Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

INVESTMENTS IN
POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

S. Cadieux: I’ll start with a quote this morning. “Education is the most powerful weapon you can use to change the world” — Nelson Mandela. I think, today, that is more fitting than I intended it to be.

They’re powerful words. When we think about our post-secondary system and the value of advanced education in our society, it’s imperative that we think about it in its broadest sense — its holistic and intrinsic value, as well as the practical.

If you’d asked me what I wanted out of my post-secondary experience when I was 18 and just getting started, I would have said: “The skills and knowledge and credentials I need to do the job I want.” And if you’d asked me why it was important, I would have said: “Because I wanted a career that would pay well and that I’d find interesting.” I think those things would still hold true today, but now I think I would also say that I would expect post-secondary to help expand my understanding of the world and my role in it.

Today I think that the post-secondary sector is more about fostering knowledge and understanding, contributing to the development of skilled workers for our economy, and developing thinkers, creators, defenders of peace and justice, defenders of freedom and democracy, innovators, imaginers, scientists and artists. Universities and colleges are, in many ways, our keepers of history, continuity and champions of sustainability through dissection, debate and theory. And to sum it up, while my views have expanded, the value and importance of universities and higher learning has always been and continues.

Here in B.C., we have a rich post-secondary sector that has served us very well. One only has to look so far as people like Dr. Ryan D’Arcy. He’s a Canadian neuroscientist. He’s a professor at SFU, where he holds the Surrey Memorial Hospital Foundation B.C. Leadership Chair in Multimodal Technology for Healthcare Innovations. He’s an alumni of UVic.

Robert Turner is an internationally recognized expert in brain physics and magnetic resonance imaging. The coils inside MRI scanners owe their shape to his ideas. He studied at SFU.

The world-renowned architect Bing Thom, who designed buildings all over the globe, including the remarkable Chan Centre for the Performing Arts on UBC’s campus, graduated from UBC.

Dr. Masajiro Miyazaki was a Japanese-Canadian osteopathic physician who practised in Vancouver prior to World War II, and during World War II was appointed coroner by the British Columbia Provincial Police in the town of Lillooet. In addition to his coroner’s duties, he served as the effective general practitioner in the Lillooet area and founded the local ambulance service and a proper hospital for the town of Lillooet. He went to UBC.

Now, I may have given a little extra information there on him, and it may not immediately seem clear why I did that, but I get a little nostalgic when I talk about Lillooet and my time there. I remember my visits to Dr. Miyazaki’s house, which is now a historic location.

[10:10 a.m.]

I could use my whole time here today on people who’ve done really great things, who have come up with really important and innovative ideas that have shaped our world, and they started at B.C. post-secondary institutions. That continues today, Mr. Speaker, with mechatronic students at SFU, the medical students at UBCO, the social work students at TRU and the film students at Cap U.

It served B.C. well, and it continues to grow, from 155,000 students in 2001 to over 200,000 full-time equivalents today. More than 426,000 students are enrolled in at least one course. There are 25 public post-secondaries, amplified by the private post-secondary sector, and they’re spread across our vast province, ensuring that education is available to everyone close to home.

Although post-secondary education doesn’t come cheap, B.C. students pay only a third of the total, or real, cost. I think it’s really important that people have access, and that’s why there’s a mix of student grants and loans available to assist students to manage the upfront costs of tuition and why government, for the last 12 years, has limited fee increases.

Most former students lament their days at university — the budget-stretching meals of Kraft Dinner and instant noodles, cramming for exams, the less than ideal cleanliness of dorm life. But rarely, if ever, have I heard someone lament their experience in terms of the value of education — that it wasn’t worth it, or that it was a bad investment in their future.

Now we’ve reached a tipping point in B.C., with fewer residents entering the workforce than those retiring. Eight out of ten job openings will require post-secondary education. That’s why it’s important that we pay extra attention to the sector, and it’s why the $1 billion of investment and new capital going forward is so important. Projects like the energy systems project at SFU and the undergraduate teaching labs at UBC….

Our world is changing quickly, and the speed of technology is changing even faster. The tech strategy is about increasing our experts in that sector. It’s all needed, not just for tech or the digital revolution, but also because our world is changing. Our climate is changing. Our population is exploding. We will need new ways to grow food. Our world is shrinking, metaphorically, and with that, we’re seeing evidence in the news every day of the need — that we’ll need new thinking and new ways to govern and unite nations in peace and tolerance.

With all of this change, our need for education and skills — and, more importantly, our ability to adapt — is also increasing. So I guess that leads me to: what is the future for post-secondary? There’s a growing disconnect between the skills imparted through our degree system and the skills demanded by employers. More and more employers are demanding crossing specialties and soft skills — more EQ, less IQ.

So how does our system need to evolve to adapt to meet those changing needs and challenges of a future that’s ever closer? The importance of the sector is not in question. But the question now to ask ourselves is how best to support the sector in its evolution to best serve the students of today and tomorrow.

Now, my experience…. I spent time at SFU. I then went to KPU, in three separate programs, then to BCIT. I even did a weekend course at UBC, and then I spent some time at a private institution, a securities institute. All of those skills melded together have created, for me, a great basis on which to form my career. But what will it look like for the students of the future, Mr. Speaker?

L. Krog: I want to thank the member for her statement about investments in post-secondary education. Coming from the generation that I did, where tuition at Vancouver Island University — then Malaspina College — was $100 per semester, when the minimum wage was a buck-50, one doesn’t have to be an incredible math whiz, which I wasn’t, to calculate that the reality of access to post-secondary education in this province has become a great deal more difficult than it was in 2001.

Indeed, we know that tuition fees at our colleges and universities have doubled since 2001 — when, certainly, the minimum wage hasn’t. That’s just one factor to take into consideration.

We know that in other countries who have placed a priority on post-secondary education, indeed, tuition is free. It’s because those societies, those cultures, those countries recognize the incredible importance of having a well-educated society, not just in terms of the technical skills that enable them to participate in the increasingly complex workforce that comprises the modern world, but also to be thoughtful, creative, critical citizens of a modern democracy.

[10:15 a.m.]

When we talk about investments in post-secondary education, I think we have to consider that post-secondary education, for some, may be just acquiring that very technical skill, that ability to participate in the workforce, or it may be for broadening the mind. It may be for an opportunity to expand and experience, if you will, cultures that aren’t part of the communities from which students come. That, to me, is the greatest benefit of post-secondary education: the opportunity — certainly where I came from, in a very small community — to encounter a diversity that is simply not available. We are a much more diverse society than when I was young.

This has been a very positive force for Canada in terms of its leadership in the world, but also in terms of the quality of life here in Canada. We are indeed a fortunate people. However, there are things that government needs to do if we are to ensure that accessibility remains in the forefront. No one should be denied the opportunity for education based on pure money.

I remember my high school counsellor saying to me…. When I was very concerned about whether I’d be able to save enough and whether my widowed mother could afford to assist me to get on to college and university, he said — with such great, glowing confidence, consistent with the time — “Don’t worry. The money will be there.” Well, he was right, but it was there because there were union jobs in the summertime and workplaces that paid good wages where I could afford to go to university — and, likewise, my spouse.

Those times have changed. The access by students to good employment opportunities while they pursue their education is often gone. Many students now regard a three- or four-course semester as a full load, because they are working at other low-wage jobs to try and support themselves. In my generation, a full course load was five courses, no question. So we have to consider society. If we want to move ahead, if we want to participate in that complex world that requires such a variety of complex skills, what are we going to do as a province, as a country, to ensure accessibility?

One of those things, obviously, is to bring back a student grants program, also to waive interest on student loans and address the growing problem of increasing tuition costs. We want every British Columbian to have that opportunity. In my own community, at Vancouver Island University, they pioneered the very program that this government is pursuing vigorously: giving free tuition to those students who’ve been in the care of the province, 18 to 24 years old. That’s a marvellous, incredibly important step towards ensuring accessibility and full opportunity for those who’ve been deprived, in so many ways, in our society.

The signal that sends is that accessibility is paramount. Obviously, we have to move towards a system that ensures full accessibility by all students. If we want to have the kind of civilized country we value, a country that will be a beacon unto the world — as we often think it is, particularly in these perilous times — education and the opportunity to participate are so important. Public education gave me everything. I am grateful for it, as I know the member is.

S. Cadieux: Thanks to the member for his comments. While I know we will agree to disagree on some of the methods by which we see access improving, I certainly don’t disagree with the member at all about the need to do more and the reality that the current government has announced an expansion of the tuition waiver program. It’s something that I do support.

In fact, the idea of tuition waivers for kids from care was something that I started having conversations about with staff in the Ministry of Advanced Education, and in the Ministry of Children and Families when I first took on the portfolio. It was not long after that that Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond had issued some encouragement to universities, as I was doing in the background as well.

[10:20 a.m.]

I was very pleased when we started that program and pleased to see the government expand it, because I do believe that education is an important equalizer. That is something I think we will choose to agree on.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

As we see that, we know that in the sector, one of the things that is a challenge and that drives tuition rate increases is also scarcity. So when we see investments in new buildings and new facilities around the province, the availability of education close to home is improved. With those billion dollars of new facilities around the province, we will see improvements to access for students.

As universities make those investments, they’re also doing those investments in a rapidly changing environment with rapidly changing technology and demands from society. The debate on how best to meet student needs for their skills is going to continue to change. One of the questions I’m asking, certainly, is: will credentials matter, and how will the system look in ten years?

There’s been a shift in the hiring process to screening bots that seek specific key words to narrow the applications of applicants. And while a four-year degree used to be a ticket to the front of the hiring line, it is certainly no more than a base requirement today. In a way, that’s devalued the currency of a credential. So how does the sector adapt to that change?

We know that the skills that a degree represents are still, and even increasingly, required, we must also consider this statistic. I’ll quote from Jeffrey Selingo in a paper he wrote called the “Future of the Degree” in the Chronicle of Higher Education. It cites — and I’m paraphrasing — that in ten years, one-third of the skills considered important today will have changed. He goes on to say that in a knowledge economy that changes so quickly, the combination of skills that a worker possesses may matter more than a single degree. There’s discussion about a movement towards a lifelong credential — which, arguably, is simply a redesign of the current system — to allow for ongoing life learning, upgrading and skill development across disciplines.

I think that as we do that and as we look to future, we’re going to have to think about these things. I think that’s the burning question, because it certainly isn’t: do we value higher education? We all do.

CELEBRATING LIBRARIES

A. Kang: Through the character of his book, the author of A Song of Ice and Fire, George R.R. Martin, said: “A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one.”

I am proud of our Education Minister for inviting thousands of British Columbians to explore thousands of lives by designating October 2017 as Library Month. On the second day of Library Month, I am thrilled to join the Education Minister’s effort in encouraging reading, promoting the services provided by libraries and recognizing the hard work of our library administrative staff and volunteers.

Since 1999, B.C. has joined other provinces in celebrating Library Month. We may not notice sometimes, but libraries have accompanied us through most of our lives, most of the stages of our lives. We have elementary school libraries, we have secondary school libraries, we have post-secondary school libraries, and we have public libraries and special libraries. Some of us even have our own libraries at home. Regardless of what kind of library we frequent, we discover the joy of reading, develop new skills, form deep community roots and ties with each other and invent innovative ideas that make our society better.

These can all happen in libraries, and what’s even better: it’s free. Library access is free to all British Columbians. We have 71 public library systems in B.C. — 247 library branch locations, serving more than 360 B.C. communities. This means access to digital newspapers, e-books and free Internet. Libraries ensure that all British Columbians have free, equitable access to in-trust sources, information, ideas and works of imagination. Beyond the simple lending of books, libraries are places where people go to explore an idea, to test a theory, to create new content, to find community connections and information, and to share knowledge with others. These are all important to our overall growth.

If you’re still not convinced, here are more of some services that libraries offer. Libraries provide on-line learning platforms; coding workshops for families; and classes on how to use computers, a smartphone or a tablet. The learning is not limited to libraries, as libraries also provide technology that you can take home and learn to use.

[10:25 a.m.]

Libraries continue to diversify their services and collections to support changing user and community needs. The world is changing, and so are our libraries. I’m glad that British Columbia recognizes the benefits of our libraries.

In 2016, there were 61.6 million visits to libraries and 59 million items borrowed. That is an average of 13 items per person. Out of the visits, 1.7 million people attended a library program in 2016, representing an 8.6 percent increase. The number of Wi-Fi sessions used in libraries also increased by 6.7 percent since 2015. This means that people who cannot afford computers or Internet at home can still be connected to their library and to the on-line world. Last but not least, 9,000 children registered for summer reading club programs in 2016. Among them are my children, who proudly wear their medals.

With the dedication of our librarians, teacher-librarians, other staff and volunteers, our libraries are constantly improving, becoming better and better. I would like to take a moment to recognize their hard work in helping British Columbians improve their literacy skills and their lives every day. Library staff and volunteers are essential to the strong, resilient and inclusive communities we all can call libraries. Their patience plays a key role in supporting students in personal reading. Without them, we may not know what to do with the abundance of knowledge that we have.

The library staff and volunteers become our best friends quickly. They help us foster lifelong learning and play a vital role in helping British Columbians of all ages have access to information and tools they need to live, learn and work. They are also our teachers, and support us in acquiring the skills necessary to find and evaluate information in order to adapt and succeed in British Columbia’s diverse, innovative economy. Their commitment and dedication allow culture to continue to flourish and thrive.

Families can spend their weekends in libraries, as I do with my family. Libraries are where past, present and future intersect. We find our past in collections and archives that piece together our history and collective memory. We find our present in the workshops and recreational activities that bring our communities together. We find our future in the creative and innovative minds stimulated by the enriched environment.

Starting today, I encourage everyone to go out to your local library, chat with a friendly staff or volunteer there, utilize the resources there, and immerse yourself in the learning environment. We can all pick up a book at home, because reading every word counts.

D. Davies: It is my pleasure to rise today in reply to these institutions that are staples of our communities across our province as well as across this country. No, as we’ve heard, these aren’t Starbucks or McDonald’s. They are our public libraries — very specifically, our public libraries. It is interesting, as a little note, that south of the border there are actually more public libraries than there are McDonald’s. I think this is certainly showing that there is a desire for knowledge.

These are institutions that are very important here in Canada as well. Just this past week, I was very happy to see that the B.C. public libraries were represented at the UBCM. I enjoyed chatting with the people that were working the booths, and I’m very confident that B.C. libraries have a bright future for all of us.

Libraries are where I learned enjoying to read as a youngster. Standing in the aisles in Fort St. John, shelf after shelf of books before me, I knew that I could easily lose myself there for hours. This experience within our public libraries taught me the love of reading as well as my desire to build my imagination. They showed me a curiosity for science, an imagination for fiction, or later on in life I could find an academic inquiry. All of these happened within this one institution.

This is key. Libraries provide a vital public service for so many British Columbians that may not have access to computers or Internet. In small and rural communities, they can be a true hub for our communities, but they’re vital in urban areas as well.

[10:30 a.m.]

B.C.’s first public library opened in 1891. Since then, in British Columbia, they have grown to 247 service points across this province — a vital public service. Libraries are often an unrecognized, fundamental part of our province. Libraries are meeting places. They hold classes for young and old. Staff will help people find jobs, write resumés and get access to much-needed government services — much more than just reading.

The Fort St. John Public Library is in my riding. It is a hub, such as this, and I’m proud to be a past board member of our Fort St. John library. They have programs that range from Mother Goose storytime, adult literacy programs, outreach for local daycares and free book delivery to homebound patrons. They have a queer-straight alliance, which provides community groups and LGBTQ teens and their friends and families a safe place to be. They provide amazing science classes and give meeting times to our home-schooled children.

The library is a hub. It is key and fundamental to the safety and growth of so many parts of our community. I’ll read the mission statement. “The Fort St. John and area public library is a community cornerstone, providing a variety of information and support for lifelong learning in a welcoming, entertaining and safe environment. The library hosts creative, community-oriented programs and delivers top-notch customer service” — which I see every time I go into our library. All of this is delivered with a budget of under $1 million in our community. Those are very tall orders for a community library that services such a large area.

As a teacher, I often found myself needing ways to fuel imaginations, connect people and knowledge, and energize our youth in our world. But I have to admit — and I’m sure that the hon. member across the way who is an educator, as well, will agree — that our efforts have certainly been aided by having public libraries in our communities.

I relied on libraries for my own personal reading and enjoyment, but as a teacher I continued to rely on libraries in many different ways. I had students that shared the same love of reading that I had and ones who used the library for solitude, for studying and for resources that they may have lacked at home. Libraries have given students somewhere to go and learn — to absorb new information or just a place to go and do some quiet research.

Libraries are important to our communities, as are many other institutions. They have existed as long as we have gathered to read. They are key educating tools for generations, and libraries, after all, are an important, vital part of our province.

A. Kang: I want to thank the member for Peace River North for his comments.

As a teacher myself, I love libraries. A popular Canadian artist of our time famously states that communication saves relations. It’s true, and the foundation on which communication stands is literacy. Our ability to express and articulate our ideas shapes the communication we have with others, whether it’s through speaking, writing or typing — or maybe, nowadays, texting.

Our libraries provide such valuable resources to improve our province’s literacy, and I would like to thank the Education Minister again for promoting these resources and helping us build a strong community through communication. As a past library board member myself, in the Burnaby Public Library system, I am very proud to be able to talk about libraries in every way possible today.

Burnaby Public Library is a crown jewel of my riding, Burnaby–Deer Lake. It has brought my family closer than ever. Speaking from personal experience, I participated in Burnaby Public Library’s summer reading program with my children this summer. Not only did the program stimulate my children’s interest in reading but also allowed kids to develop relationships with librarians.

I have to be honest. Parenting is a tough job. Some may even call it a career, because to us parents, our children never seem to grow up.

[10:35 a.m.]

Fortunately, we have amazing library staff and volunteers who treat our children like their own, providing them with a safe learning environment or just a safe environment for them to hang out. This makes our life as parents so much easier.

Not only do librarians help us polish literacy and communication skills, but they also provide the space and forum for us to utilize those skills. Libraries share their space with community. They often host community forums to provide unique support programs for newcomers. A library is not just a place for studying; a library is a place for learning. It’s also a place for civic engagement and community building.

A library, a strong library system, is a cornerstone of a strong community. There isn’t a right way to read a book. There isn’t a left way to read a book. I invite all members in this chamber, both on this side and on the other side of the aisle, to read a book, and together we will celebrate Library Month.

HONESTY AND INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT

S. Gibson: I thank all colleagues for welcoming me this morning. It’s a great pleasure to speak in this House, representing the constituents of the Abbotsford-Mission riding.

I take this topic very seriously, having completed over three decades of elected service, both locally and provincially. This topic is dear to my heart, you might say. As members of this House, we know that transparency and free elections are really what it’s all about. We look around the world and see, even recently in the media, contested elections. People are wondering: “Was this a free election?” So we value transparency and democracy.

We know when we go to the polls — those elections — we can count on them. We trust that the results will be appropriate and true. But in the aftermath of the recent election, transparency was replaced with murkiness. Instead of the voters observing the process of forming a new government, it was done furtively, and those negotiations were done, in many ways, in secret. So the voters of our province really were not clear on just how things came to be, and I think that’s very unfortunate. They were shut out of the negotiations.

The two parties who criticized our previous government for insisting that the transfer must take place in the House…. You’ll recall that, hon. Members from across the floor. All of a sudden, that was replaced with something I do characterize as murkiness.

One thing I’ve learned, having served on Matsqui council, then Abbotsford council and now here — the honour of serving here in this place…. Somebody told me this many years ago, and I still think it applies here: it’s not how you start the race; it’s how you end it. As some of you know, I do a little running. I even ran this morning — a little early, but I was out there for a few kilometres. It’s a good metaphor, because there are a lot of folks that we know who have started in politics or in business, various dimensions of life, and unfortunately, haven’t ended well.

I’m afraid that part of the challenge here is the murkiness or the lack of transparency between the two governing parties. A lot of issues have come up — I might say the current issue regarding the series of promises that this government has made. I’ve noted those previously.

I saw a cute cartoon in New Yorker magazine. Some of you see the cartoons in the back. I do enter that contest every week. I’m hoping to win that contest one day — the caption contest. I saw this New Yorker cartoon, and it had on it: “Now this late-breaking announcement: last year’s campaign promises.”

For the NDP, there were key promises, and many voters were attracted to those. They were intrigued by them. The way that they were dispensed through the media…. In many cases, I believe people were persuaded.

Deputy Speaker: Member, this is a non-partisan time in the Legislature.

S. Gibson: What was their concern?

An Hon. Member: No NDP.

[10:40 a.m.]

S. Gibson: Oh, pardon me.

Key promises included $10-a-day daycare — I’m not allowed to speak to that, hon. Speaker? — a $40 renters rebate, the elimination of interest on student loans, a rollback on ferry fares. Clearly, these promises were attractive to many voters. So in the case of….

Deputy Speaker: Perhaps the member can generalize his comments.

S. Gibson: Okay. So in general, what I’m trying to share with the House today is the importance of transparency in government. A part of the concern I have is that we are seeing less and less transparency. I suppose I’m not allowed to refer excessively to the folks on the other side of the House, but of course….

Interjections.

S. Gibson: Yeah, that’s right. I appreciate that.

I think one of the concerns that I have is for the public. They’re looking to this place to set high ideals.

Interjection.

S. Gibson: I believe that. Thank you for the encouraging comments from across the floor. Having you there for me is always appreciated.

A young boy was giving testimony one time in a court case, and the lawyer said to the boy: “Your dad asked you what to say, didn’t he? He told you what to say.” The boy said: “That’s right.” And the lawyer thought he had a good case for court, and he said: “Well, what did he tell you to say?” And the young boy said: “My dad told me to tell the truth all the time, and then I wouldn’t have to plan what I’m going to say.”

So there are some reversals here that I do see. I have a concern about accountability. I want to note the fact that my concerns, going into my second term as an MLA….

Deputy Speaker: Member, please take your seat.

Point of Order

Hon. M. Mungall: A point of order, Madame Speaker. This is clearly a non-partisan time for statements from private members. The member opposite’s statement is clearly extremely partisan. He is even accusing this government of not telling the truth. I’d like him to withdraw.

S. Gibson: Okay. Well, I’ll conclude my comments there. The only thing I would add…. Thank you for the remarks. They’re appreciated very much.

Deputy Speaker: Member, you have been asked to withdraw your remarks.

S. Gibson: I withdraw those remarks. Thank you.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much.

Debate Continued

S. Chandra Herbert: It’s hard to respond to remarks that were withdrawn because they broke the rules of the House, but I will do my best.

I was encouraged and excited to see that the member decided to speak about honesty and integrity in government, and that means following the rules of this House. That means that when we’re asked to respond or comment on issues in a non-partisan way, we don’t just use this as a punching bag to beat up political opponents.

Why don’t we speak about high-minded ideals of honesty and integrity? Why don’t we speak about ways that we can actually increase honesty and integrity in this House, in our communities, all across this province? I think it would be a helpful thing if the member opposite had any ideas about ways to improve honesty and integrity, including things that I’m very excited about — actually having a lobbyist registration act that works in B.C. so that former government members and former ministers don’t get an inside track on jobs or on money that a government might give out.

Maybe it’s about how we run our electoral process altogether. Do we want a more proportional system, one where your vote is actually counted in a real way and not discarded if you don’t vote for the top three parties? Those could be things that could lead to increased honesty and accountability in government.

You know, I know it’s hard to get off speaking points that are handed to you by an opposition research branch saying, “We’re mad we’re not in government anymore, so let’s attack and punch the other guys in the face,” but I believe that it’s up to each of us to say, if we’re pushed in that direction: “No. If this is non-partisan time, I’m not going to be partisan about it. I’m going to speak about ways that we can actually improve our democracy, things that I’m excited about.”

There’s legislation in front the House around banning big money. I’m not going to talk about that in my remarks, because I’ll get the chance to do that when we get to the debate of that bill. That’s the kind of thing that excites me.

[10:45 a.m.]

What are other things that we could do to engage our population in government, in things that are bettering our democracy? One thing that I’d like to see is reforms to the Election Act so that people actually get more of an opportunity to meet with their members. Members may not know this, but if you go into a rental apartment building, for example, and knock on doors to try and meet with your constituents…. Technically, under B.C.’s election law, you can’t do that. Under the federal election law, you can.

A small change, but in that way, members, like the one opposite, could actually go, legally, into apartment buildings and knock on the doors of their constituents to hear their points of view — learn something, maybe act for the renters to improve the situation renters are facing in this community, in his and mine and communities all across this great province of ours. A small change but a little thing that we could do.

Another area that constituents of mine say they want to get involved in is…. Sixteen-year-olds and 17-year-olds want to vote. They tell me they’re interested in being able to vote. They were incredibly involved in this last election. They watched the promises. They watched the parties. They watched the debate. They had very set views on what they wanted to do. In fact, some of my great volunteers were as young as 11 years old.

They were involved in the democracy. They watched the governance sides. They watched the parties. They made their decisions. They decided what they wanted to do, who they believed and who they didn’t believe, who demonstrated action that they supported and who didn’t. They got involved. They wanted to vote. Now, 11-year-olds may be too young. But 16, though — certainly, I think if we give them the right to drive a car, then we should start looking at that. Should they have the right to vote, as they do in a number of other countries?

There are so many ways we can improve our democracy, so many ways that we can support honesty and accountability. I know our Auditor General does a great job. Many of our committees in this House can increase accountability, can increase participation and can ensure that we deliver honest governments.

One thing I’m excited about is that right now we don’t have one grand party in control of everything, in terms of saying: “We’re the majority. We win. Too bad for the rest of you.” That used to happen in this House. I’ve seen that happen before. We’ve got to cooperate a little bit more. A little more humility. A little bit more willingness to accept when, maybe, we’re wrong. Maybe we get some things right. Maybe we get some things wrong. I hope ministers in this House remember that.

One thing I’ve found really works with voters in my constituency is: if you don’t know something, tell them. They’re actually quite floored and say: “What? A politician not pretending to know everything? A politician willing to ask for advice?” That is the basic that you’d expect from anybody. But sometimes we get elected to this place, and we think we’re smarter than everyone else in the world. We fall on our faces, as we should. It’s better to be humble, to admit when you don’t know everything and to make some changes.

S. Gibson: Thank you for those remarks. I appreciate them and the points about younger people getting involved in elections. I remember when I was first elected to local government. I was 28. The next youngest person was 56.

Interjection.

S. Gibson: Yes, that’s right, back when I was a little younger than you, even.

One of the things that I do believe in is that we have to engage younger people. Cynicism is high. I think that’s one of the things we tend to agree on. We’ll talk to younger people. I have a couple of daughters. I wish younger people were more involved. I agree with the remark.

I think the topic, honesty and integrity, goes to heart of why we’re here. All of us have that mandate to represent our constituents.

It’s my honour to come back here for a second term. A number of you have served here for many, many years. My colleagues here just elected, very first term, from Coquitlam–Burke Mountain, Kootenay East and Peace River North. I’m surrounded by some excellent members. We’ve got some great new fresh faces here. What a privilege it is to serve with them.

I think if you have to talk about honesty and integrity, you almost need to be worried. It should be something that comes naturally to us. Yet, as I’ve remarked a moment ago, there are many countries in the world that don’t have the honesty and integrity that we have here. Of course, there’s a suspicion that the elected officials even have the mandate to serve. It’s a great topic and, perhaps, timely.

We’re thankful to serve here as elected representatives. My folks in the Abbotsford-Mission riding entrusted me to be their ambassador here of their issues and concerns. A privilege, again, to be here.

We’ll look forward to hearing more discussions in due course.

[10:50 a.m.]

THE IMPORTANCE OF B.C. FERRIES
TO ISLAND AND COASTAL COMMUNITIES

N. Simons: The importance of B.C. Ferries to island and coastal communities. Saying that B.C. Ferries are important to island and coastal communities is like saying that a bridge is important to the North Shore or a railway is important to Prince Rupert or the highway is important to Dawson Creek. It’s obvious.

As British Columbians, we’ve always been willingly paying for the transportation infrastructure that benefits our province. Every highway going through any town is important to that community. B.C. has always paid for ferries, airports, highways, bridges, railcars, rapid transit. We’ve all paid for the transportation infrastructure that gets people to where they need to go and goods and services to their markets and customers.

We have huge geographic challenges here in B.C. with our diverse geography, ranchlands, glacier-topped mountain ranges, deep fjords and inlets, boreal forests, mighty rivers, rainforests, lakes and about 10 percent of Canada’s coastline. So the importance of our ferries can’t be overstated. Our communities rely on them. We’re not ferry-dependent; we’re ferry-reliant. Without them, our communities would become isolated. Our goods and services arrive on the ferry. We take the ferry to visit families, to attend events, to visit the doctor. Our goods and services go from the coast to their markets via the ferry. Our industries — forestry, mining, aquaculture, pulp and paper — all rely on ferries. Our economy is dependent on the movement of goods, and good public policy should reflect their importance.

The point of this motion is to make the case that the importance of ferry policy should be reflected in the needs of the communities they serve. A community becomes less accessible when it becomes harder and more expensive to get to it. According to the chairs of the 13 ferry advisory committees, the impact of increasing fares, combined with decisions around service reductions, have been having an increasingly devastating impact on our communities. I want to give the ferry advisory committees all the credit for keeping on top of this issue for so many years. I know that their submissions have often seemed to be ignored, but I sense that there’s a change of mood, a change of attitude, in the offing.

For one, we have the upcoming fare reductions and the restoration of seniors discounts. These are major steps towards acknowledging the importance of ferries as much as they’re in response to successive reports telling us that increasing ferry fares are stifling our economies. B.C. Ferries recovers 92 percent of its operating costs through ferry fares. In comparison, Washington state recovers about 66 percent of their costs this way. B.C. Transit only recovers about 33 percent, and Calgary Transit, 50 percent. The Alaska Marine Highway recovers 25 percent from their fares.

Residents of ferry-reliant communities have been carrying an unfair burden. I’m looking forward to fare reductions and the restoration of seniors discounts coming in the new fiscal year, and like many in our ferry-reliant communities, I’d rather not have to wait.

Medical travel. Besides fares and the number of sailings servicing our communities, there are other aspects of the service that reinforce the importance of good public policy. Community members often use ferries to attend medical appointments on the Lower Mainland or on Vancouver Island because specialists and their services are not available locally. The travel assistance program gives patients a form allowing them free travel as long as appropriate paperwork is completed ahead of time.

I contend that people travelling with this TAP form, as it’s called, should automatically be given assured loading. It’s possible under the current system, but it’s fraught with problems, as illustrated by a constituent.

“Last week I had to travel to Vancouver on short notice for urgent medical tests. To get there on a Tuesday, it meant I had to travel on a holiday Monday. During the 5½-hour wait at the Langdale terminal, the third ferry of the day, I phoned customer service, who told me I could have arranged assured loading, but they needed my name, the reason for my travel, what kind of treatment I was receiving, my address, a description of my car and the terminals that I would be using at departure. B.C. Ferries would then send a letter, which you’d present at the booth.”

The constituent continues.

“This procedure doesn’t work for urgent travel or unscheduled illnesses. The information required is an invasion of privacy. If you or your escort’s vehicle is unavailable, the letter becomes useless. If an appointment is changed from one hospital to another, the terminals listed become wrong and the letter no longer works.”

The cost of administering this program is probably unjustifiable, and I’ll be urging that those with the ability to make the rule changes do so, so that people who are travelling for medical reasons will be assured loading.

Reservations. Another issue that underscores the importance of ferries to our communities is the concern over the reservation system. They might have seemed like a good idea to some at the time when they were introduced, but concerns were raised by residents with how much of our deck space would be allowed to be reserved.

[10:55 a.m.]

Many were reassured that it would be capped at 15 percent. But now, on busy days, people who can afford an average of an extra $16 to reserve one way do so, leaving regular citizens of our communities with a de facto increase in the cost of living and more barriers to travel. Increasing the number of sailings would reduce the need for reservations, but B.C. Ferries is making money on us. Reducing the number of sailings has made reservations almost essential.

At noon yesterday, I called to see the situation on the Sunshine Coast route, Langdale to Horseshoe Bay. On Sunday afternoon, the 1:05 sailing was full at noon. The 2:40 was almost 50 percent full. The 3:25 had already been 40 percent accounted for, the 5:30 was 40 percent full, and the 7:35 was already 33 percent capacity.

Let’s take the 2:40 as the example. If half the deck space was reserved…. The Queen of Surrey can accommodate about 362 cars, so 173 had reservations. Averaging $16 a car, B.C. Ferries collected $2,768 solely on the reservation costs. Let’s presume, then, that on half of the Sundays of the year, half the deck space of the 2:40 sailing is reserved. This represents $71,000 in revenue per year, extra, just on one sailing, half of the time.

If I use this same calculation for all four sailings yesterday, which were, on average, 40 percent reserved — 145 cars on four sailings, so 580 cars, averaging $16 a car — that amounted to $9,280 yesterday, or $241,280 for half of the Sunday afternoon sailings a year.

There’s been a lot of policy implemented over the last 16 years that will need time to help undo. I look forward to my colleague’s remarks from West Vancouver–Sea to Sky and my opportunity to respond to them when the time comes.

J. Sturdy: Thank you to the member. I think he knows I will generally agree with him on some of these issues.

He knows for my whole life I have been a creeker — a Roberts Creeker, that is. I remember sitting on the beach as a little kid listening to my parents bemoan the ferries — the inefficiencies, the traffic, the tourists plugging everything up. “And what about the fact that the Sunshine Coast is on the Mainland, don’t you know. Why isn’t there a road?” And that debate continues.

My family has been on the Sunshine Coast, and remains on the Sunshine Coast, for the past 80 years — 80 years of ferry travel. So the member knows that I am not going to dispute the importance of B.C. Ferries to the people on the coast, because to me, it is very personal.

B.C. Ferries is in a good place right now. It’s one of the largest ferry operators in the world, with year-round service — 24 routes, 47 terminals moving people and goods, 21 million passengers last year, eight million vehicles, 172,000 sailings. Pretty much 90 percent on-time performance and trending up. Named a top employer in British Columbia for innovation and employee development.

Traffic has been growing at almost 5 percent a year. Vehicle and passenger numbers at levels not seen in over 20 years — 20 years, Member. Passenger approval ratings of almost 90 percent, in spite of what the member opposite says.

Ferry Services is working in communities, investing in them. Like on Thetis Island, where they worked with the community on scheduling improvements, realized savings and invested those savings right back into the island. This is good for everybody.

Speaking of investments, the last 15 years of B.C. Liberal government have seen newer vessels, an overall lowering in the age of the fleet, reducing costs, reducing GHG emissions through dual-fuel ferries. Innovative cable ferries — which some members didn’t support — will save $40 million over the life of that vessel. New terminals, safer seismic floating terminals. Efficiencies and separations of walk-ons from vehicle loadings, like what is happening in the member’s riding right now, in Langdale, to improve the efficiency and on-time performance.

Their plans for significant continuing reinvestment, at least for now. More new vessels. A plan to continue reinvesting savings into additional sailings, which have been added significantly in the last while. POS reservations. Length-of-vehicle options. Improved customer loyalty programs, over and above the experience card, etc. But B.C. Ferries is, in fact, an expensive and complex service. It does cost money. I wonder if you have any sense of what that operating expense is per year.

[11:00 a.m.]

Well, it’s a lot of money. It’s almost three-quarters of a billion dollars per year — well, $726 million in operating expenses last year. For comparative purposes, I do want to point out…. I propose a question to the House. I wonder if the House recognizes what it costs to run the whole highway network in British Columbia, all 47,000 kilometres of network. Well, I’ll tell you. It’s $491 million to operate the whole highway system. It’s an interesting comparison — a third less to run the whole highway system than it is to run the ferry system. Interesting comparison.

But this new government is planning to handicap that ferry corporation right out of the gate — throw a spanner in the works at a time of unprecedented passenger and vehicle demand. The government is planning to reduce fare revenue by tens and tens and tens of millions of dollars, which, frankly, is not good public policy. Seems it’s a new modus operandi: cut revenues without a plan. At least, there doesn’t seem to be any plan for replacing these revenues. Arbitrarily announcing an intention to cut fares, informing the corporation through the media — and no consideration of implications.

By reducing revenue, government is creating the potential for overloads, congestion and terminal chaos, and the continual improvement of the service, which has been the case for the last ten years, will cease. To make up the shortfall, the ferry corporation will need to replace those revenues. Through what? Oh, maybe the old chestnut of raising taxes to provide a larger subsidy. Or they can eliminate sailings or do what the NDP did last time, and that’s starve the ferry corporation for reinvestment.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Sturdy: Fair enough, Madame Speaker.

But other than running this corporation into the ground…. It’s a sorry state of affairs, and it’s distressing that we’re moving full steam ahead without a real charted course for improvement.

Deputy Speaker: Member, please take your seat.

N. Simons: As expected, we get an ultrapartisan response to what was simply a statement about the importance of ferries to our communities. Despite the fact that it’s out of order to be partisan in the response, I’d like to take issue with some of the comments that the member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky made, and that is that there’s an idea that in British Columbia, we’re going to pit one region against another. Are we going to complain about the cost of clearing snow from highways in the north? Are we going to complain about the cost of bridges across rivers?

If this member wants to talk about how much the ferries cost compared to the highways that he uses and the Sea to Sky Highway, which he built for $600 million, I think we have some issues to talk about. B.C. ferries are essential…

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Through the Chair, Members.

N. Simons: …to the hundreds of thousands of people on the Sunshine Coast and on the Gulf Islands and on Vancouver Island, not to mention the other communities that are inaccessible by road. The member seems to forget the fact that there are communities that are supporting economies that contribute to British Columbia. To dispute the simple fact that ferries are important to our communities by talking about how much money they drain from his revenue is, I think, just inappropriate.

There are other issues that could be talked about that would reflect the importance of ferries to our communities, and that’s dealing with the adult fares. The 12-and-overs, under this government, for a long time have been considered an adult. I think anyone in this room realizes that a 13-year-old shouldn’t be paying adult fares.

The experience card is something that is a barrier for people on low income to receive the discounts, because they need to put at least $65 down on those cards before they can use them if they’re just walking on, and $115 if they’re using a car.

The ten-minute cutoff has created an impression that B.C. Ferries are not working with the communities that they represent. I think some of these issues need to be addressed. Unfortunately — well, fortunately — now that member in opposition, I’m hoping that he can actually speak for the citizens that he represents in opposition and encourage this government, as I will be doing, to ensure that the services remain viable and that our economies remain viable because of the importance of B.C. ferries. That’s simply the point that I was hoping to make.

I understand that the ferries are expensive, because boats are expensive. But travelling to our communities is essential, and I think that needs to be recognized by the opposition. The time of pitting one community against another, one region against another and one form of transportation against the other is over. I’m glad to be part of a government that recognizes that.

[11:05 a.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, private members’ time on Monday mornings is characterized by non-partisan debate. I would ask each member to reference standing rule 25B and, should further guidance be required, page 61 of your standing rules. Thank you.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of this House is required to proceed with Motion 5 without disturbing the priority of the motions proceeding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 5 — SUPPORT FOR RURAL B.C.

C. Oakes: Today I stand proudly to move a motion to support a strong rural British Columbia.

[Be it resolved that this House continues to support a strong rural B.C.]

Last year during break week, I was proud to hold a community opportunity session to look at ways for our region to diversify. Over the break week this year, I met with constituencies affected by this difficult summer. On the Tuesday I held an MLA listening forum and invited agencies from throughout the community to meet and listen to people working in all of our vital sectors.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

The audience included people from Work B.C., the city of Quesnel economic development committee, the chamber of commerce, Rotary, AC&D, school district, friendship centre and the Community Futures of Cariboo North. From these discussions, what has become clear and evident, what I think is critical to the success of our region, will be an approach to help people directly, not just a focus on community.

We need to look at how to diversify existing programs, such as the rural dividend, to look at how we can support, for example, small businesses — small businesses like guide-outfitters and trappers — to diversify their businesses that will take a generation for habitat renewal. Forms need to be made available immediately for the agricultural sector to apply for the AgriRecovery program. This work needs to begin today. Work needs to happen this fall. I can tell members, as I was leaving on Sunday, it did feel like snow.

We need to work with the federal government and the provincial government on expanded programs, like the job creation partnership, to support the agricultural sector to get the important work done.

There is an opportunity, as well, for the provincial government to work with western diversification to look to enter into new agreements with Community Futures, similar to programs like Small Business B.C., to support enhanced business development and loan referrals. We need to resolve the fee deficiency we’re experiencing and look at the development of new small-scale dams to fight the effects of drought.

The tourism sector requires support on expanding their shoulder season this year, and they’ll require immediate support on management plans in areas where their operations have been critically impacted this summer by wildfires. This means more people and resources on the ground.

We need to look at small-scale salvage, working with communities on the land base and having a way to ensure that locals have access to this important work. There is a critical need to ensure that forest service road information becomes integrated into the Drive B.C. network to provide reliable agency information for communities.

We need to review industry classifications under the Wildfire Act. We need to develop a clear manual for fire evacuation for land-based resource sectors like agriculture and plaster, including firefighting training manuals for local ranchers and farmers.

But above all, we need compensation for individuals without insurance who lost property, structures and, above all, their livelihood, as well as support for the many others affected in our communities.

On the infrastructure side, we require better cell service and enhanced weather stations, and we should be implementing the agricultural centre of excellence that developed out of last year’s community opportunity session.

I entered into politics in 2005 as a city councillor, as I knew how important diversification would be for the region of Cariboo North, due to the downturn of the annual allowable cut due to the mountain pine beetle. At the time, pine beetle represented the greatest threat the forest sector had ever faced. Despite all the damage and uncertainty caused by the pine beetle, we made it through by working together. I call upon the same spirit of cooperation now.

My family has a long history in the Cariboo. Living through the Depression gave my great-grandparents a great perspective. I can hear my great-grandmother’s voice, always at the back of my mind, how truly fortunate we are to live in a region of such incredible abundance.

[11:10 a.m.]

This resource abundance has helped to build not just the Cariboo but the entire province of British Columbia. For generations, rural British Columbia has funded great development in urban settings. Now our people need support. We need help to transform. We are resilient, and we are strong, and with the support, we will continue to build British Columbia.

I was proud last year when we talked about bringing people together to work with our First Nations. When the Southern Dakehl Nation Alliance announced they were able to support and bring forward start-up projects focused around transformation and training, I knew these projects would be critically important to the entire region to have the potential to provide thousands of new jobs.

First Nations communities have been terribly impacted by the fires. Like all of us in the Cariboo, they need hope. We all do. They are counting on us, and they deserve our immediate attention.

J. Rice: As the MLA for North Coast and someone who lives in rural B.C., I’m well aware of the challenges that rural British Columbians face.

However, I’m also really aware of the fact that we are interdependent. Rural B.C. and urban B.C. are interdependent of each other. Often there is a message of this rural-urban divide, which I’ve heard quite a bit lately. I would like to try and get away from that because the urban-rural divide message breaks us apart. It creates anger, competition, and it pits communities against one another.

We saw this type of division under the former Premier, when she called rural residents a ragtag group of people. Elected and hereditary First Nations chiefs and matriarchs and band council members, sports and commercial fishermen, farmers from the Skeena watershed to tidewater were labelled as the forces of no because they didn’t agree with the Premier’s message.

I think as legislators, as members of this House, it’s….

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

Please continue.

J. Rice: As legislators and members of this House, it’s incumbent upon us to build each other up, to uplift all British Columbians, regardless of where they live.

I appreciate the comments from the member opposite. She has quite a list of ideas and suggestions for this new government. In fact, it was rapid fire, and I wasn’t able to digest them all. But I do appreciate constructive suggestions on how we can improve the lives of rural British Columbians.

I do appreciate the angst and the tragedy that her communities and all rural communities have faced this season with the unprecedented number of wildfires. We had over 65,000 people displaced. I appreciate and I recognize the hardships that individuals, that the small businesses that she speaks of, that families encountered. We’re thankful for the firefighters and the emergency responders and the volunteers who kept people safe. Not one life was lost. We’re committed to ensuring the necessary programs and supports are in place to work together on recovery.

The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development is leading the provincial government’s support for First Nations and communities in terms of wildlife recovery. There are four key components of the long-term plan that we’re building: people in communities, economy, environment, and infrastructure and reconstruction. We’re working closely with the federal government to ensure they keep their commitments in supporting British Columbians as we recover from this year’s wildfires.

We are engaging with First Nations and communities to ensure all provincial government agencies are providing the necessary programs and supports to assist wildfire recovery efforts.

A key component of economic recovery is getting timber to mills, as the member opposite was just speaking about. To that end, forestry staff are working closely with licensees and expediting their cutting permits and issuing salvage licences. Timber that was cut down to make fire guards is already being milled. Forestry staff are also prioritizing areas for reforestation, not only to rebuild timber supply for mills but to restore wildlife habitat.

[11:15 a.m.]

These efforts build on other accomplishments to date: $100 million was provided to the Canadian Red Cross to assist with evacuees, and just over $21 million has already been provided to 52,000 individuals. Emergency assistance grants of $1,500 each are being provided to small businesses and not-for-profit organizations in areas that were under evacuation order or areas where they were directly impacted by highway closures.

The Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture has provided $200,000 each to the Cariboo Chilcotin Coast Tourism Association, the Thompson Okanagan Tourism Association and the Kootenay Rockies Tourism Association to help tourism businesses in those regions. Together, the provincial and federal governments have committed $20 million to agriculture producers.

The AgriRecovery initiative will help B.C. ranchers recover from their losses, return to their land and their livelihoods and continue to contribute to B.C.’s economy. This is in addition to the $6 million that the province is already spending to replace damaged fencing along the highways.

J. Tegart: I am pleased to rise in the House today, in support of my colleague’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House continues to support a strong rural B.C.”

Preparing for my comments today, I had the opportunity to think about why I love living in rural B.C. I’ve lived in the small community of Ashcroft since I was six years old, just a few years ago. It’s provided good, family-supporting jobs at the local copper mine, at the railway and through forestry.

Our homes are affordable and within the reach of young families. We have quality, public education. We have a diverse population — young families right through to seniors, who are more than willing to share their wisdom with others. You know your neighbours. The arena is a two-minute drive away for our kids playing hockey. Kids can walk to school, to dance class and to their friend’s house to play for the afternoon.

But rural B.C. also has some challenges. Those challenges include centralization of service to larger population areas. They are also the viability of small businesses that serve our communities as transportation is so easy to go to the city. The other challenge is job creation and diversification.

What I find in our small, rural communities in Fraser-Nicola is that when opportunities knock, we need to answer the door. We don’t get very many opportunities for job creation and big projects. So I would hope that everyone in this House, when we look at those opportunities coming into British Columbia, that we think about the people who have the opportunities for those jobs.

The rural economic development fund, which was created to build, strengthen and diversify rural communities, was expected to support up to 26,000 direct jobs. This was a fund that gave hope to small communities. Often a group of people who had a great idea in a small community just didn’t have the money to put together that business plan or to do the feasibility study. The $10,000 that was granted through that fund was a life-saver for so many of our communities. It is so critically important that we continue that funding to recognize some of the challenges in our small communities.

As everyone in this House knows, we’ve had a horrendous summer — a summer of challenge around wildfires, but that came after a spring of challenge around flooding. The largest fire started in my riding, the Elephant Hill fire. My constituents and I have lived through months of disruptions and hardship — 215 structures completely destroyed. The fires have had an impact on every aspect of life in my riding, from small businesses to forestry, mining, transportation and infrastructure.

But numbers don’t tell the story. The stories of people having 15 minutes to evacuate. What to take? Where to go? How long will I be gone? The many unsung heroes, neighbours helping neighbours who could not find their pets, who did not have transportation, who just needed to know someone had their back.

[11:20 a.m.]

Small businesses had to evacuate, with thousands of dollars’ worth of food in their kitchens — which spoiled during the evacuation. Their employees were laid off. How many of them stepped up to keep rescue workers fed and vehicles fuelled up so that the important work could continue. I have a local market garden that, in a normal summer day, will see 600 cars a day. They sell 500 pies a day. They were seeing 15 to 20 cars a day. Even though they weren’t evacuated for much of that time, there was no traffic.

When we look at how we support rural B.C., I hope that everyone in this House is thinking innovative ideas on how we can actually support individuals and businesses.

We lost the Cache Creek golf course, which for 20 years has been run by a non-profit. As we all know, those are volunteers who run a very, very slim operation to keep something happening in the community. We lost it.

As we look at rural B.C., I hope everybody understands that together we’re stronger.

R. Leonard: When we’re talking about rural B.C., how do we define it? Is it everything outside of Metro Vancouver and Victoria? Is it everything outside of any incorporated city or town or village? Is it defined by urban services or lack thereof? Or is it about the land and the natural resources and opportunities they provide? Or is it about the spirit of the people?

If “rural” is defined by having people working in natural resource industries, then my constituency of Courtenay-Comox is rural. We have agriculture; we have fishing; we have forestry. We also have services that support the people who live and work there, and when we don’t have the necessary services, we expect government to provide access.

What do those industries look like today? Well, agriculture is the cornerstone of the community, but there are challenges. Only a quarter of our agricultural land is being farmed. The average age is nearing 60 for farmers, and we have a whole new generation of young agrarians, many who moved there because of our rich agricultural resource. They’re desperate for the kinds of supports that would grow this industry in this community. I’m very proud that we will work to grow B.C., feed B.C. and buy B.C., so that we have a strong rural B.C. with respect to agriculture wherever it exists in this province.

Like many of you, I was at UBCM last week, and there was a rural forum. Some of the highlights of the things that were raised were the illegal dumping of waste on agricultural land — something that wouldn’t happen in an urban area, of course — and, particularly, no trust in the outcomes based on the professional reliance system. I’ll speak more about that later.

We also know the challenges of fisheries that have been faced in this province, and we’ve waited long enough for a government that would stand up to our responsibilities to save the salmon, the keystone species of our coastal waters. We must move forward to implement the Cohen commission recommendations.

Maybe while we’re talking about the need to support a strong, rural B.C., it’s a good time to highlight the long wait for government to work with First Nations with respect to implementing the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and adopting and implementing the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples. British Columbians deserve a government focused on working with First Nations, not fighting them with our tax dollars in the courts. Success in creating a strong rural British Columbia includes success for First Nations.

We’ve also seen huge changes in our forestry sector. The vast majority of job gains reported this year have been in the Lower Mainland, while job losses in the natural resource sector have decimated communities. On Vancouver Island and the coast, 6,800 forestry jobs were lost between 2001 and 2014. That’s a 41 percent cut in good-paying, family-supporting jobs.

[11:25 a.m.]

And 68 mills have closed between 2001 and 2011. I only recall hearing about one new mill being built in the last few years, in the Lower Mainland. Our local Field Sawmills shuttered its operations in 2005. Workers in the forests have been decimated to only a handful of loggers. The impacts of the increase in raw log exports can be seen on our bare mountainsides. Citizens worry that the logging practices in our watershed have resulted in many long boil-water advisories.

My community has been very vocal in expressing their distrust in a regulationless environment and also their distrust in the undermining caused by the spectre of the conflict of interest from the professional reliance model that we are living in, thanks to the government of the day in the past 16 years.

We know there aren’t enough boots on the ground to oversee inventorying, silviculture, sustainable logging plans. I’m quite pleased, and so is the community, to know that there is going to be a review of that professional reliance model to increase transparency and restore public trust. Sustainable forestry practices need focus, attention and oversight.

I’d also like to talk a little bit about services.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

M. Polak: I thought it was very important for someone who doesn’t live in a rural riding to get up and speak to this motion and try to highlight, for those people who live in more urban areas, the reason why it’s so important for those of us in government and those of us living our daily lives in more urban communities to support the success of rural British Columbia.

Over the years, I have had occasion to live in some fairly rural places, but my home has always been on the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. My daughter currently lives right in downtown Vancouver, and I have many friends who live in downtown Vancouver and other very urban environments on the Lower Mainland.

Much has been said about the so-called rural-urban divide. I would rather characterize it as the rural-urban misunderstanding. I dare to say it is more pronounced in urban centres than it is in rural ones. Very often, our urban sensibilities are developed largely based on an ignorance of how our economy runs and an ignorance of how life in rural British Columbia affects us in our daily lives in urban British Columbia.

I want to start by taking that illustration toward Site C, for example. If you live on the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, you can hardly escape daily conversations about what our world will be like once everyone owns an electric vehicle. What will our world be like when more and more of the services now provided through natural gas and other more destructive means become converted to electricity?

Take, for example, the expansion of use of electricity that could make such a difference in many of the industrial centres in urban British Columbia, including the port of Vancouver, where they are certainly on the leading edge of cleaning up the operations of that port. But even more could be planned with respect to the use of clean hydroelectric power.

In fact, it’s projected that demand is going to increase by almost 40 percent over the next 20 years, potentially, especially if we expand our fleet of electric vehicles for everyday use, potentially leaving us in a severe deficit position with respect to our electricity production. That is where an issue like Site C comes home to people in urban British Columbia.

They’re not thinking about it that way. They are thinking merely about the price you pay whenever you develop a large project in an environment such as British Columbia, where we all take the beauty and the splendour of our province so very seriously. But every development has a cost, and we all, as a society, must try to balance the costs of those large developments with the ability for us to provide what those benefits are.

[11:30 a.m.]

If you went to wind turbines, for example, which is suggested, you would still need to have another power source to firm up that intermittent power. That means you still need something else. Is it going to be hydroelectric? Well, if it’s not, it’s going to end up being dirtier electrical production from other places that we will import from.

Even if you got past that, just to build the wind turbines that those who live in urban British Columbia think would be the answer to all of our electricity needs, you still need rural British Columbia. You still need to mine the ore that you are going to use to make the steel for the rebar that you need to build a large wind turbine. Oh, and by the way, what do you need to make that steel? You need coal, metallurgical coal that we mine in British Columbia — which not that long ago, the Vancouver city council spoke out against the production of. So there go your wind turbines.

What else do you need? You need aluminum. The encasement of the operations of a wind turbine at the very top — aluminum. You have to mine the ore. You have to run the smelter. Those are not the kinds of things — a smelter, for example — that any of us want to see located in our urban environments. Oh no, we’d never want to see that happen, yet it’s a product not only used in a wind turbine, which we all seem to support in urban British Columbia, but aluminum is a product that we use each and every day in our lives in urban British Columbia.

Then there’s the connection that people also don’t make in urban British Columbia, and that’s the jobs.

D. Routley: It gives me pleasure, and it’s an honour, to speak to this motion, that this House support the development of rural communities. I’d like to speak to that topic from the perspective of a lifelong Vancouver Islander and also from examination through the lens of three different subjects.

Before I do that, Vancouver Island and coastal communities, the Gulf Island communities are considered rural by most British Columbians, and they are. But collectively, the communities of the upper coast, Gulf Islands and Vancouver Island comprise 765,000 people.

That’s one-fifth, 20 percent of the population of this province. And 27 percent, nearing 30 percent, of the province’s gross domestic product is developed in those communities, generated in those communities. So it’s not that the communities that are represented by MLAs from the Island and the coast and the Gulf Islands are small. Individually they may be, but collectively, their impact is very large.

They deserve consideration simply beyond the principle of fairness. They deserve consideration based on the weight that they pull in generating an economy in British Columbia and keeping people living and happy. These are important aspects of life on Vancouver Island.

I’d like to examine three things: forestry first, then schools and education funding, and then ferry fares.

Firstly, with the forestry industry, in the early 2000s, the beginning of the B.C. Liberal government, the forest industry was disintegrated. That doesn’t mean it disappeared. It was disintegrated. It was integrated before that time, where the logging led to sawmilling. The by-products of sawmilling supported a pulp and paper industry. Those things were symbiotic. They were difficult to manage but have become impossible to manage, given the disintegration that occurred at that time.

That disintegration included deregulation, which led to a massive increase in deaths in the forest industry. They went from an average of around 20 deaths per year to 47 deaths the year after the deregulation occurred. I attended the coroner’s inquest into the death of a faller where one of the contributory causes of his death was listed by the coroner as deregulation.

That’s the kind of support communities have been used to over the past 16 years with the previous government. That is about to change. We’re working hard to make the communities the focus, and that will be the driving factor in all of our decision-making. That means listening to rural communities.

The worst impact economically has been the massive increase in the export of raw logs. In 2013, 6.7 million cubic metres of raw logs were exported. The highest total during the ’90s was under 900,000 cubic metres, or one-seventh of the 2013 total.

[11:35 a.m.]

The important part of that number to us living on Vancouver Island or on the coast is that 30 percent of the harvest from coastal communities is being exported as a raw resource. That leads directly to job loss. We’ve lost 6,800 forestry jobs between ’01 and 2014 — a 41 percent drop, 4,000 jobs in wood and paper manufacturing alone.

We’ve seen 68 forest mills close. The number of large mills operating on the coast has fallen by 17, or 47 percent, and their sawmilling output has fallen by 52 percent. This only leads to more export of raw logs as they become surplus to the needs of the ever-dwindling number of mills. The mills in my own constituency are directly affected by this and have had to idle their mills in order to cope with a loss of fibre. The Coastland Industries in Nanaimo, Harmac pulp mill in Nanaimo and several other operations in the constituency I represent have been starved of fibre and, therefore, jobs in the future.

B.C. is inefficient, unfortunately. We require 4½ times as much wood to support one forest job compared to Ontario and three times as much fibre to support one job as compared to Quebec. These are statistics that need to be turned around, and this government, the new government, is determined to do that.

Then we look at schools. In rural communities, we were impacted very significantly by a funding formula that penalized small schools. The previous government moved to a per-student funding model, which has devastated our schools.

S. Bond: Last week hundreds of locally elected officials from every corner of British Columbia gathered in Vancouver for the annual Union of B.C. Municipalities meeting. I, like other MLAs, was very proud to join mayors, councils and regional district representatives at workshops, plenary sessions and ministerial meetings.

UBCM provides every community with the opportunity to bring their ideas, their concerns and their asks to the provincial government. But in my view, it’s of particular importance to rural and remote communities, who simply may not have the access to government that many larger cities do.

One of the clear messages that many of the villages and regional districts delivered was the need to invest in training closer to home in order to ensure that we continue to have strong and growing rural communities. While this isn’t a new or surprising ask, it’s an important one.

Rural communities have always grappled with their ability to recruit and retain professionals. Training closer to home offers a perfect way to change that. A good example of that was the decision to train physicians outside of the Lower Mainland of British Columbia for the first time in B.C.’s history.

Hundreds of students have benefited from the northern medical program, with many of the students who successfully complete the program making a choice to live, to stay, to work in rural or remote communities. Not only students from around the world have come to take the program, but in many ways, more importantly, it has allowed exceptional local students to stay home and take their training, increasing our chances of keeping them in the north, where we so desperately need them.

It’s not just physicians. There have been significant increases to the number of training spaces for nurses. There has been a physiotherapy program added, in partnership with UBC. There have been medical training programs at the College of New Caledonia. The list goes on.

We have first-class post-secondary institutions in northern B.C, we have the capacity, and we have a need for more regional training opportunities. While much progress has been made, there is more to be done. The model of training that existed in this province for decades, where the vast majority of professionals are trained in the Lower Mainland, simply has not worked for rural British Columbia.

The northern medical program took a new approach, and it’s making a difference. The training of health care professionals must continue to be a priority for all of the members of this House. The infrastructure that’s in place for the northern medical program, the demonstrated need and the major challenge with recruitment and retention provide very compelling reasons for ongoing investment and expanded training options.

[11:40 a.m.]

One of the critical factors escalating the need for training closer to home is the aging demographic across virtually every sector, including health care. As our professionals retire, or in fact have retired, we have to build on the investments made and increase the number and types of options available.

Let’s quickly look at two areas for consideration. I think all of us in this House recognize the role that physiotherapists play in the health care continuum. They are essential members of a comprehensive health care team. Studies have shown that there is a shortage of physiotherapists, not just in British Columbia but in Canada, and the majority of physiotherapists are employed in urban areas. Those concerns are acute in regions like the one I live in.

While we have a rural cohort in place now, there are simply not enough spaces to meet the demand. UNBC has the ability to host a stand-alone physiotherapy program, and I, like our local governments, want to encourage the government to consider that a priority.

As we look to improve care for seniors in our province…. We agree with the government that this does need to be a priority, and we support the work they intend to do, but we need to recognize that with increased hours of care comes the need for trained staff to do that work.

Again, we see in rural and northern communities shortages of trained care aides. I met with service providers recently who shared the significant challenges they face in having the staff they need to do this essential work. Programs are in place, but these programs require increased space to meet the growing demand.

Strong rural communities, like urban communities, rely on having the professionals they need in core areas like health care. Training closer to home is an effective way to ensure those needs are met. Our local government representatives made powerful presentations to government about this issue. Today, I want to show my support and urge the government to build on investments made in programs like the northern medical school.

R. Kahlon: I want to thank the member for Cariboo North for bringing forward this motion.

Also, I agree with the member for Langley — only the beginning intro, regarding the importance of people that are not from rural communities to speak on this issue.

I’ve spent a lot of time in the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin’s backyard. I’ve got lots of family and friends who live in Likely, Horsefly and Williams Lake, and I’ve got fond memories as a young child going there. I’ve spent quite a bit of time over the last few years, in my previous role, travelling to those areas.

I also am fortunate that I play on a ball hockey team where 75 percent of the players are from rural B.C., a lot of them from Williams Lake, some from Quesnel, some from Mackenzie. We often have these discussions. Their families moved to the Lower Mainland for various reasons. We’ve had some discussions, so I thought it would be an opportunity to share some of the things that I’ve heard from them and some of the challenges that we face in rural B.C.

First off would be around education. We’ve seen some real challenges with the funding model and what that has meant to some of the schools in Williams Lake, and we’ve heard from Oliver and other places over the last few years especially. We’ve seen some school closures and then some not-school closures right before the election. We’ve seen a bit of instability in the school system. That has an effect on many levels, and I’ll come back to that.

Just on ELL and adult basic education alone, we’ve seen some significant challenges when the government brought in the higher fees and since the tuition was introduced. I saw a stat that just jumped out at me. English language students and advanced adult basic education enrolment dropped 35 percent the moment that those fees came in. Often, those are workers who are looking to transition, perhaps shifting careers. It’s also people looking to contribute and become part of the economy in rural communities, not to mention the Lower Mainland as well. So that piece really jumped out at me.

What I’ve heard from some of my friends, as well as when I travelled up there, is there are some challenges on health care. The member from Prince George just spoke about physiotherapists. I know that’s an issue in all of the hospitals that I got a chance to visit in my previous role.

[11:45 a.m.]

How do you attract physiotherapists? How do you attract doctors? There was a case at South Okanagan General Hospital where they had to shut down the hospital. On Friday nights, they just put up a sign saying: “The hospital will be shut down. We have a doctor shortage.” How do we ensure that those professionals are wanting to move to rural B.C. and parts of rural B.C? It’s a serious issue.

On the economic side, I think, is a big issue, just on forestry alone. Since 2001, we’ve seen 25,000 jobs lost in the forestry sector. I talk to my peers who are on my ball hockey team now. A lot of them worked in the forestry sector. When those jobs disappeared, a lot of them and their families moved to the Lower Mainland to find work. Those jobs are critical for the fabric of rural B.C.

We’ve seen some significant challenges, partly, I think…. The member from Cowichan spoke about our practice of using forest products to create jobs. A stat that jumped out at me was that B.C. gets one-quarter as many jobs for a tree that’s cut compared to one-third of, say, Quebec. That leads to significant challenges.

There has been a shortage, I believe, of social infrastructure — talking to my peers in rural B.C. If you don’t have significant health care, say, for older folks who are retiring, if you don’t have high-level education for young workers who want to move there…. How is it that we’re going to build the environment for people to move over to small rural communities to help contribute in the local economy?

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

I think there are some initiatives that we can be taking to support that. I’m proud that we made some announcements around adult education and ELL. I think the MSP cut is going to help folks around, basically, pocketbook issues. More needs to be done. I think the member from Williams Lake made some suggestions really fast. I look forward to hearing more and advancing those as we go on.

T. Shypitka: I am pleased to rise today in support of rural economies. In recent years, we have seen local economies stagnate and suffer because they did not diversify when they were in good financial standing. Once markets turned, their economies suffered, leaving companies and workers very vulnerable.

The rural dividend fund was created to ensure that prosperity in B.C. did not begin and end with a select few but would be spread to all corners of our province so that the financial abundance that we have all worked so hard to create could be shared equally.

As of this past February, over 77 projects in rural B.C. were awarded project development grants totalling $756,591. These grants were provided to ensure that rural communities would receive the boost that they needed to grow and attract new business.

The investments from the rural economic dividend were projected to support over 26,000 direct and indirect jobs, with an impact of $2.8 billion to the provincial GDP. The dividend outlined a clear strategy on how the government was going to provide a long-term action plan to support rural communities, which, in turn, contribute to a more diverse and resilient climate for many B.C. small communities.

I was disappointed to see that the NDP have seemingly forgotten about this important initiative, leaving it out of the budget.

Rural B.C. has contributed a great deal of this province’s success. In my riding of Kootenay East, mining and forestry are two industries that have literally built our communities. For well over 100 years, these industries have provided high-paying jobs that supported families and created smaller businesses to grow.

I’m personally part of five generations that have all been affected directly by these industries. As I have mentioned before in this House, there is one industry alone in my riding that provides over $1 billion to the local and provincial economies. Over 60 percent of that is enjoyed by the residents of the Lower Mainland.

As these industries hinge on the very volatile commodity prices, certainty in a marketplace is a luxury these industries do not enjoy. It is, therefore, very important that certainty in government is something they can trust upon.

[11:50 a.m.]

A couple of years ago, when coal prices took a big hit, it was important that government took a lead to provide support for such an integral part of our rural economy. A deferral on hydro charges enabled these community-building industries to keep in the game. More importantly, it ensured the continuance of family-supporting jobs. It was our former Minister of Energy and Mines, the Hon. Bill Bennett, that introduced that plan. It was well received. This is the foresight by government that is game-changing and virtually important to the resource sector in rural B.C., and it’s something I look forward to working on with government in the future.

A strong B.C. is one that does not forget its roots and it does not abandon its people in times of need. Right now rural B.C. is in a time of need. I understand that it is easy to become desensitized to news stories about forest fires when they are put on repeat for months on end. But the damage that has been caused by the many fires is not just a distant news story for many of my constituents. It’s a part of their daily life. When members on this side of the House have said that entire communities and families have lost everything, we mean it.

Now more than ever, rural B.C. needs their government to take their back and take real action to support them. Putting out the fires was step 1. Now comes the more difficult step of recovery. For small businesses in my riding and many other ridings in rural B.C., they are wondering when they are going to see any actual concrete plan from this government.

Rural members on this side of the House…. I’ll go on to actually a little bit more about my rural riding. We have trappers. We have guide-outfitters. We have ranchers, fishing guides. Essentially, the whole entire tourism sector has been affected by this big hit. Rural members on this side of the House look forward to working with rural members opposite to build a stronger, more sustainable British Columbia.

B. D’Eith: I’m very happy to speak to the motion presented by the member for Cariboo North. I represent an interesting riding. It spans urban, suburban and rural B.C. Maple Ridge and Mission represent a broad representation of the issues that face many British Columbians today.

We have an urban homeless crisis in Haney, but we also had a rural school closure in Stave Falls. We have city water, but we also have agricultural and residential wells on a delicate aquifer in Grant Hill. We have one of two tree farms in British Columbia, the Mission municipal forest, but also have a very busy film industry. We have industrial areas, but a long tradition of agriculture and an amazing farmers market in both Mission and Maple Ridge.

What I see with my community is that, urban or rural, people are facing many of the same issues. Concerns about affordability. Access to services like decent health care and good public schools and stable, well-paying jobs. These are shared by all. In fact, the division between urban and rural needs is really a creation of our friends from across the aisle. Even in asking this question, the member of Cariboo North seems to be continuing this strategy of dividing urban and rural in this province. Well, I can tell you that our government works for all British Columbians, no matter where they’re from.

This year at the Union of B.C. Municipalities conference, I talked to city councillors, mayors and representatives from all over British Columbia. What I heard was interesting. People from the north were concerned about the fears that have been drummed into them by the B.C. Liberals. One councillor from Smithers was really worried about the new mines opening in his area. After meeting with the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, he was excited. He realized that his fears were misplaced, and the minister clearly understood the needs of his people.

In fact, everyone talked — from B.C.’s interior, the Kootenays, B.C.’s north — about the same thing. They felt that the ministers at the UBCM conference were listening to them for the first time in many years.

The Minister of Education talked about building rural schools, not closing them. The Minister of Health talked about increasing medical services and access to doctors in rural B.C., not decreasing services. The Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development talked about this government’s efforts to get a softwood lumber deal with the U.S., which the previous government failed to deliver on.

Of course, there was much talk about the wildfires in B.C. — the worst fires in B.C. ever, a wildfire season that will have profound social and economic impacts on communities both now and in the future, especially in the Cariboo. Our government responded immediately, spending over $500 million fighting the fires. And with the federal government, our government has committed $20 million to help ranchers rebuild their ranches.

[11:55 a.m.]

Moving forward, our government is committed to working with communities throughout British Columbia to help get people and businesses back to normal. That is the message I want to convey. We are working with communities to figure out what their needs are, for every community has different needs, and one size does not fit all. That means listening and trusting that our rural communities know their needs best.

Rural economic development must be driven from the ground, from the local level. This means assisting communities to identify opportunities to plan and move initiatives forward, as well as communicating how our work at provincial levels can fit with local priorities and can best support them. We will engage representatives of rural communities, rural residents and First Nations communities in the development of a rural development strategy. That includes getting advice on provincial-level policies and programs that can effect rural development opportunities.

These are fundamentally and philosophically different approaches from how the previous government did business. We will work with all areas of British Columbia, no matter who represents them in this House. The B.C. NDP is putting people first by listening to what people need. This is how the B.C. government should operate, and this is how our government will ensure that we have a strong rural British Columbia.

B. D’Eith moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.