Debate of the Legislative Assembly - May 13, 2008
J. Horgan: As always, it's a pleasure to rise in my place and represent the citizens of Malahat-Juan de Fuca speaking today on Bill 27, the Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act.
Before I begin my remarks, I just have to commend the minister. I think she's the fourth minister to bring in a bracketed act that has the word "green" in it. Just in case anyone is missing it at home, the government wants you to think they're being green, so much so that they're bracketing the word and putting it on the front of everything they pass out. I don't think there's anything wrong with good labelling, good branding, pretending to be doing something that you're really not.
If that is the government's objective, I give them full marks for labelling all of their legislation so that, in case the backbenchers on the other side are curious, they'll know what they're standing up to vote for, because they certainly don't speak about the bills in this place. That's the objective of the opposition, in most instances.
In this case, I have just two things I want to focus on with the minister. I know she is very familiar with the regional growth strategy here in the capital region district as a former municipal official herself and responsible for the Community Charter. She'll know full well that the regional growth strategy here on southern Vancouver Island has been a hard-fought document with communities working together to come to some resolution about where growth will occur, where growth will not occur, what types of developments we want to see in and around the capital region.
Nowhere in this region are these issues more important than they are in my community of Malahat-Juan de Fuca. Hon. Speaker, you will know that I live in the city of Langford, the fastest-growing city on southern Vancouver Island, where innovation is not something that the citizens there shy away from. In fact, they embrace innovation. Were it only an opportunity for the member for Oak Bay to come to Langford periodically and to see that innovation on the ground, she wouldn't be forced to say such things as she did in debate yesterday.
I just want to read just one paragraph from her comments yesterday in starting off second reading. The minister said as follows: "This is certainly what has been mentioned and connected to the 2007 and 2008 Speeches from the Throne as well as the Premier's annual address to the UBCM convention, particularly last fall. As a government, we must rise to the challenge before us, and we want to tackle these important issues head-on. But we know we cannot work in isolation."
So that's the minister's objective, and who could argue with that? I know those that are watching at home or those very thoughtful people that are in the gallery, my family included, would say that that's a laudable goal and a laudable objective, and I certainly wouldn't want to dispute that.
But then I look at the reality of the past number of years in our community, particularly in Malahat-Juan de Fuca, and I have to take members back to that dark day in January of 2007 when the Minister of Forests, without any consultation - I am advised by the minister after canvassing this issue with her in estimates - with first nations in my community, without any consultation with the capital regional district, arbitrarily made a decision to release 28,000 hectares of private land from tree farm licences on Vancouver Island.
Now, on the surface that seems like a trivial and insignificant thing, but when you put that action....
Hon. K. Falcon: I seek leave to introduce a group.
Leave granted.
J. Horgan: Where were we? Regional growth strategy, Western Forest Products, tree farm licences - a lot of acronyms. That's the RGS, the RFLs and the WFPs. All of that adds up to a classic and complete contradiction of what the objectives of Bill 27, the Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act, is supposed to be all about.
The minister, upon introducing this bill this spring, would have known full well of the debate raging in my community about the prospect of urban sprawl, this expansive development all the way up and down the Strait of Juan de Fuca unencumbered by any rules or responsibilities. It's an unincorporated area.
The minister responsible for unincorporated areas, you would have thought, might have been aware of this fact when the government made this decision. She certainly would have been aware of this fact when she tabled a bill which she alleges is designed to reduce urban sprawl and to create what she called "compact communities."
Now, what, hon. Speaker, in your opinion and in the opinion of those in this place, is a compact community exactly? What would that be? Would that be a community that's been emptied by job loss in the forest sector? Would that be Mackenzie? Would that be a compact community - getting smaller and smaller with each day of Liberal government as jobs are shed from the forest sector?
Or would it be a massive development on the west coast of Vancouver Island in and around Shirley, Otter Point and Jordan River where there is no infrastructure of any consequence? There's a two-lane road, a ribbon of highway that stretches along the beautiful wild west coast of Vancouver Island.
According to the government on that side of the House: "It makes good sense" - says the Forests Minister - "to release lands to developers that were traditionally used for resource extraction, for forestry, and that were contemplated in the regional growth strategy as no-go zones."
There will not be development on these lands, because they were resource lands. If you look at a map of southern Vancouver Island, it's pretty clear. We have the capital regional district water supply in the Sooke Hills. That area of land is off limits to development. We have forest lands that have been harvested two and sometimes three times over the course of the past 100 years, regenerating for jobs in the future, regenerating for habitat, wildlife on southern Vancouver Island.
But then we come to this Legislature where up is down, black is white, the bizarro world of British Columbia where the government can say on one day it's okay to Western Forest Products to sell vast tracts of land that they put into a tree farm licence as part of the contract 50 years ago to protect and preserve forestry on Vancouver Island.... It's okay to throw that out the door, because we've got the Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act that's going to somehow protect us from urban sprawl on Vancouver Island. Unbelievable.
This side of the mouth says: "Fill your boots, Western Forest Products." This side of your mouth says: "Oh, don't worry about us. We're green. We've bracketed it on all of our bills. It says so right there - 'green.' Couldn't be more green if we tried. We even print it on our underwear when we get up in the morning."
"We are the greenest government in the history of mankind," says the B.C. Liberal Party. Hogwash. Hogwash, I say. Absolute hogwash.
Interjections.
J. Horgan: How can the member for Shuswap actually applaud the prospect of massive development up and down the west coast of Vancouver Island with no infrastructure? Volunteer firefighters are now moving out of the community because the forest jobs are gone. They're moving out of the community.
There's no forest protection. There's no sewage protection. We're going to be burning greenhouse gases driving back and forth, back and forth.
Interjections.
J. Horgan: I often enjoy sparring with the member for Shuswap, and I'm just delighted that he's been able to join us here while my family is watching because we do exchange discussions over the dinner hour about how engaging and droll he sometimes can be.
In any event, I'd like to get back to the substance of this bill. I want to take the opportunity, because the Minister of Labour has a small part to play in this as well, and I'm glad I caught her attention on this issue. Some months ago an announcement was made by the head of the public service that the government was looking for some 300,000 square feet of office space that was going to be located in downtown Victoria. We're going to put more offices in downtown Victoria.
Well, local representatives of local government in my communities, in Langford and Metchosin and Colwood and Highlands, sent a letter off to the government saying: "Why wouldn't you put office space where people live? Why wouldn't you try and reduce the commute? Why wouldn't you take steps to reduce our impact through transportation on greenhouse gas emissions?"
The response from the Minister of Labour, who I do hold in high regard, was: "We don't know where our employees live, so we can't track and monitor where they're coming from."
Well, I'm a government employee standing in this place, and on my paycheque is my address. I'm fairly confident that with the IT, the information technology, capacity in the province of British Columbia.... I know it's not as simple as pushing a button, but it's pretty darn close. Let's find out where our employees live. We wouldn't be violating any privacy issues. We send paycheques to people every day. Let's find out where they live.
Let's see if we need 300,000 square feet of office space in downtown Victoria. Or would we be better served, would it be a more cooperative, more green approach, to look at the whole region and say: "Let's build some office space in Langford so that we're not commuting back and forth. Let's take our government employees and seat buildings where they live"? That makes sense to me. I know it makes sense to the Minister of Labour, but unfortunately, we don't know where our employees live.
I, for one, live in Langford just down the road. I have to commute here every day, and I do it happily because this is the place where I work. But government employees that live in my community don't have to get on the bus every day or don't have to get into the Colwood crawl and drive into this place. They could work in their communities if a progressive, thoughtful government was truly green and wasn't just bracketing it and branding it as something that they think they are. Maybe if they tried to be green, we would have green policies rather than just greenwash.
Although I know that the Minister of Labour is listening intently, I'm hopeful that she will review the process and review the concept of building more office space in Victoria so more people can commute. Let's build it where people live so that we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
If we're not going to do that, at a minimum, why don't we...? I'm a broken record on this, and I know the member from Oak Bay-Gordon Head has heard this more times than she cares to. I'm going to tell her anyway, because it's my opportunity. As you know, I've got half an hour, plus or minus school visits, to say my views on behalf of the people in my constituency.
What we want to see in Langford, Colwood, Metchosin, Sooke, Highlands, up the Malahat into Shawnigan and beyond, is commuter rail service on Vancouver Island. Why wouldn't we want to get people out of their cars and get them into a train? It's clean. It's green. It's efficient. Upgrading the railbed would have no impact whatsoever on the commute. The train tracks are already there.
In fact, the train runs every day on Vancouver Island, and this will come as a surprise to many people. It leaves Victoria at eight o'clock in the morning and goes north. It goes in the wrong direction. It goes north to Comox nearly empty every day and comes back at night nearly empty every day, rather than switching the service around and bringing commuters into the city in the morning, getting them out of their cars and demonstrating a true commitment to green technologies.
We don't get that. We get brackets on bills: the Local Government (Green Communities) Statutes Amendment Act. A lot of branding, a lot of talk, a lot of bluster, a lot of blow but not a lot of progress on issues that are important to people in my community.
Before I conclude my remarks, I want to thank the minister for bringing this forward. Certainly, we want to at least hear the government talking about progressive policies and hear the government talking about green initiatives, but I implore both the Minister of Community Services and the minister responsible for the public service to genuinely sit down and think about: how do we work in the capital regional district?
We have a regional growth strategy that says we're going to be developing in Langford and in Colwood. Why wouldn't we take that opportunity and build office space that can be filled by public servants so that they're not in their cars? They can bike. They can walk. They can find other means of transportation. For those who must come to this place, into the downtown core, into the capital region, why not use the train?
I don't think a day goes by since I was elected that someone doesn't come up to me and say: "Keep fighting for that train, Member. Keep fighting for commuter rail on Vancouver Island." It makes sense now more than ever, I would argue, in a time of climate change. My friend from Victoria-Hillside talks about these issues all the time.
Improving transportation in the southern part of Vancouver Island is absolutely vital to our economy. It's vital to our environment, and it seems to be only lip service from this government. This bill, bracketed as it may be, does very, very little to get us to the objectives that we all want to see here.
There's a group called the Communities for Commuter Rail, and they meet in my area of Langford and also in View Royal. It contains members of local government. The minister will know them - members from the councils in Langford, View Royal, Colwood, the mayor of Sooke participates, and from Victoria and Esquimalt. All councils are represented on this committee. They meet monthly to advance the cause of commuter rail.
Has anyone from the provincial government ever joined us at that table in two years? No. We've made presentations to government. We've advised the Minister of Transportation. Certainly, the Minister of Community Services is aware of this committee. We work diligently every month to try and bring forward initiatives that will advance commuter rail and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the capital region. But the province of British Columbia is not at the table.
The minister, in this legislation and in her remarks, said that she wants to be a leader in developing this consensus. As I take my seat, I invite her to come to the next meeting of the Communities for Commuter Rail. It's on the 21st of May. I'll drive out with her in her Smart car, if she wants to. We might even take the bus, if that's okay with her. Or, if I can get shoes big enough.... She can maybe borrow the Minister of Finance's running shoes, and we can take a hike on the Galloping Goose Trail.
If the minister wants to really get something done in this community, and I know she does, come to our committee meeting. Go to the Minister of Transportation and say: "Let's get that train going now, not sometime in the future. Right now."
