C. products were exported to the United States. Our second-largest trading partner was Japan at 12.8 percent, and our third-largest trading partner was China, with 2.3 percent of B.C. exports going to that country. Our provincial economy was quite vulnerable because our eggs were, essentially, all in one basket. Any downturn in the U.S. economy would reverberate throughout British Columbia.
[ Page 8241 ]

However, a change of government in 2001 ushered in a strong commitment to help business expand to new markets. By 2014, exports to Japan, China and other parts of Asia now account for 39.5 percent of British Columbia’s exports. While the United States remains an important trading partner, we are no longer reliant on a single customer.

By contrast, as the member for Abbotsford-Mission said earlier, Alberta’s share of exports remains almost completely reliant on U.S. markets, at 90 percent in 2014. We have seen how the dramatic drop in oil prices has plunged Alberta into a serious deficit position. This situation poses significant challenges for any jurisdiction, especially since Alberta will now have to borrow just to cover operating expenses, such as providing health care services.

British Columbia, on the other hand, is in a much more enviable position. Because of diversification, we are less vulnerable to sudden price shocks. Over the past three years we have balanced our budget. While virtually every member of the G20 has struggled since the economic meltdown of 2008, British Columbia has worked hard to keep public spending in check. A balanced budget means that we can focus on social priorities and begin helping British Columbians most in need.

It also means that British Columbia maintains its triple-A credit rating. Since November 2004, British Columbia has received seven credit-rating upgrades. British Columbia continues to maintain the highest credit rating possible with Moody’s, Standard and Poor’s and Fitch. Strong credit ratings signal that British Columbia is a great place to invest, and this helps to create jobs and spur economic investment.

A balanced budget, coupled with a triple-A credit rating also sends a strong signal to investors that British Columbia is a great place to do business. That is, essentially, the message that the Premier and other members of this House send during trade missions abroad.

Export markets are fiercely competitive, and what often sets you apart is the strength of your relationships. Trade missions secure B.C.’s entry into priority markets and provide the momentum required to leverage partnerships, international investments and expand potential trade deals.

In conclusion, I think it is worth noting that the Bank of Montreal is now predicting that British Columbia will lead the country in economic growth in 2015. By balancing the budget and keeping public spending on track, there is no reason why B.C. will not continue to lead the country in the years to come.

S. Chandra Herbert: “Some look at things that are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask: why not.” Of course, that was George Bernard Shaw. It’s something that we as legislators all need to keep in our minds.

When you go back to the creation of this place, the creation of this province, what were some fundamental industries? Well, of course, forestry, mining, fisheries, agriculture. You’ll see those in this building, illustrated. What you don’t see, but what has happened since, what has been dreamed of and come into creation since those days, of course, is our creative economy.

[1150]

B.C.’s creative sector, whether it be in book publishing, the music industry, film and TV, digital entertainment, technology, magazines, theatre, dance — on and on you go — we are an incredibly creative province that punches above our weight in terms of the content created, in terms of the creativity and in terms of how it gets exported around the world.

I mention this because traditionally we’ve focused on natural resources. That’s all the government has talked about. Really, lately, the only one is…. Gas has been the main focus of this government, while largely ignoring other sectors that are vital for exports.

Now, how vital is the creative economy to B.C., and how much should we pay attention to it? Well, at a minimum it’s 85,000 jobs — generally well-paying jobs, good jobs, good for the soul, good for the spirit. It’s about $4 billion in our gross domestic product, if you use that accounting figure — so roughly in the same ballpark, in terms of jobs, as forestry, mining, fisheries.

It was not something dreamed of at the time this province was created. It came into being because of artists, because of entrepreneurs, because of innovators. I think about something Liz Shorten and Bob D’Eith, who work with Creative B.C. and who work with the Canadian Media Production Association and Music B.C.… They said to me, when we started meeting early around Creative B.C. and this idea, that we should bring together our film commission. We should bring the other creative industries together, as other provinces have done.

While there was resistance originally from the government side, thankfully, the argument won the day. We all agreed at that time, as we were coming up with the plans to push and advocate for Creative B.C., that it makes so much sense to collaborate. Artists do it already — the authors, the coders, the lyricists, the musicians, the playwrights, the film scriptwriters and on and on. They’re already collaborating, taking ideas from each other. Let’s bring the industry associations together. Let’s bring the government together so we can truly celebrate our creative economy and draw in more support.

In B.C., well, we are full of creative people — some of the highest percentages in the country in terms of actual artists, if you look at the vital statistics. We, unfortunately, do not get the same level of support from the federal broadcasters and the federal producers as we would if you went by per-capita figures. That has got to change, and I think that’s why Creative B.C. is so vital — being able to make our case on the national and international stage. Once we have the dollars and once our producers — whether they be Omni, whether they be Brightlight,
[ Page 8242 ]
whether or not they be Music B.C…. On and on you go. We do incredibly well.

I’d like to just touch on something which we hear on our radios in Metro Vancouver right now and which is a great example of collaboration, of what a little bit of support to artists can do. I speak, of course, of the PEAK Performance Project. It’s a project where, for the last seven years, they’ve been working with musicians — training them, giving them support, financially and otherwise, and giving them a platform to produce and celebrate their music.

Many of the artists are now being picked up and noticed internationally after getting a small start on a small stage on a pretty awesome radio station and getting airplay internationally, exporting our culture to the world, bringing those dollars back into Canada. Content is king. We need to honour the artist, honour the creator who brings that work. Once it gets sold internationally, the royalties keep coming in for years and years to come.

We’re good at digging stuff out of the ground. The province has proven it’s good at forestry as well. We need to value what is between the ears — the creativity, that creative spark — because it can generate untold billions when done well as well as lighten the heart, inspire, make us dream and make us ask why not, rather than why, as George Bernard Shaw said so well.

I just want to say that we on the New Democrat side honour the creative industry, the economy and support whatever we can do to improve its push internationally.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

J. Yap: It’s my honour to join in this debate on the motion, which is in regards to “the importance of international business investment and export diversification in growing a strong economy” for our great province.

[1155]

I’m grateful to my colleague the member for Surrey-Panorama for bringing this motion forward. In his comments he talked about a thriving Surrey-based company, Endurance Wind Power, which I also had the opportunity to visit and can certainly endorse what he said in terms of the great local success of a company that is thriving in the export market, using all of the advantages and tools that are available. There are many stories just like Endurance.

I would like to, if I may, in my time, just focus on a few things that relate to this motion. As has been said, British Columbia is a trading economy. We need to trade to continue to grow our economy, to be able to have the revenues that will provide for the public services that we all deserve and require. British Columbia has historically been and will continue to be a trading economy. We have seen our trade partners diversify over the number of years. Some reference has been made to that.

We have some natural advantages. It is true. Our geography is a natural advantage, being here on the Pacific, Canada’s Pacific gateway to the Pacific and from the Pacific into North America. It is a blessing that we have as a province. Yet we also have other advantages that have come, that British Columbia has, including a well-skilled and multicultural workforce, as has been mentioned. That does give us some strategic advantages.

Importantly, we have a competitive business environment which didn’t just happen. We didn’t just inherit. We achieved through the great policies of our government in prudent fiscal management, in ensuring that we have balanced budgets and restoring confidence among the international community that British Columbia is a great place to invest, to create jobs and to do business.

It’s worth repeating that 70 percent of our exports in 2001 went to our very important trading partner, the United States. We’ve since been able to find other trading partners to diversify the exports that are so vital to British Columbia, and $35 billion annually is the level of exports from British Columbia.

Today we have diversified it so that 40 percent now goes to the Pacific Rim. The U.S. is still very important to British Columbia — 50 percent. We’ve seen this growth continue. Year to date for this year, we’re at about 4 percent ahead of 2014. So continued success thanks to the great policies, the focus on encouraging investment, our jobs plan, our focus on finding trading partners, especially in the important Pacific Rim target markets, which we’ve heard about.

We have an historic opportunity. As we all know, there are hundreds of millions of people who are moving up into middle-class lives in markets such as India, China, Indonesia and other developing countries. British Columbia has the product line. We have the resources. We have the assets to trade with these growing economies to continue to diversify our economy and create investment and jobs.

Noting the hour, I move that we adjourn debate.

J. Yap moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Polak moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:59 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