DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (Hansard) - Thursday, February 21, 2008
Response to Budget Speech - J. Horgan    (system requirements)

J. Horgan: It's a pleasure and a privilege again to rise in this place and represent the residents of Malahat-Juan de Fuca in the Legislature and discuss Budget 2008, the greenwashing. "The revenge of the technocrats," I've been calling it back in my community, where innovative and unique policies 30 years hence will somehow miraculously pay the rent in February and March of 2008.

I'm also delighted to follow the member from Port Moody-Westwood whose parents I am proud and honoured to represent in this place, and I know that it comes as a surprise to him, but they have confessed to me that they will be voting for the New Democratic Party in the next election.

I want to mention two individuals who have passed on since I last had an opportunity to speak in a debate such as this, and I appreciate that the throne speech debate has adjourned and will be coming back at some time. But I don't want to miss the opportunity, because His Honour Steven Point mentioned John Webb in his remarks.
John was a public servant here in British Columbia, and he was also a municipal councillor in one of the communities in my constituency of Metchosin. John was an outstanding individual. All I can say about his passing is that the world has lost a good guy. Hon. Speaker, as you know, as we toil here and as we toil in other places, when we're laid to rest, if people say,"There goes a good guy," we've done our bit.

John was an extraordinary man - a renaissance man, a carpenter, a poet, a hard worker and just a generally decent guy. He's greatly missed by his spouse Moralea, his stepchildren, and also the community of Metchosin.

Another individual who passed just recently was Jim London in my community of Langford. Jim was the first mayor of the incorporated district of Langford - now the city of Langford - and was, until his passing in January, a school board trustee. Certainly, I know the Minister of Education has met and knows Jim. He was an outstanding fellow. His contribution to education and public policy is going to be difficult to replace in my community and in fact across the province. So I wanted to acknowledge his passing as well as that of my friend John Webb.

Now with that, I'd like to move on and talk about the issues that I believe are relevant in this debate to the people in my community. As you know, I say this when I stand in this place that Malahat-Juan de Fuca is a vast and diverse constituency that incorporates the south Cowichan, the Cowichan Valley regional district, the communities of Cobble Hill, Cowichan Bay, Glenora, Cowichan Station, Shawnigan Lake, Mill Bay and then down into the capital regional district, representing the district of Highlands, the city of Langford, portions of Metchosin and the unincorporated areas of East Sooke out toward Port Renfrew as well as the district of Sooke.

It's a diverse area where we're seeing rapid development - housing development, commercial development and some light industry as well. It is certainly leading the capital region, my area of Langford, in terms of growth, as is south Cowichan with burgeoning communities of Mill Bay, Shawnigan Lake and touching on Cowichan Bay as well.

The challenge of living in fast-growing communities is that the demand for services goes up year after year. Sadly, Budget 2008 again leaves a disconnect for the people that I represent. It's all well and good for the member for Langara to stand and deliver a speech and talk about all the great and wonderful things that are happening in the greater metropolitan area of Vancouver. Good on the people in the lower mainland. I'm sure they deserve everything they're getting. We have the Olympics coming in 2010. The infrastructure requirements for that are enormous - certainly well exceeding the $600 million price tag that the government has put on that. But they still hold to the fallacy that somehow the circus in February 2010 is only going to cost taxpayers $600 million.

Interestingly enough, in this week's budget the government has committed $300 million in subsidies to oil and gas companies and a $220 million tax cut to large banks. So you're almost at $600 million right there, in one fell swoop. I'm wondering if you can eliminate that revenue in only one short day, how is it that you plan for an event for ten years and only spend $600 million? It's inconceivable to me, but somehow the math on the other side, the sketchy numbers on the Olympic circus that will be coming to our communities in the lower mainland, seems to be part of the mantra from the other side, and they're going to hold to that, regardless of the reality that the people of my community are seeing.

So we have rapid growth. With that comes a requirement for services. There's nothing more important in my perspective than education.

It's spring. Another spring, another round of school closures in the Cowichan Valley and also in the district of Sooke. Right in my community, around the corner from my home, Glenlake Elementary is slated for closure. This is in a community in the Sooke district that has an increasing student enrolment, not a declining student enrolment. Yet because of the skewed and misguided funding policies of the B.C. Liberals, we have a situation whereby education funding provides for individuals, but it doesn't provide for edifices.

If you can't have a school, then you don't have an education community. You need teachers, children, administrators, custodial staff and special needs assistants, and you need a building. You need a place to go. You can't just say: "Hey, let's go to school today. How about we go to Centennial Square in downtown Victoria?" People grow accustomed to going to a community school. This government doesn't seem to pay any heed to that. Glenlake Elementary School is on the chopping block.

In the Cowichan Valley there are two schools - École Mill Bay and Koksilah Elementary. I want to take a few moments to talk about those two schools in particular, because they are unique not just to the valley but potentially to Vancouver Island.

École Mill Bay is a single-track French immersion program that's only been in existence for three years. It's ironic that the program started at Elsie Miles Elementary in Shawnigan Lake. Of course, that school was closed, so they moved the program to École Mill Bay just two years ago. On the day that it was announced they were going to close École Mill Bay, 38 children signed up for kindergarten.

So 38 kids signed up, yet we're going to close the school. This is a program where you've got kids K-to-2. It's going to go from kindergarten to grade 3 next year, and in three years, kids who started in kindergarten at Elsie Miles will be going to their third school, and they haven't even got out of grade 3 yet. That makes a lot of sense to the people in the Cowichan Valley.

I've raised these issues with the Minister of Education, and the board office has raised these issues with the Minister of Education. I'm sure her in-box is full of correspondence from very committed and passionate parents, yet what we get is: "The funding formula is the funding formula, and you're just going to have to get by. Move on; go somewhere else. Take your kids and put them somewhere else." That's the solution for École Mill Bay.

Very active parents, hon. Speaker, as you would expect with an immersion program. There was a public meeting in the Cowichan Valley some weeks ago, and 150 people showed up. The board listened carefully and attentively to the appeals and the overtures from the parents and from others that are interested in the program, but sadly, their hands are tied.

They're shackled by a policy put in place by this government that says: "We want you to be autonomous, school board, but you have to do what we tell you. We're only going to give you so much money, and it's not going to be enough to meet the needs of the people in your community."

I know that the Minister of Education finds this humorous and laughable. Perhaps she could take her sense of humour to the Cowichan Valley and meet with the people and the parents there who have a disconnect.
You have a government talking about billions of dollars in surplus . . .

Interjection

From École Mill Bay let's go to Koksilah Elementary School. The minister speaks glowingly of her administrative triumph of managing to get agreement with the federal government to allegedly - allegedly - close the gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal learners. This is all, again, revenge of the technocrats: "Let's get in a room, and let's strike a deal that has no relevance to people on the ground." In the case of Koksilah Elementary School, it's 98 percent first nations....

Interjection

I was speaking of Koksilah Elementary School in my constituency, in the South Cowichan - 98 percent population aboriginal learners, the Hul'qumi'num community, the Cowichan Tribes, the largest first nations community on Vancouver Island. For the first time in generations first nations have some comfort that the education system is doing something for their children rather than something to their children.

These are people who lived through the residential school crisis. I know those members on the other side are certainly not accountable for that, nor am I, but history is the judge that stands to look at all of us in this place. How did we respond to the way people have been treated in the past?

There's no better example, in my opinion, than Koksilah Elementary. Every day elders come and teach language and culture to the kids in that school. It's supported by the Cowichan Valley trustees; it's supported by the Cowichan Valley Teachers Association. But in the wisdom of the Minister of Education, her funding policies have put the district and the trustees in a position where they may well have to close that school.

How is it that the Premier can stand in this place and say he wants to, as a point of policy, close the gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal learners with one breath and with the other breath say: "Well, sorry, school district. There's nothing we can do about that. We only have $4 billion in surplus this year. We only have $4 billion that we don't know what to do with"?

"I know what we'll do with that money. We'll give some of it to affluent people. We'll give a hundred bucks to Jimmy Pattison."

Why in the world would we stand in this place and ignore first nations learners in the Cowichan Valley and, at the same time, give money back to people who don't need it? Why would we give the Toronto-Dominion Bank, the Royal Bank, RBC Dominion Securities $200 million in tax breaks when we're closing a first nations school in the Cowichan Valley? Why would we do that? It's absurd, hon. Speaker, and it's a complete and utter disconnect.

When I travelled around the province with the Finance Committee last fall and the fall before that, I was with the member for Port Moody-Westwood and other members of this place from both sides of the House, and we would go into communities and talk to people. I can remember very well going to the community of Terrace. We had witnesses come to the committee and say: "We're not getting the programs and the support we need for our kids, whether they be in child care, whether they be in the public education system.

One of the government members, a decent guy, a good fellow, a thoughtful fellow, said: "That's not true; we funded that program." It's that disconnect, that complete and utter misunderstanding of what goes on, on the ground that doesn't just afflict this government. It afflicts all governments, whether they be New Democrat, whether they be Liberal, Progressive Conservative, Social Credit. Once you get into that side of the House, you go into the cabinet room and you've got technocrats following you around with big honking binders saying that everything is fine.

It's not fine, and there's no better example than Koksilah Elementary.
The Premier stood in this place three years in a row, three consecutive throne speeches, saying, "I am committed to reducing the gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal learners" - three years in a row. Lots of money for the summit, lots of money for this, lots of money for that, but on the ground in communities it's not showing up.

I don't know why that seems to be a problem for those on the other side. It's just reality. It's not just the Liberals' fault. I'm sure this happens to all governments. I'm certain it happens to all governments. I know it happens to all governments. When you stop listening to the people who elected you, you're completely out of touch with the reality of the world. We hear the members on the other side, the revenge of the technocrats, talking about what a great place this is going to be in 2020 and 2050. Who cares, hon. Speaker? Who cares?

We want to leave this place better for our grandchildren - absolutely. We have that obligation as individuals. We have that obligation as legislators. But today....

Childhood comes once. If we're going to underfund and scrape back money from kids and programs for children, then how are we serving the future? How are we helping the kids of tomorrow?
Koksilah Elementary, for those who are listening at home and those who are listening in this place, is a classic example of neglect by government of a program that's working effectively. It's taking down the shadow of residential schools across the south Island, and it's being replaced by a government who says: "We got $4 billion in surplus. We're going to give Jimmy Pattison a hundred bucks. We're going to give the affluent each a hundred bucks, but that school is going to close."

That school is going to close for want of a few bucks. It's a tragedy.
The other issue that's of significance in my community is transportation. I talk about transportation all the time in this place.

My colleague the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin joins me in saying to the government of British Columbia: "With your $14 billion announcement back in January...." It was a delightful announcement because we remember the same announcement being made in 1996 by the government of the day - commitments to the transportation initiatives in the south Island and to transportation initiatives in the lower mainland, and nothing is happening.

We got a really nice highway to Whistler. This is with no disrespect to the people of Squamish and those who are going to be on a safer highway. Good for them. But there are highways all over this province. The Malahat Drive in my constituency - closed with regularity, deaths with regularity, no transportation alternatives....

M. Karagianis: And now no money for the south Island.

J. Horgan: And now no money for the south Island again from this government.

I sit on a committee called the committee for commuter rail. It's a group of regional politicians from View Royal, Langford, Esquimalt and the city of Victoria. What they're looking at is using the E&N corridor, an existing railbed and an existing bit of infrastructure, to move people around on the south Island. What a good idea.

We've had a consultant look at the situation, and they've issued a report that says the capital costs of getting the train running from Langford into the city of Victoria in the morning and returning in the evening, two or three or four times in these two critical periods, would be only $16 million.

M. Karagianis: A fraction of what the banks got.

J. Horgan: That's right.

Imagine what we could have done had we not given $220 million to the big banks. Imagine what we could have done if we hadn't given $327 million to oil and gas. Sixteen million bucks to get the train running in the right direction here in my community and through the community of the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin.

Why wouldn't you want to make that investment? Why wouldn't the member for Saanich North and the Islands and the member for Oak Bay-Gordon Head support those initiatives at the cabinet table? Why wouldn't they say: "There's a good idea"?

There's a transportation initiative that would not impact on the daily commute that's already in place. You wouldn't have to have construction along the highway. You wouldn't have to build bus routes that businesses in the lower Island don't want and that won't necessarily change or dramatically alter transportation patterns. It won't take any cars off the road. It will increase traffic, in fact. Why wouldn't you invest in the E&N corridor?

Apparently, this government doesn't see any value in putting money into the lower Island. Not for transportation initiatives. Not for education programs. Not for child care programs.

One of the challenges that we have in this place - and it was evident today during question period - is that when the love is gone, it's well and truly gone. Those on that side of the House refuse to listen to reasonable ideas if they come from this side of the House.

When we came here in 2005, all of us were new, shiny, ready to go, sent here by our constituents with some expectation that we were going to work for the common good - not for partisan purposes, not with any malice or mean-spirited attributes. We were here to help the people that put us here.

The other day the Ministry of Energy was making some derogatory comments about where people had come from before they came here. It's my view, hon. Speaker - and I know you share it - that we're all equal in this place. We all come from different backgrounds. We all come from different parts of the province. But we all come here with one common objective, and that is to work for the public good.

Whether we came from finance, from education or from any sector of the economy, we all came here with one common purpose. Regrettably, those on that side of the House - the Jimmy Jones-juice drinkers over there, the cult followers of the member for Vancouver-Point Grey, those who say he can do no wrong....

Interjections.

But it is laughable. For those at home to hear the "shame on you...."

The famed decorum that takes place in this chamber. We saw it today in question period - the roars of laughter, the roars of approval, the roars of disapproval. The public, the people at home, the people that are working every day to pay the bills don't understand what the heck we're doing in this place.

When we stand up and speak passionately for the people that put us here.... "You're out of order. Shame on you." I don't know. I've been around this place for a long, long time, and it's days like today that just....

What do people at home think is going on here? Are they concerned about what I'm saying? Perhaps.

Interjection.

Now, I appreciate that I get under the skin of the members on the other side, and I'm delighted to do that.
I haven't had an opportunity to talk about B.C. Hydro and the rate increases that are coming because of an ideological drive to create an artificial market for electricity for independent power producers. I want to touch on that just briefly and not use up too much of my time before I get to the Western Forest Products giveaway by the Minister of Forests. I know he's anxious to hear what I have to say on that matter.

I'll only spend a few moments on the resulting rate increases from B.C. Liberal energy policy. In 2002, hon. Speaker, you'll recall that the Minister of Energy came into this place and said: "B.C. Hydro is not broken, but I'm going to try and fix it anyway. I'm going to take a Crown corporation that's served the province of British Columbia very ably and very well for generations, providing a dividend to the taxpayers so that we can fund our education, our health care programs, and I'm going to say that you can't generate new sources of energy. You are precluded from creating your own power. You have to buy new sources of supply from the private sector."

On the surface one would think that's not such a bad thing. I mean, there's expertise, certainly, in the private sector with respect to construction, and so on, but what we miss in this is that B.C. Hydro doesn't have a profit motive. Its motive is to serve its ratepayers - least cost, most affordable, less intrusive on the environment. That's their objective.

What's the objective of the independent power producers? Profit. Why wouldn't it be? I don't blame them for wanting to make a profit. I encourage them to want to make a profit. But why would we take a public utility that has served us very, very well and say: "You can only buy power from one source; you can only buy power from one group of people"? They happen to be contributors to the B.C. Liberal Party. That's an aside. We'll put that over here for a moment.

Why would you say to a company that's working well, serving all the people of British Columbia: "You must buy high-cost, low-value power to meet the needs of this generation and generations in the future"? Well, that was B.C. Liberal policy in 2002.

They made matters worse in 2007, because then they said, "We want to be self-sufficient. We don't want B.C. Hydro to do what they have been doing for decades" - playing the markets, as entrepreneurs would do, as free-enterprisers would do, and finding the least-cost energy with the least social and environmental impact and purchasing that for the people of B.C., for ratepayers. That's what they've been doing for years and years.

Madam Speaker, I regret that I've had to sit down so many times today, but that's largely my fault, certainly not yours. If it gets a little bit of life into the back bench of the B.C. Liberal Party, then that's probably a good thing too.

We were talking about B.C. Hydro. In 2007 the Minister of Energy said: "Not only are we going to restrict where you can purchase your power; we're going to give you a date certain where you can only buy from one source. Inside the province of British Columbia you're going to only be able to buy power.... Even in high water years, even when we don't need the power, you're going to have to buy it from our friends in the Independent Power Producers Association."
Ridiculous policy. Not just the B.C. NDP's saying that; the Independent Business Federation is saying that. The industrial users are saying that. The large industrial users of electricity are saying: "Why is it that the budget documents say that the mid-Columbia price, the benchmark price for electricity today, is 50 bucks a megawatt hour? Why is this government telling B.C. Hydro to buy power from independent power producers at $88 a megawatt hour?"

Let's do some quick math for those on the other side. That's 38 bucks a megawatt hour more than the market would charge. Does that make economic sense to you, hon. Speaker? It doesn't make sense to....

Interjections.

The member for West Vancouver - wherever it is up there toward Whistler.... You know, as long as we're building dams in her neighbourhood, she's happy as she could be. Her constituents aren't too happy about it. In Squamish the Ashlu Creek has been given away to independent power producers. What's the benefit to the community? Higher electricity prices.

Hon. Speaker, I see that my time is drawing short. I didn't want to miss the opportunity to talk a little bit about our friends at Western Forest Products, who came to the Minister of Forests saying: "Well, we have a bit of a bad patch here, hon. Minister. The industry is on its knees. What can you do for us?" The minister said: "Well, why don't we allow you to release your private lands from tree farm licences?" This is a covenant that's been in place for 50 years in the province, certainly here on Vancouver Island. The minister let those lands go.

I want to read a poem. I know the top cop will enjoy this. This was sent to me by a constituent at the height of the debate over the Western Forest Lands giveaway by the Minister of Forests. It's an interesting poem. It's by our friend Anonymous, but I'm sure the members on the other side will enjoy it. It goes as follows:

The law locks up the man or woman ?Who steals the goose from off the common ?But lets loose the greater felon ?Who steals the common from the goose. ?The law demands that we atone ?When we take things we do not own ?But leaves the lords and ladies fine ?Who take things that are yours and mine. ?The poor and wretched don't escape ?If they conspire to break the law; ?This must be so but they endure ?Those who conspire to make the law.?The law locks up the man or woman?Who steals the goose from off the common ?And geese will still a common lack ?Till they go and steal it back.

That's from a constituent of mine, and that really rings true with the Western Forest Products deal. We look back at what could have been. What could we have done?

I know the member for Oak Bay-Gordon Head.... It looks like she's going to be following me in debate, which should be fun for her. The member for Oak Bay-Gordon Head should have known, as the Minister of Community Services, that releasing that much land in the unincorporated area on the west coast of Vancouver Island right when these people are in the midst of a governance study to review how they want their community to evolve, right when they're in the midst of looking at their official community plans and looking at new government structures.... Why would you release that much land into the marketplace? It's inconceivable.

What could we have done for the price of that land? We don't know the final cost of the real estate transaction, because events have overtaken us, and the Capital Regional District has made some zoning decisions. They've downzoned some of the land to make it forest-only or restricted the type of activity that can take place. But we know that roughly 50 million to 70 million bucks is about the going price for 1,200 hectares of land on the west coast of Vancouver Island. What could we have done in my community for that $70 million, for lack of 70 million bucks that the Minister of Forests seemed to think Western Forest Products needed?

Why didn't we instead go to the first nations in my community, the Pacheedaht people, the Beecher Bay band and the T'sou-ke Nation? Why didn't we go to them and say: "How can we reconcile with you? How can we come to a treaty by using these lands to meet your objectives for community development? Why didn't the government purchase those lands and use them for treaty settlement? For 50 million bucks to up to 70 million bucks, why didn't you use that to resolve outstanding issues with first nations in my community? Why didn't you use that...?

If you wanted to give money to Western Forest Products, why didn't you write them a cheque? Why didn't you just write them a cheque? Why didn't you buy it off them and put it to public use?
It was traded in the 1950s for access to public lands, and the minister knows that. He broke the covenant. He gave the land back to them, they're selling it for a song, and we could have done so much with that land.

We could have solved treaty issues. We could have created parks. We could have put a community forest project in place. They've closed the dryland sort at Jordan River. The minister knows that. He said that it was about jobs. The jobs are gone. Thanks for nothing, Minister.

Madam Speaker, I've had a delightful time. Thank you very much. I look forward to hearing from the member for Oak Bay-Gordon Head.