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 25, 2015

Morning Sitting

Volume 27, Number 1

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

MONDAY, MAY 25, 2015

The House met at 10:02 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

THE VALUE OF SHAWNIGAN LAKE

B. Routley: The value of Shawnigan Lake. I believe the value of a place, a community, is not only its economic value or even just the environmental value. I believe it’s the people that make a community special.

That’s certainly what I find in the Shawnigan Lake community. It’s the individuals living or learning in the Shawnigan community who have a special shared value, and it’s the Shawnigan Lake itself. Currently, they feel that value is being threatened.

I want to share with you some of the recent statements of students and others that speak to the values that they hold dear for their lake and their concerns regarding threats to that value.

[1005]

Natalie Urquhart is a student at the Shawnigan Lake School. She says:

“I adore this lake. I’m a day student, and I live nearby in Mill Bay. First of all, as a student at Shawnigan, my drinking water comes from the lake. On my days off school and in the summer I like to come and swim, go tubing, water-skiing and have picnics on my boat on the lake. Most of my friends and I live quite close to the lake and usually spend most of our summer days there. It’s a wonderful place to spend time with family and friends to cool off in the heat or just to enlighten the mood of the day.

“I am truly opposed to the contaminated soil dump, as it would destroy the charming comfort of our lake. The damage could be irreversible, with pollution and the safety concerns that everyone feels. If there is a leakage of the waste container, that would permanently damage the lake, killing water life and water quality.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

“Even if there is no leakage, people might not feel safe in the water. Someone saying that there is no leakage probably won’t put people’s minds at ease. Parents may no longer allow their children to swim there and may stop coming. The houses around the lake won’t feel safe having drinking water from there, and families might go to great expense to find water elsewhere.

“I am outraged at the fact that hundreds or even thousands of people have protested this idea because of the immediate impact to each of them, and yet government is adamant and ignores them all.

“I doubt anyone will even read this letter.

I think that’s my favourite part.

“I will send it in, though, with the hope that you will realize what a horrendous decision you have made and change it. I have a strong connection with this lake, and I know hundreds of other people who do as well. I believe I speak for all of us when I say that I hold out hope that you will change your mind, that you will realize this decision is catastrophic and change the decision for everyone’s sake.

“My name is Halle Campbell, and I’m a grade 9 student at Shawnigan Lake School. I do not know how to put into words the impact the lake has on each and every one of us at Shawnigan Lake School. Whether they’re a rower or a sailor, even if they just enjoy swimming in the summer, every single person at Shawnigan is affected by the lake.

“Fast approaching is our centennial celebration, being next year. If you think about it, that is 100 years’ worth of students representing over 30 countries from across the globe — students from Poland to Dubai, even the United States where I live, who have been strongly impacted by this lake.

“I may not be from Canada, and yet I still feel protective over this lake. This school has done so much for me, opening my eyes to the world, expanding my passions and teaching me it is okay to be myself. So I feel the need to preserve this great place for all future students, for grandchildren, for great-grandchildren of current students. Saving the school includes saving its biggest asset — Shawnigan Lake.

“My name is Daria. I came to Shawnigan School from Russia, and I know exactly what pollution is. Unfortunately, we can’t do anything against it, but I wish we could. I am from a place where we don’t have the ability to even tell our politicians what we think, to express our opinions about pollution. Here I am able to tell you that the people in my country suffer because of it. People there cannot clean the water, but you do have clean water. Please protect it.

“I’ve been rowing on Shawnigan Lake since the beginning of this year, and I have been enjoying it, because at home I didn’t have the ability to row on clean, pure lake water. This lake is a huge part of Shawnigan life that gives us lots of aesthetic opportunities for people who live here and for those of us who are from around the world. Please think about the people who are part of Shawnigan Lake life, what the lake brings us and how many things will change in a negative way if the lake becomes full of toxic materials.

“My name is Amelia Macintosh. I’m a grade 8 student from Shawnigan School. Shawnigan Lake is so important to me. There are so many people who benefit from this lake and what it offers.

“As a student at Shawnigan, I use the lake’s resources every day. I use the lake when I row on the beautiful, clear water. There are schools and rowing clubs that would die for the water we have 30 seconds away. While I row, I often see water-skiers or fishermen. This lake is something that everyone uses.

[1010]

“I don’t understand how you can’t see that while this place may look so small, we are a community. If we don’t have the lake, we will fall apart.

“I am a day student at Shawnigan, which means I have had the privilege of using this lake since I was a baby. I see it every morning when I go to school. I look out at this beautiful place, and I am thankful to call it my home. One of my favourite hikes I usually do with my family is Mount Baldy. On the top of that mountain is a most breathtaking view. The view that you see is Shawnigan Lake. It makes my worst days better, and my good days incredible.

“This lake is my home, and if you continue to dump contaminated soil, you are potentially ruining my home and the homes of so many other people. I have a request. If you would please hike to Mount Baldy and see the view I’m talking about, or go to the site where the soil will be dumped and see exactly what you are ruining, you will see the beautiful Shawnigan Lake.”

M. Bernier: I’m pleased to rise in the House today and respond to the statement brought forward by the member opposite. For myself, for my five minutes, I’m going to spend a bit of time mostly talking about the process and
[ Page 8620 ]
the facts of the issue of what are taking place right now.

First of all, I don’t think there’s one person in this House that would argue the fact of the importance and the beauty that Shawnigan Lake has and what it brings to this province. As a government, we’re working hard to make sure that we address the concerns that the community and the citizens in that area have.

In fact, the ministry has a legal obligation to consider applications that we get from companies when they want to treat and discharge contaminated soil. South Island Aggregates has two separate permitted areas. One area is permitted under the Ministry of Environment and can receive contaminated soil. The other is permitted by the Ministry of Energy and Mines, and that one actually cannot.

Each parcel of land is permitted to receive soil, contaminant concentrations that are deemed safe for the specific use for that permit. Government staff actually has carried out robust testing on both permitted sites, and they did this on May 13. They did this on the groundwater, the surface water and the soil. The sediment and surface water were also tested for Shawnigan Creek.

South Island Aggregates can continue receiving contaminated soil on the Ministry of Environment’s permitted site as long as they remain in compliance with the permit that they have. There is a process in place, and I’m sure that the member opposite is hoping that government, obviously, will follow the process, which is what we are doing. I would like to remind the member opposite, as well, that the company, under these permits, is required to implement a comprehensive sampling program of the soil, of the groundwater and the surface water.

Now the ministry staff are in the process of amending the permit in accordance with the Environmental Appeal Board’s direction that was outlined in the final decision that took place. This was not and is not a political decision. The Environmental Appeal Board is an independent tribunal, and as government, we respect that decision. The original decision to grant this permit was made by a statutory decision–maker, independent of a political process. As part of the permit, the company must treat discharged water to meet the most stringent water standards here in British Columbia and is required to post monitoring information and the reports of this.

The ministry also conducted inspections of the facility as recently as this April and will conduct additional inspections and monitoring to ensure the site is in compliance with this permit. The Environmental Appeal Board decision on March 20 ruled in favour of Cobble Hill Holdings. That’s formerly South Island Aggregates.

This came with a number of requirements for South Island Aggregates. I’ll just explain a couple of those. This included inclusion of local community representation on an advisory committee. It prohibits blasting during cell-liner installation. It prohibits the reuse of liners. The permanent roof must be constructed within one year. Wheels of soil transport vehicles must be rinsed off before leaving the site. And monitoring of streams immediately after any storm event greater than a one-in-200-year event….

[1015]

By implementing these regulations, we can ensure the quality of drinking water standards are met. On May 1 the Ministry of Energy and Mines issued a stop-work order to South Island Aggregates with respect to soil importation on lot 21, which is covered under an Energy and Mines permit. South Island Aggregate was also required to forward all documentation relating to the importation of soil onto that site by May 8, which they did.

The Ministry of Environment permit also issued is currently in effect, and amendments to reflect the Environmental Appeal Board’s decision will be completed in June. The conditions that the Ministry of Environment has placed respond directly to the residents’ concerns that they have for any danger or risk to their drinking water.

Decisions are made by technical staff and experts who have the knowledge on this subject. In this case, the statutory decision–makers concluded that the final permit will provide the necessary level of treatment and human health and environmental protection. This includes treating discharge water to B.C. drinking water standards and full transparency by posting the monitoring information and the reports for everyone to see.

Our government is committed to conserving, preserving and protecting the amazing and beautiful water resources that we have here in the province of British Columbia, and Shawnigan Lake is one of them.

B. Routley: The people from the community of Shawnigan Lake are not comforted by what we just heard at all, and I can tell you why. Even at the Environmental Appeal Board hearing, the evidence put forward was conflicting evidence about the geology and the hydrology.

For example, the proponent’s expert on hydrology and geology suggested that there was no aquifer. The closest one would be one kilometre or four kilometres away. Then it came out that there may be an aquifer right underneath the site.

It was also put forward in evidence that the geology was such that it was a kind of granite that would be good for 100 years, possibly as much as three million years. Unfortunately, there’s conflicting evidence that suggests that there may be limestone, and it may be fractured.

There are too many issues that are yet to be resolved. The community is taking this matter back to court. I think it’s unfortunate and unexplainable that the government of British Columbia would have forced a community to spend $1.2 million, so far, defending their community’s water.

In the first place, the community was absolutely against this contaminated soil dump because it’s upstream of the beautiful Shawnigan Lake. It makes no sense to have a project located right next to a stream leading to the
[ Page 8621 ]
beautiful Shawnigan Lake. It’s a threat to the watershed, as far as the community is concerned.

It’s not just the students. The entire community feels this way and feels betrayed by the government. I mean, think about it: a community of 8,000 people, and we’ve got more than 15,000 signatures on a petition opposed to this decision of the government. They’re asking that government be reasonable, understand the feeling that the community has and deal with it. Unfortunately, they’re forced to go back to court yet again, which they are doing — now going to the Supreme Court. Also, the CVRD is taking the matter to court as well. Again, that’s just the wrong approach, from my point of view.

Interestingly, a group from Camosun College some time ago, a group of students of their environmental technology program, decided to look into the Shawnigan watershed. I find it fascinating. One of their conclusions and statements in the report is that since everything that happens upstream may eventually impact areas that we surveyed below, we need to look at that as well.

GOLD RUSH TRAIL

D. Barnett: The Gold Rush Trail. Back in 1850, explorers to Haida Gwaii found gold. In 1854 more was found on the Columbia River, just south of Trail.

[1020]

People came to B.C. from all over the world, including Scotland, England, Germany and even 6,000 to 7,000 immigrants from China. Many Chinese immigrants moved to the Cariboo to become miners, to set up businesses, such as laundries and restaurants, in a place called Barkerville.

The gold rush started in 1860 and was centred in Barkerville. In response to the Cariboo gold rush, Gov. James Douglas built, at great expense, a 650-kilometre road from Yale into the rugged interior of the Cariboo Mountains. This provided an important transportation route for further development of the mainland colony.

By 1865 the surface placer gold was almost gone. Barkerville was practically wiped out by a fire in 1868. In 1858 Gov. James Douglas recruited 500 miners to be fed in exchange for free labour, building the first portion of the trail.

What is the Gold Rush Trail today? The Gold Rush Trail is the highway from Hope to Barkerville. Another part of the Gold Rush Trail is a trail from 70 Mile House presently to Horsefly and on to Barkerville.

This trail was established back in the 1990s, and it was registered as a legal snowmobile trail in 1999 by the 100 Mile District Trails Foundation and by the B.C. Snowmobile Federation. It will eventually be a 463-kilometre gold rush snowmobile trail linking communities — Clinton, 70 Mile, 100 Mile, Likely and Wells — to promote the Cariboo as a winter destination for snowmobile touring.

This is a gold rush for our communities, for tourism and for our communities’ social well-being. It draws so much attention and dollars and cents and recreation to the Cariboo.

This trail has had many, many volunteer hours put into it. It also has the participation of the provincial government, the federal government, the 100 Mile District Trails Foundation, the 100 Mile Snowmobile Club and the First Nations, who work very closely with all these organizations encouraging and working together for the gold rush economic venture.

The trail also has great participation from New Pathways to Gold, a society that was formed in about 2005 and that works to promote our heritage from Hope to Barkerville, along the highway and along our trails. It can only be said that our government has given probably over $2 million time and energy through our staff and participation with all those who were involved in putting such a great venture together.

Our partners are Clinton, 70 Mile House, 100 Mile House, Horsefly, Likely, Barkerville and Wells. Our First Nations partners are Canoe and Dog Creek, Canim Lake, Alkali. Snowmobile clubs throughout the region are the Green Lake Snowmobile Club, the 100 Mile Snowmobile Club, Interlakes Snowmobile Club, Williams Lake Powder Kings and the British Columbia Snowmobile Federation.

Our tourist associations throughout many regions are involved. The South Cariboo tourism centre; Cariboo Chilcotin Coast Tourism Association; the Vancouver, Coast and Mountains tourism region; Thompson Okanagan Tourism Association; Aboriginal Tourism B.C.; and Heritage Tourism Alliance. We have not-for-profit organizations. This here is an economic gold rush for the people of the Cariboo and the people of the province.

It’s also a gold rush for the environment when you have trails that are maintained, that are built to the highest environmental standards. We know that that is so important to the province of British Columbia. Part of our trail system is our First Nations heritage. They are great partners in this project.

[1025]

There are many types of gold rushes out there, but this one here is special. This one is unique. This one will be there for history, as it was when the gold rush first started in the 1800s. This is an opportunity that we must carry on.

Some day we hope that this trail will carry us right through British Columbia, with opportunities that keep moving our province ahead, with opportunities for First Nations, for young people, for those that enjoy the outdoors and for those that know what the economic benefits are to our small rural communities in British Columbia. This here is called gold rush 2000, and it will carry on for many, many years.
[ Page 8622 ]

K. Conroy: I am pleased to respond to the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin. She reminds me of a quote from our Lieutenant-Governor, Judith Guichon, when she said: “They came for the gold but stayed for the grass.” She was, of course, referring to what I’d call the gold rush of ranching in the Cariboo country, which is still here today, as long as all the land isn’t lost to development or sales to foreign companies to plant trees for carbon sequestration, taking the land out of agriculture production for hundreds of years.

Another business in the Cariboo that has taken off would be that of ecotourism activities. I’d like to refer to Gary and Peggy Zorn, both third-generation western Canadians, who have over 30 years of knowledge and experience in the tourism industry with their company Ecotours-B.C.

They offer a professional guide service with an excellent reputation for providing a quality wilderness outdoor experience. A sense of stewardship, regard for the waters and lands and a commitment to combining good management with both maintenance and enhancement of the unique ecosystem and life it sustains with their leave-only-footprints philosophy ensure that it will be maintained for future generations.

The lodge is located on the Quesnel River at the outlet of Quesnel Lake and at the foot of the Cariboo Mountains in Likely. They offer a number of professionally guided outdoor all-inclusive adventure tours.

“Walking with the bears” is one of those packages. This thrilling adventure has you walking among the bears in the boreal forests and on the riverbanks of the salmon-infested waters. It’s high adventure, where only a few people have had this rare opportunity to actually walk among the bears, including grizzly bears.

Gary has an international reputation as the Bear Whisperer. Because of his passion for the big bears and the knowledge of their habitat, habits and body language and his understanding of their actions and reactions, Gary is noted not only for his unique relationship with the bears but also for his many amazing bear, wildlife and adventure stories.

This company, along with the many others in B.C., generates millions of dollars to the economy of our province. A short-lived gold rush? I think not. I believe these companies will be around for years to come, as long as there are environmental regulations in place to ensure that we continue to actually have the wildlife to watch.

I want to touch on another part of our province that experienced the gold rush as well, and that’s in the Kootenays. First discovered by two prospectors from the nearby Dewdney Trail, the Le Roi mine was a claim that started the gold rush in Rossland in 1890. It was sold to Colonel Topping in lieu of $12.50, and he then turned it around and sold it to a Spokane company for $30,000, a lot of money in those days.

They began to develop the mine, and the town of Rossland was born. In 1898 the Le Roi mine was sold to the British American Corp. for just over $3 million. Once the mine came into production, Le Roi’s stock jumped from 50 cents a share to $40 almost overnight.

The population of Rossland exploded as gold fever attracted men from around the world, and Rossland became one of the largest cities in western Canada and a major business centre in North America. Many of the Rossland mines became world famous and were worked over the next 40 years. By 1897 the population of Rossland had increased to 7,000, with 42 saloons, four banks and 17 law firms. Then we see that the community of Trail evolved from that.

I also want to talk about the fact that the Golden City now looks to a new future. That’s the white gold of their winter ski slopes and the reawakening of their historic mines. I think it’s a golden past with historic buildings and sites, a really great museum and heritage sites. It shows the importance that this community has given to the development of the Kootenays and the province.

Another area was the Slocan Valley, which saw considerable mining in the early 1800s. Millions of dollars came out of that area as well. The community of Sandon actually had millions and millions of dollars come out of that tiny little community. Today it has some of the oldest trails in the region and in the province.

[1030]

The railway was taken out and is now trails. One of the most actively used trails in all of B.C.is the Slocan Valley trail, which used to be a railway but now is a trail. It is utilized in the winter and in the summer and is one of the most actively used trails in the province.

From 1895 to 1910 there was over $12.5 million that came out of that valley, which would be equivalent to over $200 million today.

I think in response to the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin, we have a number of gold rush opportunities in our past as well as new ones like ecotourism that we need to ensure stay here for today and future generations. We need to ensure that we have legislation and regulations in place to guarantee that that actually happens.

I think it’s interesting to note that for people who are truly interested in the gold rush in B.C. and the role that the gold rush played in the world, they shouldn’t miss the exhibit that’s happening right now at the Royal B.C. Museum. It’s called Gold Rush: El Dorado in B.C., and it’s here until October 31. It shows the excellent opportunities that the gold rush provided for this province.

D. Barnett: Thank you to my colleague across the floor. I was very happy to hear her be so positive about the wonderful things that the province has in British Columbia and the opportunities that we have. As a government, we’re working to make them even better by cooperating with citizens.
[ Page 8623 ]

We talk about ecotourism. Ecotourism is wonderful. It is a great product. The people that she spoke about…. I actually talked to them last week, and they’re moving forward. There always are challenges, but if you take a challenge and you quit looking at it as a negative and you make an opportunity out of it, we move forward — as we do in this government and as we do in my communities throughout the Cariboo-Chilcotin and all communities in British Columbia.

We talk about agriculture, the opportunities for agriculture and the negative comments that came from across the floor regarding tree planting. I think that basically we should look at our statistics. We should look at the whole story and not have sensationalism. Let’s stick to truth and facts.

Interjection.

D. Barnett: I know lots about it. Working together with our landowners and with our communities, with our opportunities in this province, everything is a gold rush, not just trails — mining, forestry, agriculture, tourism, education, health care. This is a province full of gold rush. This is a province full of opportunities. This is province with a government that looks forward to creating more opportunities.

Back to my gold rush trail in the Cariboo that I started my topic on. I kind of got off because of some comments that were made. I encourage everyone to come in the wintertime and see what we have, to see what our communities have put together with help from government, with help from different organizations, with First Nations — with people that see that working together on the positive side of the equation, as we do on this side of the House, can bring nothing but more and more gold rushes to the province of British Columbia. To keep our environment safe by having trails, trails that are met to the highest environmental standards possible in this province….

We have so much to be thankful for. We have so much to work for to make our opportunities and our province better, to help people with a hand up instead of a handout. This is a wonderful province. The Cariboo-Chilcotin is the best place on earth to live. Our gold rush will continue on for years and years to come, and I am so pleased to be a part of it.

AFFORDABILITY FOR SENIORS

M. Karagianis: This morning I’d like to stand up and talk here about affordability for seniors because, in fact, affordability is a growing threat for many seniors in this province. In a very timely way, there was a report that came out last week from the B.C. seniors advocate that actually highlights very specifically in great detail what that kind of affordability challenge looks like.

For seniors who spent their entire life building the province of British Columbia and working at a variety of careers, many had modest pensions that came out of that. Many more have, of course, had to rely on Canada pension and an old-age supplement, guaranteed income supplement, to top that up.

[1035]

The reality is that lots of seniors looked at their pension and looked at the kind of income that they might expect in their senior years and thought: “This looks like it will be adequate. This looks like this will give us a reasonably secure future. We should be able to afford to have a kind of risk-free and anxiety-free retirement.” But the reality is that that has not happened, and nowhere is that more vivid than here in British Columbia — the challenge for affordability. Many seniors are now finding themselves stretched from one month to the next.

The report that came out from B.C.’s seniors advocate last week really highlights one aspect of that. Some of the details in there I will talk about shortly. I think the reality that one of the main challenges that seniors see is that the cost of living is outstripping their fixed pension.

Remember that seniors are not in a position where they are going to see a significant growth in their pensions over time. They are not like the working person who can certainly get ahead and can get increases in pay or can advance their career or can move up in their companies. Seniors are in a position where their income is fixed, and there will be no change to that. In fact, the cost of living has outstripped any meagre increases in seniors’ pension growth for some time.

This government has chosen a couple of things that they are now putting onto seniors’ shoulders that are making things even less affordable for them. I hear from seniors every day right across British Columbia about this growing anxiety and concern about the fees and costs that government has put on their shoulders. Now, we canvassed in this Legislature many times — that the government has chosen in the most recent budget to give a considerable tax break to the wealthiest in the province and at the same time increased costs on families and on seniors.

Even more than on families, it is hard felt by seniors on a fixed income. They are now looking at dramatic increases in their hydro bills, their MSP, their ICBC and, of course — as we’ve canvassed numerous times — increased costs for ferries for seniors, who are now becoming more isolated and feeling less connected with their families as a result of those. The growing costs around things like hydro and MSP and ICBC are a real crush for seniors, again, on a fixed income who have no alternatives as to where they might find that money or how it might affect their well-being.

In fact, seniors right across British Columbia are struggling. They are having a very difficult time, and there are subsets of those that I’m going to speak about as well this
[ Page 8624 ]
morning. Regardless of whether the government likes to believe that this is not true, many seniors are in a position of having to make some really hard choices.

As they see their hydro bills going up, lots of seniors are trying to decide: “Do I turn the heat on during the winter in my home? Can I afford medication? Can I afford food? Which of these do I begin to cut back on as I see hydro rates increase? I see MSP squeezing my meagre income and the cost of trying, maybe, to continue driving my car become more and more expensive.” They’re having to make hard choices. These seniors, who worked their entire lives to build British Columbia, are now finding themselves in their senior years being squeezed and ignored and cornered by their own government.

The Shelter Aid For Elderly Renters is a program that the government has put in place to help offset some of these costs. The seniors advocate has, in her report, outlined how incredibly inadequate it is in real terms. The fees and…. Basically, the top end of the SAFER program is completely inadequate to meet the real costs for seniors living in communities.

The seniors advocate report has outlined very clearly that it is more expensive now for seniors if they don’t own their own home. That’s a very different set of criteria that affect those. Seniors who are living in their own homes are having to be concerned about maintenance costs, upkeep costs. How do they maintain living in their home when these costs are beyond their means?

For seniors who are living in rental accommodation, even in places like Fort St. John, the rental costs are extremely high because of the pressures on the market. How do they continue to stay there when the government’s own aid program does not help them? Within this, there’s another subset of seniors who are even less able to cope with all of this, and that is women.

[1040]

Senior women, this subset of seniors, often did not work in the workplace to the same degree in the past. They don’t have a huge Canada pension and are living on even lower incomes.

If you are a First Nations woman, that is even lower. It’s a very meagre income. If you are an immigrant woman who is living now on your own — you’ve lost a spouse — you are finding that your income is completely inadequate.

We see this threat for a huge number of seniors about encroaching homelessness, and there is no bigger fear, I think, for seniors than that they might find themselves homeless at the end of their days.

The advocate has floated some interesting public policy ideas. I’m sure we’re going to touch on those today. You know, the government often likes to talk about the big jobs plan as somehow a panacea and a cure for all ailments, but certainly, that doesn’t help seniors at all. It is a completely inadequate response to them.

I think the fact that there are no clear answers coming from government…. What are they going to do? What can be done to make housing affordable, to keep seniors in their homes as long as possible, to help them with this growing issue of affordability? I’m looking forward to hearing what the government has to say on some of this.

D. Bing: I’d like to thank the member for Esquimalt–Royal Roads for bringing forward the motion entitled "Affordability for Seniors." As the member noted, on May 21 the seniors advocate for British Columbia, Isobel Mackenzie, issued a report entitled Seniors Housing in B.C.

According to the report, the seniors advocate met with thousands of seniors and their families in every region of the province. Among the many issues and concerns raised, they expressed a deep concern about the affordability, availability and the appropriateness of seniors housing in this province. Seniors expressed clearly that they want to age as independently as possible in their own homes and in their own local communities.

As you know, British Columbia was the first province in the country to establish the office of the seniors advocate. Naturally, the government takes the findings of this report very seriously. It is a thorough examination of housing for seniors as they age, and it examines how we can improve care and support our growing aging population.

In response, the Minister of Health issued a statement that agrees with many of the general findings of this report. The minister is assuring British Columbians that the government will act on the majority of recommendations that pertain to the Ministry of Health. In the coming months, the recommendations will be further analyzed by government, along with our health authorities and partners.

Adopting many of the recommendations will require extensive work, coordination and significant financial commitment. It is a fact that British Columbia has the fastest growth for seniors in Canada. It is expected to count for one quarter of our provincial population when it peaks in 2031. It is also a fact that British Columbians are living longer and better than in any other province in Confederation.

With that in mind, our government has invested over $4 billion to provide affordable housing for low-income individuals, seniors and families since 2001. Each year we spend over $2.7 billion on home and community care alone. This is up over 73 percent since 2001.

We also provide help support to more than 51,000 seniors households across British Columbia through a range of housing options. In addition, we support senior homeowners through property tax deferment, the homeowner grant, Home Adaptations for Independence — HAFI — and the B.C. seniors home-renovation program.

The government has also provided $22 million in funding to enhance and support the Better at Home program,
[ Page 8625 ]
which now operates in over 60 communities throughout B.C. Better at Home provides improved access to non-medical supports, such as light housekeeping and transportation to appointments, to help seniors remain in their homes and connected to their communities.

In conclusion, the government will act on the majority of recommendations contained in the seniors advocate report. Our aim is to ensure the best quality of life and care for our seniors.

M. Karagianis: Thank you very much to the member for the response.

I think it’s interesting that the government is always very quick to respond to many of these critical reports that come out and demonstrate some of the failings that the government has put in place for either children and families or, in this case, seniors.

[1045]

They’re very quick to come out and agree with all the findings. It’s great to say that, but I think, in fact, history and examples of exactly the follow-through on this will prove that the government is often very slow to respond in real terms to some of these issues.

The idea that we’re going to analyze this. Yes, certainly, I think that that’s all very laudable, but at the end of the day, seniors are in trouble right now in their current living circumstances. Many women are challenged with trying to make it from one month to the next. Seniors everywhere are very concerned about what will happen next winter when the hydro rates go higher. How do they keep the heat on? How do they afford medication? Do they have to make choices between eating less?

It’s a great concern to me that the government will be quick to respond and say, “Wow, these are all great recommendations in this report and others,” but what will the follow-through look like? I don’t know. I’m skeptical of the reality.

The member opposite mentioned a couple of programs like the SAFER program. The reality is that that program is highly undersubscribed. I mean, there are only 20 percent of seniors who are eligible that are, in fact, subscribing to that, when there could be a whole lot more seniors that should be accessing that. I think that needs to be publicized a lot more.

The renovation programs all sound terrific — if you have the money to do that, to make renovations and then to access the funds there. If you have no money and you’re living on a well-below-the-poverty-level income, how in the world can you think about renovating your home?

The government has made very clear choices here: big tax breaks for the wealthy, while those that built this province continue to live in hardship. I’d like to see more real action and more real commitment by this government on how they’re going to reach out to seniors today.

Come the end of this summer, seniors once again are going to be concerned about how they are going to be able to continue to drive, how they’re going to heat their house, how they’re going to pay for their medical premiums. Are they going to be able to afford their medication? Do they have to keep the heat turned down low and wear more sweaters in their homes? We know that the implications of that are significant on the maintenance and upkeep of wherever they’re living.

These are hard choices that seniors are making. The fact is that the seniors advocate has outlined very clearly here the hardship that is currently facing many individuals. On an $18,000 a year income, just the basic cost of getting through your life, whether it’s paying your rent or anything, leaves seniors with anywhere from a $300 or $400 or $500 shortfall every single month. That’s inadequate. The government needs to do better, and they need to do it now.

SUMMER FESTIVALS

J. Martin: With the spring session of the Legislature coming to a close and summer just around the corner, I thought it may be appropriate to focus on some of the things that people love to do in British Columbia. Therefore, on behalf of my constituents of Chilliwack, I am pleased to bring forward this morning’s statement on summer festivals to highlight local artists and things to do in B.C. that attract people far and wide to our province.

B.C. currently hosts more than 30 major cultural festivals and events annually. This doesn’t include significant museum displays, art gallery exhibitions and regional arts activities, all of which present opportunities for locals and visitors to see what B.C. has to offer. They include everything from the Harrison Festival of the Arts, the Mission Folk Music Festival, Victoria’s International Jazzfest, Vancouver’s International Jazz Festival, the Salmon Arm Roots and Blues Festival, the Sweetwater905 arts and music festival in Dawson Creek and even the Edge of the World Music Festival in Haida Gwaii.

These are just a few examples. It’s why this government is investing $60 million this year to support artists, cultural organizations and communities throughout B.C.

For good reason. Arts and culture in B.C. employs over 87,000 British Columbians, including almost 26,000 artists. These events have significant economic impact in our province. For example, the Coastal Jazz and Blues Society produces the TD Vancouver International Jazz Festival. This festival presents more than 300 concerts featuring more than 1,800 musicians from all over the globe. The event attracts half a million people every year and generates $35 million in economic activity.

In addition to supporting local artists, public investment in the arts and cultural sector also supports the tourism sector of our community. The more we do, the more people come to visit British Columbia.

[1050]

Another example. Our government provided $50,000 to support the Capital Region Music Awards Society by bringing BreakOut West to Victoria in 2015. This four-day event features a three-day music conference, a multi-genre music festival and the western Canadian music industry awards as well as the Western Canadian Music Awards gala.

These events will provide a diverse group of musicians and music industry representatives, including worldwide festival producers, publishing companies, record labels, funding agencies, booking agents, songwriters, producers and many more.

These events will run concurrently with the Rifflandia Music Festival from September 17 to 20. By combining a music industry conference, a popular music festival and a prestigious award show into a four-day event, BreakOut West helps western Canadian musicians showcase their work and build new business connections.

According to the Capital Region Music Awards Society, hosting BreakOut West brings significant benefits. The host province usually provides between 40 and 50 percent of the participating musicians. Up to 75 artists would perform at 12 to 15 venues throughout the city. It will attract over 300 delegates and 3,000 event attendees. Plus, it will deliver 600 to 700 hotel room nights and an estimated total economic impact of $1 million.

These types of events also foster encounters between inexperienced artists and the more experienced entertainers. With just a small investment of $50,000, a considerable amount of spinoff benefit is generated that will have long-term benefits for B.C. artists and for our local economy.

If anyone is wondering how to spend their summer, I would encourage everyone to check out at least one summer festival in your local community. Better yet, pack up your things and head out to a part of British Columbia that you might not have seen before, and experience something new. Because if there’s one thing we all know British Columbians do best, it’s how to have a good time. There is no way to have a better time than to sit back and enjoy one of British Columbia’s summer festivals.

D. Eby: I have limited time to reply to the member’s statement about public festivals. I’d love to fact-check the numbers that he’s provided in terms of government support for summer festivals, but maybe instead, because I don’t have the time to do that, I’ll have to look beyond the member’s words about supporting summer festivals to the government’s actual actions that I’m familiar with, which are in Vancouver.

Everybody loves summer festivals. In Vancouver–Point Grey, where I come from, we’ve got Khatsahlano festival. It’s a music festival. We’ve got Greek Day. We’ve got the Point Grey Fiesta. It’s wonderful.

We can all stand in this House and say we support summer festivals, but let’s look at the actions of this government when it comes to supporting community festivals, because words are very, very easy.

There’s an agency called Tourism Vancouver in my community. This is a small industry group that is tasked with providing money to community groups in part for hosting summer festivals, winter festivals, all kinds of festivals to drive tourism in our community.

Tourism Vancouver and local hotel operators got together to voluntarily put a tax on hotel rooms and to use that money from the tax to help support festivals, among other things. It was a great agreement. It resulted in $10 million a year going to promote tourism and local festivals. In our community it was win-win.

Now, when this government built their new convention centre in downtown Vancouver, they went way over budget. They went to Tourism Vancouver, and they said: “Tourism Vancouver, can you help us out? Can you lend us $100 million towards the cost of the convention centre? You’re going to get a lot of hotel rooms out of this. People are going to come and stay for conventions.”

Tourism Vancouver said: “Absolutely. This seems like a reasonable deal. We’d like to do that.” But wow, what a bad idea to enter into an agreement with this government without reading the fine print.

This government has used that loan from Tourism Vancouver to turn the hotel tax from a tax that was supposed to go into tourism events in communities like mine and summer festivals into a general revenue tax for this government. Let me tell you how they did it. They charged Tourism Vancouver an interest rate of 6.1 percent, but the government borrows money at 4 to 4.5 percent.

What does that 2 percent spread between the two borrowing rates mean? It means $2 million a year in extra costs for Tourism Vancouver that go directly to the government. Think of how many summer festivals could be provided with that $2 million that Tourism Vancouver is now spending on debt payment instead of on the community.

How did the government respond to the fact that Tourism Vancouver has paid $7 million down on this $100 million loan, and now the debt is at $109 million? That’s right. They’ve paid off millions on the debt, but it’s going up because the interest rate is more than the payments that they can afford to make.

[1055]

They didn’t say: “Let’s match the interest rates. Let’s lend the money to Tourism Vancouver at our cost” — which is 4 to 4½ percent. Instead, they “allowed” Tourism Vancouver to increase the hotel room tax from 2 percent to 3 percent. That will increase the payments Tourism Vancouver makes to this government from $4 million a year to $5½ million per year.

Now, debt is abstract. What does all of this mean? Let me tell you about what this means in my community, for festivals. Here’s a headline from the Globe and Mail,
[ Page 8627 ]
October 10, 2014: “Vancouver New Year’s Eve Festivities Cancelled Due to Lack of Funding.” The article by Ian Bailey says: “Plans for a family-friendly New Year’s Eve celebration in Vancouver this year have fallen through because organizers were unable to raise enough money.”

How much were they looking for? One hundred thousand dollars. They were $100,000 short of their $300,000 budget, but Tourism Vancouver couldn’t help them because they were busy paying off debt to this government for their over-budget convention centre.

This government thinks it’s a good idea to take money for general revenue out of tourism, so it’s a bit hard for me to hear this member of the government stand up and say that this government supports summer festivals and this government supports community festivals, when clearly, their actions show what their priorities are, which is putting a bright face on the fact that they spent $400 million more than they expected on the convention centre by hiding the debt in a small tourism agency in Vancouver at the expense of our community festivals, including summer festivals.

That pretty much summarizes my perspective on the member and the government’s commitment to summer festivals.

J. Martin: First off, I would like to thank the hon. member for whatever that was for the last few minutes. Very much hoping he, one way or another, finds the summer spirit.

In any event, I would be remiss if I did not mention EventHostBC. Following on the success of the 2015 Canada Winter Games, the government of B.C. introduced two new measures to further promote B.C. as a world-class hosting destination.

The first element is a five-year hosting strategy. The second involves one-time funding opportunities. The new five-year hosting strategy will capitalize further on the international exposure the province received in the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games and the success of the recent Canada Winter Games held in Prince George. Both of these events resulted in unprecedented economic benefit.

In support of the five-year strategy, this government has created a quarter-million-dollar one-time funding opportunity, EventHostBC, which encourages small events that strengthen volunteer capacity for event hosting throughout beautiful B.C. Eligible non-profits are invited to apply for up to $5,000, awarded on a first-come, first-served basis, distributed to B.C.’s six tourism regions.

The funding will provide a stimulus for new events or assist existing events that are currently ineligible for other provincial government funds. An event that receives municipal, regional or federal funding is still eligible, as the event does not receive any other provincial funding. While a one-time $5,000 grant may not seem like a lot of money, it does represent a significant sum to help launch start-up festivals.

As long as the broader community can participate, this type of event is fairly open. It could be sports, art, culture-related or some other creative idea supported by the community. To be eligible, the event must be held prior to September 15. Applications are due by June 30, 2015. I encourage all members to encourage all of their groups in their communities to get those applications forwarded.

Hon. R. Coleman: I move to private members’ motions.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 17 without disturbing the priority of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

[1100]

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 17 — SUPPORT FOR
PUBLIC EDUCATION

R. Fleming:

[Be it resolved that this House call on government to work collaboratively with its kindergarten to grade twelve education partners to support quality public education so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential.]

I welcome the opportunity to debate this motion this morning, and I look forward to hearing the views of both sides of the House on this issue.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

I don’t expect very many members, whether they’re Liberal or New Democrat, to disagree about the value of public education to our province’s citizens, to our economy, to our collective well-being as a good and just society — nor should they disagree.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, in its 2012 report, Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Lives, said this about advanced economies like ours that underinvest in education: “Without adequate investment in skills, people languish on the margins of society, technological progress does not translate into economic growth, and countries” — or provinces — “can no longer compete…. In short, skills have become the global currency of 21st century economies.”

Those are words that we need to bear in mind in the province of British Columbia. We can well appreciate here that the greatest single investment our province has ever made to further its social and economic development and to sustain our prosperity for more than a century has been public education.

Without B.C. governments of all stripes in the 20th century sharing a consensus and building a modern, comprehensive and inclusive public education system
[ Page 8628 ]
with excellent teaching instruction, there would be far less wealth. There would be no middle class. B.C. would be uncompetitive. We would have more crime, and we would be an undesirable, highly unequal society. That’s how we know that public education has been our single greatest legacy investment in our province.

The problem here today in British Columbia, a decade and a half into the 21st century, is that this government doesn’t seem to understand that underinvestment in education brings with it a host of problems for both the near term and the long term. We have gone from the second best funded jurisdiction for K-to-12 education in Canada over a decade ago to ninth place. We’ve been scolded by the Conference Board of Canada for having not even met the rate of inflation for funding increases and for falling further behind.

Here’s how B.C. stacks up in Confederation: total expenditures per student in 2002 constant dollars — tenth place amongst provinces; total expenditures per capita in current dollars — tenth place goes to British Columbia; total expenditures in K-to-12 education as a percentage of GDP — ninth place. The record is clear. More than a decade of this government at the helm of education….

Interjection.

R. Fleming: Mr. Speaker, I’d ask the member from Comox, who was a former Minister of Education and did next to nothing when he had that position, to quiet down, please.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: I think when debate….

R. Fleming: If these Liberals would like to go and talk to parents who have children in the school system…. The underinvestment shows in the classroom, in the ratio of students to educators. These are facts. These are statistics gathered nationally. B.C. has shown no improvement in the educator-to-student ratio.

Between 2005 and ’10, the number of FTE educators in Canada increased by 5 percent. In British Columbia it decreased by 2 percent. Before a Liberal can talk about declining enrolment, B.C. was one of seven provinces that experienced enrolment decline. We were the only outlier jurisdiction in the country that fired teachers that served ELL learners and special education assistants. That’s their legacy.

Now I want to, at this point in debate, appreciate the members opposite and their views and the bipartisan work that the Select Standing Committee on Finance conducts annually. Members on both sides of this House have demonstrated great capacity to listen, to learn, to provide advice to the government.

How disappointing, then, in this parliament, since 2013, that the committee and its Liberal, New Democrat and independent members are continuously and utterly ignored. It’s frustrating for the opposition on this side of the House. I can only imagine what it’s like to be a backbench Liberal, to plead the case of communities and schools in their areas and regions and to be utterly ignored by the Minister of Education.

Let’s look at these resolutions that are bipartisan and both parties agreed were issues. “Sufficient evidence was presented to the Finance Committee indicating that the K-to-12 system is experiencing cost pressures as a result of inflation and aging school facilities. The committee therefore recommends that enough funding be provided to schools to meet rising costs and capital needs while ensuring strong educational outcomes for B.C. students.”

[1105]

That’s not the budget we got. We got a $54 million cut. We got a $50 million cut in capital. The record of this government….

Interjections.

J. Thornthwaite: I’m pleased to stand up and support the motion. “Be it resolved that this House call on government to work collaboratively with its kindergarten to grade twelve education partners to support quality public education so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential.”

I agree totally. In fact, as most people know in this House, I was a school trustee before. I worked, along with my colleagues on the school board, collaboratively with our fellow MLAs from North Vancouver. We have a very, very good working relationship and meet, quite frankly, on a regular basis.

B.C.’s public school system is co-governed by the Ministry of Education as well as the 60 boards of education. They are autonomous, responsible and accountable to their electorate for their budgetary spending decisions.

I want to bring up a good example, the LIF fund. The learning improvement fund was established to address complex classroom needs and ensure learning conditions are appropriate for all students. The exact use of the LIF funding is determined through consultations between school districts, principals and classroom teachers and allows the schools to tailor the supports to the unique needs of each classroom.

I’m going to quote the November 18, 2014, board of education from North Vancouver minutes. The superintendent reported on the consultative process that took place in the spring and fall, initially at the school level with school administrators, staff and chief staff representatives and then at the district level with the executive members of the North Vancouver Teachers Association and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, having met with the senior executive committee. Support was provided for priorities identified at both school and district levels.
[ Page 8629 ]

And what happened? This is where the funding went in North Vancouver: 11 new part-time staff or support staff, six new full-time positions for teachers and 52 new part-time positions for teachers — all for the school district of North Vancouver. And — this is key — the local teachers union has agreed to this plan.

I would like to paraphrase what our Minister of Education said. British Columbia has one of the best education systems in the world. We are ranked in the top three along with Finland, which is often quoted as being the best in the world, and Japan. That doesn’t come just because of good sound policy. It comes as a result of the dedicated efforts of teachers across the province, day in and day out.

I stand here and say that I respect the profession. I respect the work that they do. I respect the commitment on the part of teachers to providing the best they can do for every single student, day in and day out, month in and month out.

This is proof from the results that we heard. In 2011 the PIRLS, Progress in International Reading Literacy Study, proved that grade 4 students, our grade 4 students, were one of the top seven jurisdictions in the world.

In 2012 the PISA program, program for international student assessment, proved that B.C.’s 15-year-olds showed the highest performing jurisdictions, particularly in reading and science. Compared to other Canadian provinces, B.C. students were top ranked in reading and science, second only to Quebec.

British Columbia surpasses all provinces and ranks behind only Finland and Japan among peer countries, according to the Conference Board of Canada, How Canada Performs, “Education and skills.”

In 2013 the pan-Canadian assessment program, PCAP program, assessed that grade 8 students either matched or outperformed all but one province in reading and science and all but three in mathematics.

B.C. is doing very well. Why? Because our government supports quality public education so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential.

S. Hammell: It gives me great pleasure to join this debate, particularly as it is around education.

I think I’ll begin my remarks with actually talking about the misrepresentation of the truth or the distortion of reality and maybe, in political terms, the big spin. And the big spin….

Deputy Speaker: Member, I think you are pretty close to the line, so I’d watch.

[1110]

S. Hammell: Fair enough. I’ll heed those remarks.

The Liberals like to boast that they’ve added huge amounts of money to education, despite declining enrolment. However, a recent Conference Board of Canada report clearly shows that the education funding — I’ll refer back to the member who spoke prior, from our side — in British Columbia has failed to keep pace with inflation. It reports that B.C. would have to spend $1.6 billion more than it has budgeted for education over the next three years, just to keep in pace with inflation.

What is happening is that the money is being clawed back out of the British Columbia education system, to a point where we have fallen behind. In fact, the only province that spends less on education per student than B.C. is P.E.I. I would submit that Prince Edward Island does not have the complicated geography we have or the complicated multicultural system that we support proudly in British Columbia.

What the Liberals have done is continually squeeze and squeeze the education system by downloading costs, which they incur, onto the system, and they tell somebody else to go and pay for it. That is how they collaborate. They collaborate by imposing costs on the system and then expecting their increases to be absorbed in the money that they have already assigned them.

You can see that through B.C. Hydro increases, through MSP increases and through negotiated staff increases for support staff and teaching staff. Teachers’ pension plan contributions are expected to be absorbed, and the WorkSafe B.C. rate increases, as well as general inflation. You cannot continue to squeeze an education system like the Liberal government has been doing and expect it to continue to produce good results.

You have to ask why. I am a little bit cynical about the reason why the Liberals are doing this. With their complete commitment to balancing a budget, what they have done is squeeze education to take money to balance their budget while giving a cut to the highest 2 percent, in this province, of earners. Then, not only have the Liberals given that cut to the highest earners; what the Liberals have also done is increase the funding to the private school system. You have a system where you’re squeezing the public education system but increasing funding to the private system, while you are cutting the taxes of those people that are the most wealthy in this province.

A public education system is the heart of a democracy. It is the symbolic nature. You educate your people because they, in the long run, go out and vote and choose their leaders. It’s critical to a strong and vibrant democratic climate, as well as a strong and vibrant economy.

I think this obsession with cutting and cutting at the heart of the school system is misguided and will, in the end, be seen as foolhardy. I would hope that we would, as speakers have said before me, collaborate in terms of the public education. Take the words of some of the people on both sides of our House, and I’m sure we can do a better job.

S. Gibson: What a great opportunity to speak to this motion, speaking on behalf of my constituents of the
[ Page 8630 ]
amazing riding of Abbotsford-Mission. I’m proud of the government’s achievements with respect to giving all students the opportunity to be all that they can be.

[1115]

I know this discussion today will be of particular interest for the hon. member for Comox Valley, who was an educator for many years and contributed much to the communities that he served in the Comox Valley area. Also, I want to acknowledge for the record my wife, Joy, who spent her entire career in education as a teacher in the Abbotsford area — also as an early literacy helping teacher.

The facts speak for themselves, and they’re very affirming. Last June the Conference Board of Canada confirmed that B.C. has a world-class education system. Yes, our province was ranked No. 1 among 26 jurisdictions, including all ten provinces and 15 peer countries — I don’t remember the opposition commenting on that — and earned an A-plus for high school achievement.

More than 91 percent of B.C. residents age 24 to 64 have a high school diploma. Put up your hands if you have a high school diploma. This is the highest score not only in Canada, but we outrank Norway, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Past performance gives British Columbia a strong educational foundation to build upon, and we’re doing just that. Last year 95 percent of students who wrote provincial exams passed the courses.

We’re very proud, as British Columbians, of our education system. But we have to keep on finding ways to improve it. We all agree with that. This means finding new, innovative approaches that lead to better results for students, starting with our youngest students. Our government supports a variety of early learning initiatives to ensure that our youngest learners have every opportunity to achieve their best.

We support many StrongStart centres located in communities throughout the province, including in my constituency of Abbotsford-Mission. StrongStart centres provide school-based learning services to parents and preschool-age children free of charge.

Full-day kindergarten was fully implemented in B.C. in September 2011 and is available for all five-year-olds in the province. I’m proud to say that my little grandson Sammy will be starting kindergarten this fall.

We also support Ready, Set, Learn initiatives in many B.C. school districts. Families and their preschool-age students visit school libraries and participate in events such as school tours and a variety of play-based learning activities, all geared to supporting early learning. Ready, Set, Learn and StrongStart are funded by more than $13 million a year to get children ready for their school years.

Our focus for the K-to-12 system is on producing better student outcomes. We’re committed to more personalized learning to achieve this. This partnership is comprised of schools interested in pursuing new initiatives to improve their success in the school system, providing research support and helping to measure and evaluate results.

In addition to generating information on successful approaches, this strategy will require ongoing dialogue, including the sharing of research with leading international jurisdictions with similar philosophies. We want to ensure that B.C. educators are aware of the innovations that demonstrate the greatest promise as well as those that need more work.

As we move toward more personalized learning, we want to create a flexible curriculum to nurture the skills and knowledge needed for the years ahead. This means more hands-on opportunities for students, allowing them to delve deeper into high-level concepts and explore concepts of interest to them, their classrooms and their communities.

An important part of classroom innovation is the skills-for-jobs blueprint, which is designed to give students a head start on hands-on learning. This was launched a year ago to re-engineer education and training systems from kindergarten through to post-secondary training and beyond. The blueprint calls for a more targeted focus on training for high-demand jobs and useful labour market information to allow students to make the best decisions for their own lives, encouraging innovation.

Finally, no education system would be successful without high-quality administrators and teachers. In B.C. we are fortunate to have the best of both. Our government has achieved the longest negotiated agreement with the B.C. Teachers Federation, which promises stability and certainty in our classrooms.

[1120]

N. Macdonald: A high-quality public education is the greatest gift that we can give to the children of our province. One would think that those responsible for our public education system here in B.C. would agree with that. What has been clear over the past 14 years is that this government is far more intent on its ongoing war on teachers than it is in promoting educational excellence here in British Columbia.

The good news for B.C. students is that the teachers of B.C. have been able to maintain the public school system standards despite the B.C. Liberals. But at some point the cracks are going to start to show.

Predictably, every government member will stand up and assert that the B.C. Liberals do one thing or another and that this somehow shows a commitment to public education. But the clearest sign that the government was working with teachers for the benefit of children would be making sure that the children with the greatest challenges would be allowed to reach their full potential. That would be what one would see.

In fact, there’s a member that was Minister of Education in this government that articulated the problems that the
[ Page 8631 ]
B.C. Liberals have created in classrooms very clearly. When he was a teacher, he wrote to the government. I’ve never done that. No matter how frustrated I got, I didn’t do that. But this member wrote to government and laid out the facts.

The problem with what the government is doing and how it does not allow students to reach their full potential is that you have to set up the classrooms properly. There are 16,000 classes in this province right now — there were none in 2001, by the way — that have four or more students on individualized education plans. There are 4,000 classes that have seven or more students on individualized education plans.

At some point, no matter how skilled or hard-working the teacher, it becomes impossible. That was the essence of what the member from Comox was saying in his letter. It becomes impossible to run these classes effectively. That was never there prior to this government changing things.

That’s not all. Those are the students that are identified and actually have individualized education plans. This government, through its funding, ensures that students do not get the testing that would allow them to get funding and have individualized education plans until well into their school time.

The key point for addressing students with special needs is in those first years. Identify them in kindergarten, in first year, in second year. This government makes it inevitable that those students do not get the identification that they need, so the teachers are fighting for it.

That was the issue in the strikes. That was the issue that comes forward again and again in the court cases. It is this government that intentionally makes sure that our system is not what it should be and that students who deserve to reach their potential are denied that opportunity.

If you say there is no money…. The richest 2 percent will get $1 billion over the next four years that they don’t need. What could you do if you put that towards children who deserve to reach their potential?

Anybody who stands up on the government side and says that they are doing what they should do in the education system…. First, if there’s success, thank the teachers that you stomp on regularly for being successful with those students and do something real. Stand up in caucus or even stand up here and address the real issues that have been pointed out again and again.

I know it’s easier to stand up and vote for budgets that make tax cuts for the richest 2 percent. But if you really believed in what you’re standing up and saying today, you would stand up and say that we need to put the priority on helping students, no matter what skill set they bring to the classroom, to meet their potential.

It is, to me, unbelievable that this is where we are in this wealthy part of the world. With all the ability to do it, we allow students to not reach their potential. To me, it is the most hypocritical thing for somebody to then stand up and say the government is doing a good job. It clearly is not.

So that’s the challenge. In terms of other partners in education, this minister went and signed a document in front of 400 trustees promising to work in co-government. Then — what? — two months later he comes here and breaks that. That’s B.C. Liberal honour in a nutshell.

[1125]

R. Sultan: The member for Victoria–Swan Lake asks the government to work collaboratively with its K-to-12 partners to support quality public education. Of course, it should. Of course, it does. Of course, it must. There’s no other alternative.

The sheer size and complexity of running this vast and vital $5 billion enterprise in 60 school districts across this huge and highly differentiated province enforces such collaboration, whether the parties eagerly embrace it or not.

It’s my impression that the school boards, independently elected, have never been more vital to the system. Those few who embrace contention and confrontation in this arena are rare and, I believe, are on their way out through electoral choice.

I believe this also holds true for any provincial government which doesn’t put students first, which is why this government, in my observation, tries hard to guide education well and for the most part succeeds.

To illustrate, consider the big-picture numbers. Since 2001 spending has grown from about $4 billion to about $5 billion. This means, distortions of Conference Board data notwithstanding, total spending is keeping pace with inflation. But as has also been noted, the number of students served is declining. So in real terms, expenditure per student is climbing.

How is that real increase per student actually spent? In various ways which have improved the quality of the system. Let’s consider four of them.

One of the most impactful education innovations of this government is universal, all-day kindergarten. When it was first proposed I thought to myself: “Lots of luck. This is not going to run very smoothly.”

But collaboration and hard work on the ground — the school boards, the administrators, the principals and the teachers, most importantly — plus smart guidance from the ministry made it work just fine — in fact, splendidly — a superb example of the collaboration advocated by the motion of the member for Victoria–Swan Lake today.

Another example: StrongStart. In school district 45, which I represent, there are parent lineups at the door. Demand is strong — 34,000 children participating provincewide. Ministry officials in Victoria are clever enough to simply stand aside and not get in the way — another huge success for this government.

A third example: more resources for ESL, ELL, First Nations and special needs. Were these what I would call
[ Page 8632 ]
service niches even on the radar screen 15 years ago? Compared to today, hardly at all. But as school budgets in real terms have been maintained and as the school population, as traditionally served, has declined, this opened resource space for a more determined educational drive to serve those students who do indeed need extra help. Significant progress is being made, although it would be reckless to suggest that thorny issues don’t remain.

Finally, I would mention the community hub concept which my own SD 45 and others, I am sure, are implementing. A neighbourhood in SD 45, my riding, needs help along the dimension of adaptation to Canada and socialization across the ethnic strata. SD 45 to the rescue. School assets are being deployed to create a neighbourhood meeting place where none existed before. The experiment is a success.

To sum up, school system resources across the province are being maintained in real terms. As the traditional client base has failed to grow, the positive increment in per-student funding available is being redeployed to serve critical education niches.

[1130]

Evidence of the success of the ministry’s collaboration may be found in B.C.’s top-ranking student outcomes in international comparisons and, in top-ranked SD 45 at least, growth in the market share of the public education system — how about that? — as the excellent alternative private system is no longer a virtually unique comparator.

K. Corrigan: I’m pleased to rise and speak in support of this motion. Recently I was up in Prince George, and I met with the Prince George school board while I was there. Shortly after that, they wrote me a letter expressing concern about where the Liberal government is going with education and said: “There is a democratic right to a free, quality public education. In fact, public education is the heart of an inclusive democratic society, and any erosion of public education is an erosion of the inclusive rights of its citizens.” I agree. In fact, ensuring access to a strong public education system, I believe, is the most important thing that we as a democratic society can do.

In a province with some of the highest inequality and the highest poverty rates, we should not be slamming the door on public education, and yet we are, in so many ways. We provide less funding than any other province except for Prince Edward Island. We are seeing cut after cut, year after year in our public system — cuts to programs, cuts to supports for students. I know that because I spent year after year as a school trustee presiding over some of those cuts. That’s not good for education.

But it’s not just about funding and the appropriate funding for public education, which is eroding. It’s about getting the best out of all the partners. It’s about innovation. It’s about making sure that we bring the best out of all of the partners in the education system. The best way to do that is with respect. It’s giving each partner the room and the autonomy to do what it does best.

I saw it over and over again. It is true that the best innovations in education, the leading practices, come from teachers and administrators and professionals through their locally controlled professional development and through the projects and the leading-edge research that they do at local school boards. Yet the B.C. government, the B.C. Liberals, have repeatedly over the past 14 years demonstrated a lack of respect and a refusal to work cooperatively with local school boards and with teachers.

They’ve created confrontation. They’ve created a lack of respect, demonstrated by the fact that they’ve been taken to court time and time again, lost several times and yet continue to repeat their unsuccessful modus operandi and continue their high-handed approach to teachers and health care workers and other workers.

Now the most recent example we have is the education act changes, which seriously compromise the autonomy of both school boards and teachers and belie promises that this government made that it was going to work with both groups, that it would reverse its decade of disrespect and that it would work collaboratively. It is completely, in fact, contrary to an agreement that was made just in December, a promise, a memorandum of understanding, that the provincial government was going to work collaboratively, that it was going to consult on any changes to the relationship or any changes that it was going to make in public education.

By taking control of professional development, by allowing the minister to impose shared services and to fire school boards if they don’t agree with the minister, this government was once again demonstrating that it has no intention of acting cooperatively or with respect to its partners.

I just want to spend a minute or so talking about adult basic education, where hard-working British Columbians who want to improve their lives take courses to finish high school or upgrade so they can go to college or university or get further technical training. These are people who are trying to do everything that is right, often struggling with and juggling family commitments and work commitments.

In fact, a bipartisan committee, the Select Standing Committee on Finance, agreed that it was important to support adult public education, and yet this government has recently abandoned that commitment and started charging fees.

[1135]

It’s hurting people like Yashar Hakak, an Iranian engineer who left his country after he was jailed for protesting against racism and for equality. His credentials have not been accepted in Canada, so he is taking upgrading courses in order to attend SFU. He’s working as a cook in the afternoons in a restaurant and taking English, physics and calculus. His wife is taking English and chemistry. They cannot afford to continue on.
[ Page 8633 ]

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

K. Corrigan: This government is shutting doors to education by not funding advanced education, and it is consistent with the long history of doing exactly that.

Deputy Speaker: Member for Chilliwack.

J. Martin: Thank you so much, and I assure you that I’ll end on time.

If there’s a single tangible gift that one generation can pass to another, that would be an education. There is no single asset that an individual will benefit more from throughout their entire lifetime than the opportunity to learn. For that reason alone, it gives me great pleasure, on behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack, to address the motion brought forward by the member for Victoria–Swan Lake regarding public education.

B.C.’s public education system is co-governed by the Education Minister and 60 elected boards of education throughout the province. B.C. boards of education are autonomous, although not fully independent, and are accountable to their electorate for their budgetary spending decisions.

Provincial funding to school districts remains at record levels. This coming year total funding to school districts will reach $5.06 billion. That’s up 31 percent since 2001. Annual operating grants to school districts are now almost a billion dollars more than they were in 2001.

It should be noted that these funding increases are taking place during a period of declining enrolment. While other jurisdictions in North America take the opportunity to cut funding for education, in parallel with declining enrolment, B.C. stands out because we wish to improve student outcomes through increased funding. Average per-pupil funding has risen by 42 percent since 2001. Back in 2001 we spent an average of $6,262 per student. Today we are spending more than $8,900 per student in British Columbia.

Furthermore, we have established the learning improvement fund. This specialized funding was established to address complex classroom needs and to ensure that learning conditions are appropriate for all students. In this school year alone $100 million will be invested in the learning improvement fund.

The allocation of this funding is determined through consultation, and that involves school districts, principals and teachers. This school year districts have told the ministry they intend to use this money to hire 1,100 new teachers, to hire 352 new support staff and to increase the hours of nearly 2,600 support staff and teachers from part-time to full-time.

Now, I know that the members opposite would like to dispute these funding increases and create that false sense of doom and gloom in our education system they’re so fond of. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. One need only look at student outcomes in B.C. The number of students graduating in British Columbia has increased by 17 percent since 2001. During that same period the graduation rates for English language learners has increased by 68 percent. Furthermore, the number of special needs students graduating has increased by 190 percent.

In fact, B.C. is recognized internationally for successful student outcomes. In 2011 the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study indicated that among grade four students B.C. was recognized as one of the top seven jurisdictions in the world for reading ability.

In 2012 tests of 15-year-old students indicated that B.C. tends to be one of the highest performing jurisdictions, particularly in reading and science. Compared to other provinces, B.C. students were top-ranked in reading and science, second only to Quebec in math.

I know that the members of the opposition are greatly disappointed by these facts, but we can take heart that, while the school year might be quickly coming to a close, the Legislature could be coming back for a special summer session, and that would be a great opportunity for the opposition members, maybe, to sign up for some summer classes, brush up on their ABCs before we come back to the fall for a regular session.

R. Austin: It’s my pleasure to stand in support of this resolution brought forward by the member for Victoria–Swan Lake: “Be it resolved that this House call on government to work collaboratively with its kindergarten to grade twelve education partners to support quality public education so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential.”

[1140]

I don’t think there’s been anything that has been quite as contentious in this Legislature, in the ten years that I have stood here and spoken on behalf of the people of Skeena, than public education. I think I’d like to just point out as proof of the lack of collaborative work between the government and the education establishment…. You have to look at some of the evidence that came out during one of the multiple court cases that this government has been embroiled in.

I think you have to look at the comments made by Paul Straszak, who was at the time the lead negotiator on behalf of the government. Under evidence in front of a judge, Madam Justice Susan Griffin, he said very clearly that it had been government policy to actually use the education system to initiate strife in our public education system. Why? Because there was some political advantage to be had on behalf of the government.

I don’t think there is any more evidence than that of the kind of work, or lack of work, and the lack of collaboration that this government has done since 2001 to attack teachers, to attack school trustees, to undermine what was, certainly, one of the best education systems
[ Page 8634 ]
when they took over. That is the evidence. You don’t need any more proof than that. In fact, in the current court case that’s going on, they’ve asked that this kind of evidence be struck from the record so that it can’t be used as they go to the Supreme Court.

Let’s just speak for a second here. We’ve heard lots from the government members about how we have a co-governed system. Let’s be real. The school trustees have just spoken out at their most recent AGM. There’s no co-governance. They are there to bring in the cuts that the lack of funding that comes out of Victoria provides them with. That’s their job now. It’s simply to find: “Where do we cut? Do we cut transportation? Do we cut more special needs teachers? Do we cut more ELL teachers? Where do we cut?”

You’ve got to have one teacher at the front of the classroom. God knows you can’t cut that person. So all the other specialized teachers get cut, all the other services that are required to help our kids. And it’s not just those kids who succeed at the test scores; it is all children.

Public education is the one, single way in which we can mitigate the forces that, when a child is born, give some children privilege and others not so much. The only way we can mitigate that is through public education. Yet we have a system that denies the ability for those kids who are challenged, who come from less than great circumstances, whose parents perhaps aren’t as educated as other parents.

There are so many social factors upon which we ask our teachers to try and be the social workers, the social engineers, the people who will try and make sure that every child who comes into their classroom gets a chance at making it in life. That’s what we have seen with the lack of funding here.

In fact, let’s talk about funding for a second. Here in this budget during this session what was the biggest spend? The biggest spend on the B.C. Liberal side was to give a $230 million tax cut to the richest 2 percent. What does that tell you? Madam Justice Susan Griffin, in one of her readings, said that in her estimation, about $250 million had been taken out of the public education system each and every year since 2001. That was her estimate.

A couple of billion dollars should be added on to what the government has added in the last ten years. That is why we are No. 9 out of 10 in per-pupil student funding. Now, all of the government members have gotten up and said: “Oh, we do very well on the PISA scores. We do very well on this and that.” But think of all the kids who have dropped out. Think of all the kids whose lives have been just basically written off as a result of not having the proper educational funding to help them to reach their full potential.

Just think of that. Nobody seems to care about that. Nobody seems to care. You know, the government has spoken about the learning improvement fund. The learning improvement fund came about as a result of a loss in a court case. It was an acknowledgement that so much money had been pulled out: “Oh my goodness; we’d better do something.” Having pulled that $250 million a year, each and every year, they threw back a little money through the learning improvement fund.

[1145]

M. Morris: I’ve just been listening to the dissertation by the members opposite, and it’s clear to me that the members opposite don’t really appreciate the fact that British Columbia gets more value per dollar invested in education than most jurisdictions in Canada, and that’s the bottom line.

Our government is working hard to support quality public education so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential. We’re in the process of transforming education to give students a head start to hands-on learning.

Let me give you some examples of what I consider to be practical solutions that our government has initiated that will particularly benefit students in the interior and northern regions of B.C. who will get jobs in the skilled trades.

The B.C. blueprint was launched a year ago to re-engineer education and training systems from kindergarten through to post-secondary training and beyond. We’re making it easier for B.C. families and students to make the best possible career choices in a changing economy by providing the best job information possible, and we’re delivering on this.

Since launching our blueprint we have made significant progress on some key objectives. ACE IT and secondary school apprenticeship enrolment increased in the 2013-14 school year, and work is underway to double apprenticeship and dual-credit training opportunities for high school students by June 2017.

A new superintendent of trades and student transitions is dedicated exclusively to expand opportunities and build seamless pathways to training, working with districts, employers and post-secondary institutions.

Graduation policies have been changed to provide more flexibility for skills-training courses and credits. The skills exploration 10-12 course was launched to give students the opportunity to explore a variety of trades while they earn credit towards graduation.

A range of new on-line tools for students, parents and teachers, including a career skills and training toolkit for school district career programs, has been launched. Moving forward, a youth apprenticeship review with ITA will be completed, and approved recommendations will be implemented.

Part of our government’s plan to realign skills training with future workforce demands is by giving students some exposure to in-demand jobs. In the first year government has delivered on its promise to provide a head start to hands-on learning with nearly 50,000 British
[ Page 8635 ]
Columbians in 31 communities participating in Find Your Fit, a youth-focused, interactive event showcasing in-demand careers.

The tours offered youth all across our province the chance to explore some hands-on training. Students got to watch some science demos and explore career paths like welding, carpentry, accounting and more. By getting a chance to try their hand at different skills, our youth get to start thinking about potential future jobs.

One of our highest priorities is to improve outcomes for aboriginal students. I’d like to tell you about a program in my riding, the aboriginal choice program, which commenced operations in 2012. This school, called Nusdeh Yoh, or “house of the future,” provides aboriginal-based education for K-to-7 students. Over 25 percent of students attending schools in school district 57 are of aboriginal descent. We’ve seen great progress, but there can still be more to do so every aboriginal student can thrive and survive.

From 2001 to 2014 the number of aboriginal students graduating in B.C. increased by 113 percent. The six-year completion rate for aboriginal students increased by 45.6 percent — 19.3 percentage points — to a high record of 61.6 percent. That’s from 42.3 percent in 2001. The transition rate for aboriginal students entering grade 12 increased 21.9 percent, from 64 percent in 2003-2004. That’s 78 percent.

Fifty-four school districts out of 60 worked with local First Nations and signed aboriginal education enhancement agreements. These agreements are the reason we’ve seen steady and significant improvements in aboriginal completion rates.

Our goal is to produce capable young people ready to thrive in a rapidly changing world and help to provide students with tools and resources necessary to consider the full range of options available to them. Our government takes a practical, strategic and innovative approach to education because we want our students to be successful. We’re working hard with education partners to support quality public education so all children in B.C. have the chance to meet their full potential.

[1150]

S. Robinson: It’s my pleasure to take my place to speak to the motion “that this House call on government to work collaboratively with its kindergarten to grade 12 education partners to support quality public education so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential.”

I first want to speak to the latter half of the motion — the idea that quality education exists so that all children have every opportunity to meet their full potential. I believe, along with members on this side of the House, that public education is the great equalizer we have in our province. I am a product of public education, and my children benefited from public education.

Now, I could have chosen differently for my children, and I will confess in this House that I had considered private education, particularly for my son. My son Aaron was a precocious little boy, fascinated with geography and all things to do with this world. Before the age of three he knew the names, flags and capital cities of every country in the world. When eating a piece of toast, he would comment on the shape. He even noted: “Hey Mom, look. I made Texas.”

My husband Dan and I had fairly significant conversations about how we were going to meet the needs of this special little boy. After much soul-searching and reflection on our values, we came to the determination that public school was the best option.

You see, my husband and I were products of public education. It served us well. We have five university degrees between the two of us. We believed that a public education, one that served the needs of all students so that they can reach their potential, would work for our very special little boy. We believed that a public education should give him the tools and experiences he would need to reach his full potential, to become a lifelong learner and to become a full-fledged, contributing citizen.

He started school in the mid-1990s, when schools were the focus of the government of the day, a government that was focused on building and supporting schools all over this province.

My son finished his public education in 2007, a few years after things started to deteriorate in schools. Thankfully, his first few years in the public education system provided excellent early learning opportunities and a solid educational base. As a result, his own learning was not greatly impacted by the disruptions that existed in the early part of the 2000s, with larger class sizes and supports for special needs eliminated by this government.

Now I’d like to say a few things about the first part of the motion — that this House call on government to work collaboratively with its kindergarten-to-grade-12 education partners. I’m not sure how this government understands working collaboratively.

We all know that there are many parts to the education system. That’s what it takes to make a system. There are different parts. When the parts of the system are not in sync, when the parts of the system are not treated with respect, when the parts of the system are not consulted, your system breaks down.

That’s what this motion is about. It is a motion calling on the government to fix a very broken system. This government has eroded our public education system. The system that served my husband and I well in the 1970s and then my children through most of the ’90s no longer exists. This erosion of our public education system where funding is not keeping pace with inflation….

Yes, I know. The members on the other side of the House like to boast how they’ve pumped a billion dollars more into the system despite declining enrolment in ten
[ Page 8636 ]
years. But what about the cost for inflation? What about the increased costs of all the things that schools need to buy? The Conference Board of Canada notes that B.C. would have to spend $1.6 billion more than it has budgeted for over the next three years just to keep up.

What about other costs? Increased MSP, increased hydro rates, WorkSafe B.C. rate increases, provincially negotiated wage increases for support staff — all of that has to come out of existing budgets. How is it that anyone on that side of the House can say that they value and support public education?

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Budget 2015 provided a boost to public education? They told school trustees that they had to find additional administrative cuts by telling the public that it was time to deal with low-hanging fruit, fruit that was long gone.

Then, during the longest school strike in B.C. history last year, a substantial accomplishment by this Liberal government, we are told that the Premier’s priority is addressing class composition — good message to tell parents. But what has the government done? There hasn’t been anything done to address that.

The government’s own report, released in 2015, shows that the numbers for 2015 are the same as they were for 2014, which was the worst record ever.

The words spoken by the minister and by the Premier say one thing: “We’re going to chart a new direction towards individualized learning. We’re going to address class size and composition. It’s our number one priority.” Mere words. They have accomplished nothing — all just words. Our public education system remains broken.

This motion recommends that this government start collaborating with all parts of the system. It’s time for this government to put on its big-girl panties and start addressing public education.

S. Robinson moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. T. Lake moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:55 a.m.

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