DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (Hansard) - February 27, 2006
J. Horgan: I thank all of my friends in the House for that robust applause.
Before we get going, I just wanted to quote from the member for Peace River South, who said during his remarks today: "We're all friends with different ideas." I certainly feel a kinship with the member, but as I look at many of my friends from the executive council along the way, I'm not certain that they hold me with the same level of camaraderie that you do. Nonetheless, I'm very pleased to see the Minister of Revenue here to keep me on my toes over the next half an hour while I make my remarks on the children's budget that was tabled last week by the Minister of Finance.
I would like to make a couple of comments about the remarks made by the Minister of Economic Development, if I could. He touched on a few of the items that make for a robust economy. He talked about commodity prices; he talked about interest rates. He didn't mention federal transfer payments, which of course we'll all remember were constricted during the 1990s by the then Minister of Finance, the outgoing Prime Minister, Mr. Martin. In a bid to purchase the office of Prime Minister, he increased transfer payments after 2001. Before that, they were shrinking, and they were shrinking significantly. So that's one that perhaps the Minister of Economic Development could put on his list of reasons why the economy is so robust today.
He didn't talk about our natural advantages here in British Columbia either. He didn't talk about our access to markets. He didn't talk about our fantastic port facilities, and I know the Finance Minister is an expert on our ports - certainly in Vancouver - and over time will become knowledgeable on our ports in Port Alberni and Prince Rupert.
There are significant natural advantages in our economy that are assisted when there is an upturn in commodity prices. We're a resource-based economy, always have been, and we're in the process of transition. That transition began in the 1990s, which some would like to call a decade of doom and gloom. Certainly, just about every single person on that side of the House makes sure to mention it in their remarks. This is probably passed down from the chief of staff to the Premier: "Make sure you say something bad about the NDP when you are on your feet or you're wasting your time in the Legislature."
I'd like to think, as my friend from Peace River South sets the example, that we would take a higher road when we're having these discussions. Certainly, we all in this place want to see a robust economy. We want our communities to grow. We want to see our children thrive and prosper in the education system, in the post-secondary education system and beyond that in the workplace. These are things that we all want to see, and I'm confident that the members opposite, if they would leave the 1990s where they are, as a piece of history, and focus their attention on the future....
Interjections.
J. Horgan: You don't want them to come back. There are my friends who just have different ideas over there. Thank you very much. I thought for a moment you were going to be silent for the whole four minutes of my preamble here.
Interjection.
J. Horgan: Okay. Thanks a lot for that. I recall that the member from Comox wasn't here during the '90s.
Hon. S. Hagen: In '91 I was.
J. Horgan: Yeah, '91, on the way out the door. That's another thing I wanted to touch on, but perhaps later in my remarks.
A couple of other issues that the Minister of Economic Development failed to mention. The Olympic bid. We've all been embracing the Olympic bid over the past number of weeks and months and years, and it was an NDP government that started that bid. Certainly, I know the Premier does give credit where credit is due when pressed. If only the members on the other side would recognize that public policy is a river. It didn't start in 2001. It didn't start in 1991. It's an evolutionary process. All governments of all stripes over the course of history in British Columbia have added to the totality of our regulations, which the Minister of Revenue likes to dispatch....
We started the Olympic bid. We kick-started the oil and gas boom in the Peace, and I know that the member for Peace River South will acknowledge that. In fact, it was this government that retained, I believe, the former member for North Coast.... I think I can use his name. He was a Premier; he was a minister. It was Dan Miller. He's heading up the competition bureau for the government across the way.
During the 1990s he was the minister of everything. He was responsible for all the doom and gloom, yet good enough to get a job with those guys. I don't see a disconnect there. Maybe the member for Peace River South, through you....
Interjection.
J. Horgan: There were slow years of infrastructure development at the end of the 1980s. The member for Comox Valley would be aware of that. The NDP government of the 1990s had targeted tax breaks for film, biotech and high-tech, and started infrastructure development during that time.
My last word on the '90s for today is that it wasn't all that bad. It wasn't all that bad. You build on your successes. That's what the Minister of Finance has done.
I want to take a moment to talk about two items within the budget speech that I applauded on the day, and I got odd looks from my colleagues. I want to read out portions of the minister's speech. "Effective April 1, 2006, the foster parents' transportation allowance will be increased by 50 percent." That's an excellent policy. Long overdue, and I applaud the minister for doing that.
I have, obviously, a number of foster parents in my constituency - some of them very close friends of mine. I'd like to name them at this point. Darlene and Calvin Younger. Kim Dupont, who started Dads in the Hall - an organization in my community that's committed to trying to take kids off a bad track and put them on the right track - a foster parent for 22 years. Sandy and Rob Case, foster parents with.... It seems every time I see them they've got seven or eight different kids in baskets or bunnies, and they're walking them around. A 50-percent increase in their transportation allowance is a good piece of public policy. I applaud the minister for that.
The other point I want to make today - of the two that I want to make that are favourable of the budget - was this portion of the speech. It's only half a thumbs-up. I would have liked to have given it a full thumbs-up, and I did thump on my desk as the minister was speaking, but sadly, I didn't wait for her to finish her remarks because I left it with a frown after that.
It goes as follows, and the Minister of Economic Development touched on this: "This includes expanding the BladeRunners program, which currently operates in Vancouver, Victoria and Nanaimo. It offers youth at risk a chance to enter construction trades with on-the-job preapprenticeship training." At that point I started pounding on my desk, but this is where I became sad. I know the Minister of Finance wasn't here at the time, so it must have been a historic record that was brought to her attention by some of the sharp wits in the Premier's issue management office. She finished that paragraph by saying: "The program was scaled back during the '90s when we had a less active construction sector." Well, we started the program in the 1990s. We started the program. It's a good program. I applaud the minister for infusing money into it. It's unfortunate that the rhetoric had to ruin the statement during budget day.
A couple of other things I want to touch on are the roles and responsibilities of all of us in this Legislature. I've had some time to reflect over Christmas since we were last here. As I've been interacting with my constituents - whether they be in high schools or post-secondary education or whether it be in the barbershop where I go to cut what hair I do have on occasion, or just on the main streets of Langford and other portions of my community - I've said to people that my job as a member of the opposition is to hold the government to account.
The job of those on the other side is to take a budget, put it before this Legislature, pass it if they have the numbers to do so and administer the government of British Columbia and all of its agencies, boards and commissions. That's what they do. What I'm supposed to do on this side of the House with my colleagues, my learned colleagues, particularly my colleague for Nelson-Creston, is to hold the government to account.
Going back to the comments of the member for Peace River South, I'm happy to call him my friend who happens to have a few different ideas. But where the whole relationship in this friendship starts to falter is when we get off the track of what our roles and responsibilities are here.
As a historian, I understand the historical record is very important. It will be written and rewritten time and time again, for the next 50, 20.... Who knows how long? We'll be rewriting history for as long as we're in this place. But our job on this side of the House is to take on the Attorney General, to take on the Minister of Revenue and certainly to take on the Minister of Finance. That's what we're supposed to do. I don't hold any animosity toward any of the members on the other side on most days. I'm certain they don't feel any animosity towards me - certainly those that are assembled today. I consider them all to be rosy and happy.
That's our job. I've been going into schools. I've been talking to students, and I've done my level best to not be partisan, because I don't believe that's our job. As we leave this place, we're trying to educate the public, and we're trying to educate the people in our community about the good work that we're all trying to do here, about the good work of the government of British Columbia and the outstanding work of the new robust opposition. This is good.
D. Chudnovsky: That's an example of robustitude.
J. Horgan: Robustitude? Robustitude. It's not as good as repurposing or subsidiarity, but robustitude will work for me. My friend from Kensington has always got a word or two I can use.
The challenge for us on this side of the House - and I heard it a bit today in question period - is a sense of exasperation on the government side: "There they go again." Well, that's our job, people. Get over it, okay? That's what we're going to do every day for the next three years. I suppose I should also take a little bit of my own medicine, and when it starts coming back at me from the other side, particularly from my good friend who I look at every day, the Minister of Revenue, I have to deal with that. But I have to tell you that my constituents....
An Hon. Member: How do you think we deal with it?
J. Horgan: Yeah, not so much.
We've heard a lot of numbers today, and I'm not meaning to make the Minister of Finance blush by bringing this issue up. We've heard a lot of numbers. We've heard numbers for this, numbers for that. Growth is up; growth is down. Revenue is up. We're going to put this much here, this much there. But when I ask my friends at my local barbershop, Sullivan's Barber Shop at the Westbrook Mall in Langford - for all of your haircutting needs....
Interjections.
J. Horgan: Supporting the private sector whenever I can.
I ask them: "What's the number that stands out from the budget?" The number is 600 bucks. That's the number that's resonating in people's minds. That's unfortunate, but that's the nature of the game.
When we were tabling budgets in this place, we had infusions of cash for this and infusions of cash for that. It doesn't resonate with our public. It doesn't resonate with people. What I've been doing since November after we finally got our offices set up.... We're trying to get into a groove here as members of the opposition, trying to hold the government to account. I started going around talking to people. What are the issues that are really important to them? Were they touched upon in the minister's budget speech last week?
Some of them were. As I said, a transportation allowance for foster parents - fantastic idea. Shame it wasn't more. Could there have been an increase in social assistance for single-parent families? Yes, there could have been. I know that the member for Kamloops would have liked to have done that, but apparently there wasn't any room. Fair enough. We're going to call you to task on that, and you're going to have to listen to us day after day after day. Get used to it. That's what we're going to do.
That's it for roles and responsibilities, roles and functions. I think the executive council has got it figured out by now that there are not just two people over here anymore. There are 33, and we come with diverse backgrounds. We come from diverse communities. We are - some rural, some urban, some from business, some from the public sector and some are educators - a wide and diverse group of people on this side, as there is on the other side. Is that serving democracy in British Columbia? I think it is. Do the people in our constituencies feel better about what's going on in Victoria than they did from 2001 to 2005? I think they do.
I know it's my friend from Peace River South's joy to ask himself a question and then answer it, and I think I'll do that for a bit now if I can indulge my friend from Kensington. I think that our public is better served by having a robust opposition and a government that currently is a bit on the ropes, but that's okay.
I know that the member from Comox has kind of bobbed and weaved a little bit. It's been difficult for him, but to his credit he is still hanging in there, taking punches.
Interjection.
J. Horgan: Good on you. Hear, hear.
It's a tough job, a very tough job. He is doing the best he can.
It's unfortunate that decisions were made during the 2001-2005 period that had to be amended by the Minister of Finance's child-friendly budget, but nonetheless, that's what happened. I want to talk a little bit about health care but not to any great extent. We have three critics on our side to deal with that, and certainly, the Health Minister is going to have his hands full dealing with them. I want to touch on a few things.
Recall the Romanow commission. Those of us, certainly, on this side will remember that. Roy Romanow is a learned fellow from Saskatchewan, NDP Premier, Attorney General during the repatriation of the constitution - which might be of interest to the Attorney General. Perhaps not.
Mr. Romanow took a whole bunch of people and travelled around the country and talked to British Columbians about what they wanted to see in their public health care system. As I think back, it was.... How long ago was that? That's right; it was two years ago - three years, if we're in 2006. In 2003 the Romanow commission reported. What happened? Where did it go?
Is it in Lillehammer? I understand that's where the Premier is going. He could look at the recommendations from the Romanow commission - made-in-B.C., made-in-Canada solutions to the challenges we face with an aging population. He could have looked right here. Didn't happen. Doesn't happen here. It's not happening in other jurisdictions. It's certainly not happening with the new Conservative government. That's a shame.
Innovation within the public system is here. It's available; it's ready. You'd certainly have buy-in from this side if the government on that side said: "Let's down tools in this war of partisanship, and let's try and solve the problem." Let's look for solutions right here in British Columbia. Let's talk to health care workers - who we, I would have to say, treated poorly, to be generous, during the 2001-2005 period. Let's talk to them. Let's see what solutions they can offer up to us now to move ahead with revamping public health care for the 21st century.
It's not that tough. I know that my friend from Burrard and my friend for Peace River South and I could sit down and have this thing worked out in no time. Sadly, we'd have to go back and talk to the spin doctors and the handlers, and they'd say: "Oh no, no, no. We can't do that." They'd have to say: "Well no, it wasn't robust in the 1990s. Everyone was sick in the 1990s. No one was healthy in the 1990s."
Interjection.
J. Horgan: My friend from Comox, thankfully, has put me onto another track, because that's important when you are standing up extemporaneously making remarks about a budget that happened some time ago.
I'd like to talk a bit, if I could - through you, Madam Chair, and of course to my friend the Minister of Revenue - about strategic public investments and infrastructure and how they fuel the economy. My friend from Peace River South, who is a soulmate, made reference to that very thing, talking about oil and gas, and road development in his constituency - very important, vital to economic development. It's equally vital in the lower mainland and on Vancouver Island.
I know that my friend the Minister of Community Services will be interested to hear these comments about the importance of infrastructure development in our community here on Vancouver Island. Vancouver Island was and should be the second-most robust portion of the economy in the lower half of British Columbia, but sadly, according to those on the other side, it's not good public policy to invest in New Democrat constituencies.
I want to say that $3 billion for the gateway initiative in the lower mainland.... I don't begrudge a penny of that if it can facilitate economic development and move people around in the lower mainland - $1.2 billion for a RAV line that will take tourists to a train stop that could take them up the Sea to Sky Highway to Whistler for another $800 million. What do we get on south Vancouver Island? We got $8 million for the Dougan Lake stretch, which I'm very thankful for. We got $220,000 for a study of the Malahat Drive. So $8.2 million for the lower Island and $4.8 billion for the lower mainland.
We've been neglected....
Interjection.
J. Horgan: The Minister of Community Services agrees with me that we have been neglected. We've been neglected. It's just delightful to see so much energy. Maybe if the Minister of Finance had more energy in her budget we wouldn't have had to use so much of it today.
We were anticipating energy. We were anticipating an invigorated document, and the only number that sticks in people's minds is 600 bucks. That's a tragedy for the minister, and it's a tragedy for this place, because the work we are all doing here is, by and large, important. It doesn't feel that way to many people in our constituencies, but it feels important to us, so we'll carry on doing it, I suppose.
So $8.2 million for road infrastructure in the lower Island and $4.8 billion in the lower mainland....
Hon. I. Chong: It helps Victoria.
J. Horgan: It helps Victoria, says the member for Oak Bay-Gordon Head. It helps Victoria to spend $4.8 billion in the lower mainland, $8.2 million on the south Island.
I know the member from Comox takes the road. He drives the Malahat, I'm sure, periodically. He would probably, if given the opportunity, speak up in executive council and say: "You know, we need a little bit more money in the lower Island. We need a little bit more money to keep this economy going." As the member for Peace River South said, infrastructure drives the economy. I know the Minister of Revenue agrees with that statement. Why don't we see infrastructure development here? Why don't we see transit development?
We had an announcement today. I was there with local dignitaries. The mayor of Victoria was there, and the mayor of Lake Cowichan - no friends of mine politically, although I guess we are friends with different ideas, as my friend from Peace River South said. We were talking about the Island Corridor Foundation. This is a group of first nations, of municipal leaders who have got together and created a charitable foundation and taken over the E&N corridor. I know the member from Comox is as excited about that as I am, because it puts local ownership of this important transportation link in public hands.
CP Rail, as a term of Confederation, built a rail line on Vancouver Island. That was a good thing. At the time, John A. Macdonald got to come out here. He was the member, I think, for Victoria at that time. I know Port Moody-Westwood is a historian; he might correct me on that. John A. Macdonald was here to bang in the last spike. He may well not have been the member for Victoria at that time, but he certainly had been at some point in that period. So the E&N corridor is important.
Interjection.
J. Horgan: You'll learn a lot from me if you just turn me on and let me go.
Hon. R. Thorpe: I thought you were the Transportation critic.
J. Horgan: Not in 1886.
The Island Corridor Foundation.... Jack Peake, the mayor of Lake Cowichan - again, he sought a Conservative nomination. He's not a political friend of mine, but he's passionately committed to locally owned transportation solutions on Vancouver Island. Today they announced that CP Rail had transferred the corridor to this foundation. It is fantastic news.
A little bit of hallelujahs from my friends?
[Applause.]
Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
Interjection.
J. Horgan: An open mind, constructive criticism from the government.... Well, I'm glad I have your attention, anyway. That's the important thing as we get close to six o'clock.
The E&N corridor is a great opportunity for commuter rail on Vancouver Island. Those members I know, again, the Port Moody-Westwood.... The West Coast Express, although ridiculed when that side was on this side, is full every day. Is it subsidized? Partially. Of course it is; it's public transportation. But it's full every day.
People driving on Highway 1 - are they going to get on the train? I know in my community people would rather be on the train. If you live in Duncan, you can get on a train and be in downtown Victoria in an hour and ten minutes. You get into your car in Duncan at seven o'clock in the morning and it will take you an hour and 45 minutes to get here. You're harried and frazzled when you arrive.
Interjection.
J. Horgan: Productivity would go up, hon. Minister of Revenue, if we could put people on a train from Nanaimo down to Victoria.
They can read their newspaper. They can have their laptops out. They can send some e-mails, and they'll arrive refreshed, perhaps have a cup of cappuccino. Now you don't have to fix the Malahat, because you've got people on the train.
Interjection.
J. Horgan: There you go.
Infrastructure development drives economic development. Again, I continue to agree with my friend from Peace River South, who has somewhat different ideas, but that's the case. That's the fact of the matter. We'll get no disagreement on this side of the House. Positive infrastructure development will increase economic development.
I want to talk about a....
Interjection.
J. Horgan: Perhaps my friend from Nelson can tell me about the lights, because I understand they're various colours, and I don't know what they mean. I can keep talking.
Interjections.
J. Horgan: Yeah, wind it down. Okay.
I want to talk about education capital for a moment, because again it speaks to.... If you elected New Democrats on Vancouver Island, bubkes; if you're elected somewhere else, on that side of the House, money's flowing. Milk and honey in those constituencies, but not in mine.
In school district 62, we have an increase in enrolment, one of the few districts across B.C. with an increased enrolment. We desperately need two new high schools - nada, not a thing, not happening.
I appeal to the Minister of....
C. Evans: Five and a half minutes.
J. Horgan: Five and a half minutes? Thank you very much.
I appeal to the Minister of Education to discuss this with her officials. Of course, I had to go through the Premier's office and meet with the ministerial assistant and vet my questions before I met with public officials. Again, the roles-and-responsibility thing gets a little bit blurred here.
I know my friend from Burrard would endorse my being able to go talk to people to help my constituents. I'm not going into this with malice. I don't want to disrupt the Minister of Education. I want to improve the quality of life in my constituency. It's not to score political points. That's easy enough to do, standing in this place. But when we're interacting with public servants that are being paid by the moneys that were approved, or will be approved, by this coming budget, I believe I should have a right and a responsibility to talk to public servants about improving the lot of my constituents. Not going to happen; got to go through Martyn Brown. Check it out.
Martyn, I'm here. I want to talk to people about my constituency. Why won't you let me do that?
An Hon. Member: Why is that?
J. Horgan: I don't know why that is. But it bugs me - a lot.
An Hon. Member: Can you get that changed?
J. Horgan: I can't get that changed, but maybe the Minister of Finance might put in a good word for us about speaking to public servants, about improving the public lot in our communities.
The last thing I want to talk about.... We're running out of time. I understand I only have about five and a half minutes left. I want to talk about....
Interjections.
J. Horgan: Oh, that was three minutes ago. Yeah. I'm getting the hook from Port Moody-Westwood.
There's an issue brewing in my constituency and constituencies right across this province. It has to do with meat inspection regulations. I want to raise this now, because the Minister of Agriculture, in his response today, spoke glowingly about the agricultural sector, and I support that. The Cowichan Valley has been the breadbasket of British Columbia. It has been in the past, and I'm hopeful it will be in the future - a vibrant agricultural economy. There's enormous opportunity there. Small farmers are being penalized because large, industrial abattoirs are making people sick. Large, industrial abattoirs are putting E. coli and various other things through the system.
We have meat recalls in various large, industrial distributors of meat. But in small locations on Vancouver Island, on the Sunshine Coast, in the Kootenays, there has never been a problem - never been a problem. Well, the Minister of Revenue talks about regulations that stifle and restrict growth and development.
Nothing could be dumber than this one, hon. Speaker. It's very good to see you in the chair. I am happy you could be here for the last couple of moments of my remarks on the budget.
This is an issue of significant importance in my constituency and other constituencies on both sides of this House. We raised it with the minister in estimates last fall as we were finding our feet as new members, and he made a commitment that something would be done. Well, the only thing that's been done - as far as I can tell, based on the volume of e-mails and phone calls I'm getting from disappointed and disenfranchised farmers - is nobody's listening. Nobody is listening. If the Minister of Agriculture would take this issue seriously, I know it would be a great benefit to people in my community.
I've enjoyed this opportunity to talk today. I always do. It's a fun place to be. I enjoy the job. I want to thank my constituents for giving me the opportunity to be in here and say these few words. I also want to go back to my friend from Peace River South, because I came into the House to hear him speak this afternoon because I genuinely believe that his view of what we're doing here is as close to my view as anyone else's on that side of the House.
This isn't a partisan thing. It's not about ideology. It's not about scoring points. It's about doing what we can to improve the lot of the people in our constituency. That's why we all came here, and that - surprisingly, for me - is the most enjoyable part of this job. I get very disappointed and despondent when I have to sit here and listen to rehashes of the 1990s that just aren't consistent with the fact pattern.
Can I say that, Mr. Speaker?
Mr. Speaker: No, you can't.
J. Horgan: I think that's an interesting turn of phrase - "not consistent with the fact pattern." I kind of like that.
Interjection.
Mr. Speaker: Member.
J. Horgan: Not consistent with the fact pattern?
Interjection.
Mr. Speaker: Member.
J. Horgan: Okay, fair enough. Spin. I can say spin.
Anyway, I've enjoyed myself. I see some of the members of the executive council, at least, with grins on their faces, so my time has been well spent. I'll give the floor to whomever on that side wants to stand up and bash the NDP in the 1990s.
