To view video of Response to September 2009 Budget
http://bcleg-ds1.insinc.com/ibc/mp/md/open/f/8/8/20090917wv150en?f=w&m=v...

2009 Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament
HANSARD
________________________________________

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.

________________________________________
Official Report of
DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
(Hansard)
________________________________________
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2009
Morning Sitting
Volume 2, Number 6

Budget Debate
(continued)

G. Gentner: I rise here today to primarily take an analysis of this budget, particularly from the perspective of Delta. I have to say that this budget isn't worth a wooden nickel. It certainly is a piece of paper that has been built on deception. It is nothing but a spurious, deceitful, phony budget that's been presented to us, it seems to me, by nothing but a bunch of snake oil salespeople. That is exactly what we're seeing here.

They've tried to bamboozle us. Here we are today dealing with a budget that is trying to cheat the people of British Columbia into believing something that they said during the election. It certainly isn't what is being delivered here today.

I have to start by…. Let's just back up here, and let's quote the Minister of Finance on June 11. He said: "If I were in a position to table a budget today, it would be a deficit of $495 million or less. I'm still confident that come September 1, we'll be able to deliver on that."

Then, lo and behold, on August 25, just before the budget, the minister states: "It was only as we got into May and June" — June, the same time when he said previously that he could commit the $495 million — "that the forecasters started to diminish their numbers for 2009."

We know the falseness of that statement. We know the months and months and months of preparatory work that goes into presenting a budget. The government was certainly aware, and it's admitted it today, that it did know the numbers.

Briefly, let me talk about balanced budgets. Tommy Douglas, who served for 18 years in Saskatchewan…. An ardent democratic socialist, for 18 years of government he balanced the budget 16 years, and he inherited debt like you haven't seen before since the Great Depression.

[ Page 485 ]
Interjections.

G. Gentner: I will talk about the '90s.
Since the Depression….

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members. Members.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members. Member for Fraser-Nicola.
Take your seat, Member.

Would the member for Coquitlam-Maillardville please refrain from making remarks.

Member, please continue. Please direct all your comments through the Chair. If everyone else would respect the person who has the floor so that we may all hear.

[1040]

G. Gentner: It's interesting how this House, or some members of this House, deny the fact that probably, without question, Canada's greatest Canadian balanced the budget every year except for two. The two years were based on trying to deal with farmers' debt inherited over a huge Depression era.

Let's quickly look at the budgets and what happened during the '90s. Let's compare them to today. In 2000-2001, when this government inherited it, the so-called provincial debt of the NDP was $34 billion. At the end of this debt cycle, we will be seeing a debt of over $52 billion.

You know, times are good. Did they put together a rainy-day fund, like we see in Manitoba, or a fund for forest workers? Or did they look at what's happened in other provinces? No, they were like drunken sailors — spend, spend, spend. The debt has increased year after year after year.

We had about $1.4 billion of revenue coming from forestry during the NDP. These guys have mismanaged this economy so badly that we're now down to less than $400 million. It's an absolute disgrace. And you know what? We have seen for years a decade of deceit, a decade of falseness, a phony apparatus across the way that is in denial of the fact that they have mismanaged this economy.

What do we have today? We are indeed heading towards a structural deficit, where there'll be no return. There'll be no return. We're not just talking here today about a budget for the province alone but about the ongoing costs for other governments.

TransLink is through the roof, municipal governments are going to have a hard time, and this government has no answers. It's lost its way, and it certainly has lost the integrity and trust of the people of British Columbia.

The government has recognized that British Columbia has endured the hardest recession in 27 years, so it recognizes that things really weren't all that bad in the '90s. They were not bad at all.

But why are we in this situation? Well, we have a government here that will say: "When times are good, it's all because of us. When times are bad, well, it's because of the global economy." Why we are here in this situation is because of something called the credit crunch — the deregulation of credit, banking.

This is what the government has been foisting upon British Columbians for ten years, and we're seeing in the throne speech even more reference to deregulation. We'll be in a situation where we will have more debt piled upon debt because of a lack of oversight into how our finances are governed.

These are tough times. Families are worrying about their prospects. The scope of the economic crisis is hurting our expectations, and the government talks about the seismic economic shifts that have rocked our province, which have hurt our industries and are now leaving thousands and thousands of workers worried and unemployed.

Again, if ever there was a need for a rainy-day fund, it should be now, and this government has spent it all away.

It's really a matter of our approach and how we deal with budgets and how we deal with deficits. On this side — at least the member for Delta North believes — we should be putting money more into fixing and maintaining our infrastructure — fixing and maintaining, not spending it foolishly like we have with certain megaprojects.

I want to talk specifically about the South Fraser perimeter road.

An Hon. Member: Weren't you talking a year ago about…?

G. Gentner: I'm going to talk about the South Fraser perimeter road. I talked about it a year ago, I talked about it three years ago, and I will keep talking about it until we can wrestle this deficit.

We have a megaproject, well over a billion dollars and climbing. Now is the time to postpone this project, do a rethink and take the remaining dollars out of this capital no project and put it into operating expenses that help people in this province.

It's a matter of priorities. This is not stimulus, this project. This is nothing but a sinking hole. It's a throwaway of money.

[1045]

The government states in the throne speech: "Shrinking revenues will by necessity curtail our discretionary spending." Well, discretionary spending for this bunch is a matter of politics. They choose whether they want to cut here or cut there — cut women's services, provide services to poor, provide money for schools. That's all discretionary. But it's also political.

[ Page 486 ]

The member from south Kamloops asked us how we can find $1.2 billion. I just told you. It's a matter of priorities.

We know that this government is in trouble. It certainly talked about the possibility of cutting away the retractable roof at $365 million. That is a decision, a capital project, where perhaps you'll return to it. But now is not the time for that flagrant expense.
But instead the mentality here…. We certainly have to replace the roof. But $365 million for a retractable roof — now is not the time. Now is the time to fix and maintain our economy where the money is most dear.

Unfortunately, this government sort of has a freeway burger mentality. You know, it's going through the drive-through in the 1960s. The fiscal cupboard is bare, but they still believe in the big-fin cars, big freeways. They believe in the Styrofoam containers and throwing them out the window. That's what this government is all about.

It certainly isn't to find savings and invest in people. It is here to invest in programs for the wealthy and, above all, international corporations — not in the province or the people.

In my community of North Delta we'd rather see the money spent on programs that affect seniors. We would rather see money spent on our children. We'd rather see our money spent on libraries and health care. We'd rather see money spent on post-secondary education — far more dear to us than the completion of the South Fraser perimeter road.

The Liberal government, when times were good, didn't properly plan for the future. You know, global trade has collapsed, and now is the time to rethink what we're doing here with that kind of megaproject.

Globalization has collapsed. Some 80 percent of the ships in Singapore are tied up. You go talk to our longshoremen about trade, what's happening out there. We are falling behind. It's a whole different world. The Vancouver Sun reported on February 6, 2009, that retail container traffic at the port of Metro Vancouver is expected to drop by 15.6 percent the first year as part of a survey of U.S. and Canadian ports in wake of the global economic downturn — from industry watcher Port Tracker reports.

As well, on April 7, 2009, the Vancouver Sun reported that early-year sales result in a 25 percent decline from 2008 and that the port of Metro Vancouver "is taking a hit from the slow-moving economy, with container traffic taking a hit. It's down sharply for the first month in 2009."

Considering the Port of Vancouver has started container traffic and it's down significantly, how can the Ministry of Transportation continue with this bulldozer approach with the South Fraser perimeter road without taking into consideration the new economy, the new global situation we're in?

We heard through the throne speech this great idea on the northern corridor and how the new emphasis is going to move containers and diversify the north. When you look at the congestion within the Lower Mainland, that diversification is a good thing. It's a good thing. It's a good thing to create a sustainable economy that recognizes the north and the savings of travel time, in particular that of the facilities of Prince Rupert.

[1050]

But when you look at the budget, the cuts that are happening and how they're going to disrupt people's lives…. The major cut of $1.17 million — to put it on the shelf for a while and earmark the money into other valuable necessary programs is the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do.

There are other alternatives. If we take a step back and look perhaps at what we could do, we should be looking at short sea shipping — the availability, and how we could earmark or use alternatives to move goods and services in the province at a huge cost savings.
We would be able to put money in for kids. We would be able to look at parent advisory committees and say: "We're not going to cut your grants. We found the money." We can put money into building a decent society.

The cuts to the environment and spending on a freeway…. What's the difference? When we compare and describe the South Fraser perimeter road, the impacts…. Let's look at what it's going to do to Burns Bog, what it's going to do to the agricultural land reserve.

Think of what in this budget you can do with more than $1 billion. At the South Fraser perimeter road we're going to see increased congestion. I'm urging the Minister of Transportation, the Minister of Finance and the Premier, again, to postpone the South Fraser perimeter road until a comprehensive transportation plan looks at the future global, national, regional trade cycles along with a thorough examination again of all practical, sustainable, inclusive options and concepts. I think that's reasonable.

With the recent announcement that some capital projects may be scrapped, I believe now is the time to earmark that money somewhere else. It's a matter of shifting priorities from the completion of some megaprojects and put that money into things such as housing, municipal infrastructure — stimulus that will stimulate the construction industry. It would be maintained.

A broad approach to the redistribution of investments will be a benefit to British Columbians through these tough and recessionary times. So what the South Fraser perimeter road means to the budget…. What does it really mean? Let's itemize the costs and the shipping expenditures according to our priorities. Let's look, for example, at river habitat that's going to be impacted here with this road.

Ravines — in my community there are eight of them — provide nourishment for salmon. Most of it is chum, but there are chinook in these areas there. There's cutthroat

[ Page 487 ]

at intertidal areas; there's eelgrass providing riparian habitat. At one time we used to have sturgeon up and down that river, up in Delta. It's gone.

How we've destroyed the foreshore. We had something called FREMP, which was a quasi-judicial body that looked at that kind of development. You look at the old records, and that was red-zoned, which meant no development along there. It's funny how the funding was cut on that program, and now the government is having its way.

We used to have canneries from Steveston all the way up to North Delta. Originally, you didn't even have to fish; you could pick the fish right out of the river. That's all gone. And what do we have today? We have a Premier that's now walking away from the mess of the fish farm industry that he and this government helped create. They're walking away.

The South Fraser perimeter road is receiving $350 million from the federal government for the international agenda of shipping companies. Can you imagine if you took that $350 million and put it into fisheries in this province — how we would rejuvenate the sport fisheries, the first nations fisheries, the commercial fisheries and, above all, tourism? That $350 million — you know what that could do? It would put us back on the map as a leader when it comes down to wild salmon.

We have a chance to save the Fraser River. We have an opportunity here to create a jewel within the urban and rural setting, and this government is letting it slip away. Just wait for the hazardous wastes that come speeding along the Fraser River's most sensitive environmental areas. It's madness; it's simply madness. There will be a calling that we will have to address later with a huge mop-up cost and environmental degradation.

The heritage of my community, Annieville and Sunbury, which is made up of the Finns and the Japanese and the Swedes…. These huge, wonderful, heritage-rich sites are going to be wiped out by this road. For a minuscule amount of money that we find in the South Fraser perimeter road, can you imagine what we could do for heritage in this province? We could revitalize it.

[1055]

Let's not forget about the first nations. Did you know that along the Fraser River, we have two archaeological sites? One in particular is Glenrose. It is the oldest archaeological wet site in North America — 8,500 years ago. The first nations, as the glacial till was left behind and the ice age was receding…. The mouth of the river was not Richmond. Richmond didn't exist back then. It was indeed….

Interjection.

G. Gentner: Here's a member who doesn't care about first nations history. This member does not care about first nations.

Deputy Speaker: Member, please direct all your comments through the Chair.

G. Gentner: Absolutely. It's obvious, Mr. Chair, that this government does not give a hoot about aboriginal history. They're going to wipe out the most significant archaeological site in the province.

An Hon. Member: They think it's a joke.

G. Gentner: They think it is a joke. Well, it's not a joke.

For the minuscule amount of money that we're spending on the South Fraser perimeter road…. We could divert that money and put it into heritage.

Pollution. You know, the pollution budgets have been slashed. They've delegated authority to Metro Vancouver. Unfortunately, the regional government has no teeth to implement that.

Could you imagine if we stopped the accumulation of the smog and pollution from the South Fraser perimeter road by investing $50 million, or just 5 percent of that budget, into children with respiratory needs, those who have asthma? Can you imagine if we took that $50 million and put it into cancer research?

A $15 million cut I hear of today to the Michael Smith Foundation. We could easily divert that money. What's more important — fighting cancer, or a freeway?

Of this budget, 40 percent is for land acquisition, making it the greatest accumulation of land in the history of the province, and we're wiping out the most valuable farmland this province has in production. Land along the river could be used for preservation, parks, sustainable development. Some of the most fantastic vistas overlooking the Fraser River — wiped out, nuked.

Could you imagine if we took 40 percent, or the $400 million, and invested it instead into farming? That could cover the Minister of Agriculture's cuts for four to five years. If you want to fight climate change, you start by producing local and buying local food. You don't wipe it out.

That still leaves you with $350 million to $400 million. Think about it. We can put it into real stimulus — real stimulus. Advanced Education — $68 million cut. Some 5 percent of the total of the South Fraser perimeter road could enhance advanced education. Again, agriculture has been cut by $75 million. Again, we can take it from this ridiculous project that's really going nowhere.

The member for Surrey-Fleetwood talked about leaky roofs, and this government's solution is buckets. Leaky roofs in schools, and their idea is: "Oh, we'll give them a bucket." If we took some money off — we're looking at $135 million, one-tenth — of the South Fraser perimeter road into real priorities…. That's education. We wouldn't be in the mess we are.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

[ Page 488 ]

It's all about priorities. It's about what's dear and what's important to British Columbians. I can talk about North Delta. North Delta has had an application way back on February 19, 2009, for the Sungod Recreation expansion project. It's what my community wants — not necessarily the South Fraser perimeter road, but, you know, a stimulus package. We would provide 3,500 square feet to up to 7,000 for recreation that would push capacity for another 50,000 population capacity-wise — a cost share of $4.3 million.

The municipality has heard nothing from this government — nothing. They're waiting. They've been waiting for a long time. But the priorities are very different for this government.

We can look at the stimulus packages. We can say that B.C. stands to lose $400 million in federal handouts because they're behind the game.

[1100]

We have a Premier who, way back in 2008, said: "We vow to accelerate spending on government infrastructure." That was October 22, 2008. He said the same thing in '09. The clock is ticking on these projects, and we still haven't had any resolve. We're going to lose out. The good thing about the cost share with the municipalities is it's 33 percent — 33 percent buys you 100 percent — one-third, one-third cost share.

You know, Manitoba, a different municipality. Interesting, Manitoba has had ten balanced budgets, including this one, and they had a reserve fund to bail them out in times like that. That's an NDP government — interesting. They went for a stimulus package — $227 million; the feds $100 million. It went right into housing, low-income households.

They snapped that money up right away. They didn't dally around. They created a stimulus package and jobs. The government knew about all these deadlines. I don't blame all the members across the way. They weren't here in the spring when all this stimulus money was being talked about, so I'm going to excuse them.

But you know what? When you're looking at 33 cents on the dollar…. That's what it costs you. Half of these members, particularly half of the members of cabinet, who are denying the fact that they knew nothing about this and that we're going to get on with…. Either they're not telling the truth or they're just plain stupid. What is it? Are they stupid?
Interjections.

G. Gentner: I'll take it back. I'll withdraw. Not half of them are stupid. They're all incompetent.

I recently was up at the Flathead, another disgrace in the world's eyes. We now have the United Nations coming and seeing what's happening there. I was up there, up in the Montana area. I took in the river. I talked to park officials at the glacier park, and they're betwixt as to why this B.C. government would turn its back on some agreements that were basic understanding memos years ago.

I was also at the PNWER Boise conference, and I would like to thank the gracious hosting by the member for Abbotsford South. His speedy hosting was most welcome. But unfortunately, it seemed to me it was more like a Republican orgy there. It was incredible dealing with…. And there were some Saskatchewan party Conservatives there and of course the B.C. Liberals. It was a love-in. Many were there hopeful to see Sarah Palin, and of course she wasn't there at all.

I have to say this about Sarah Palin. At least she's had the moxie and fortitude not to welcome fish farms in Alaska. We've got to say that one thing. I mean, she makes this bunch look like Genghis Khan when they start talking about right-wing politics. It's incredible, absolutely.

We listened to a presentation done by Plutonic. They were down there. It was interesting. I was sitting beside some of these Republicans, and they were cringing. They couldn't believe that we were allowing this to happen.

Oregon. With their stimulus money, they're putting it into renewable energy — wind power, solar power. They couldn't believe that we would allow in British Columbia energy to be generated at a time when the rivers are running and, the same thing, we're competing with hydroelectricity. In fact, they were perplexed, because in the wintertime they had it already solved. When we're at a low premium, demanding need for electricity in the wintertime, they have it. They have it now with wind power. We're so far behind the eight ball on that one.

Hon. Speaker, I wish I had more time, because I could start talking about priorities. Some of the priorities are when…. I usually give you my annual report on credit card expenditures. I mean, the Minister of Finance and the Premier's office have merged their credit card numbers. I don't know why that is. I guess the Premier's office wanted to hide behind the Finance Ministry. But it's interesting to see that between 2007 and '08 to 2008-09, it went over a million dollars at a time when since October this government knew it was in fiscal trouble.

[1105]

You know, I can go on about all the expenditures: the nightclubbing; Ric's Grill, Prince George — $3,000, the one entry.

Bikes — $2,800 for bikes. I don't see any bikes. I don't see the Premier riding up here on his bicycle. Bikes? Obviously he wants to get it done before the HST kicks in. Can you imagine $2,800 on bikes? I don't see any of the members opposite riding their bikes here to work, you know.

Movie theatres. Can you imagine $225 to go out and see movies at your expense? There's another one that's going to be hit by the HST. Absolutely incredible, the country-club attitude over there, and they have the gall

[ Page 489 ]

and nerve to tell everybody else in the province to tighten their belts. Balderdash. It's a betrayal. They certainly aren't telling the truth on that side.
I'll end it with a notion that is interesting. Up on the Sunshine Coast the Premier has his annual little get-together at the Rockwater Secret Cove — $6,000 at Halfmoon Bay. Fine dining, Madam Speaker, at a time when everybody else is cutting back — fine dining indeed.

You know, half a block away is his good friend Bill Good flipping burgers for him. I mean, this is the type of attitude we are putting up with in this province, and it stinks. It stinks.

We've got to make some changes, and we will make changes when we're government. We will put together a fiscal policy, and I can tell you right now that on this side we're already working on the transition. We're working on it, because heaven help us that we have to put up with another four years of deficit and deceit.