Third Session, 41st Parliament

(2018) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, May 14, 2018

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 135

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

Youth and trades

M. Dean

G. Kyllo

Social and economic future of First Nations

E. Ross

A. Olsen

Housing the homeless

J. Brar

L. Throness

There is only one taxpayer

T. Stone

N. Simons

Private Members’ Motions

Motion 22 — Impact of climate change on communities and economies

R. Kahlon

D. Barnett

D. Routley

M. Morris

B. Ma

R. Coleman

R. Glumac

R. Sultan

J. Rice

S. Thomson

B. D’Eith

MONDAY, MAY 14, 2018

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[10:05 a.m.]

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

YOUTH AND TRADES

M. Dean: “We’re opening up the doors of opportunity for more people by

investing in skills training throughout the province,” so said the

Premier of B.C. when he announced that more than $5.4 million is being

invested in industry-standard training equipment to give trades and tech

students the skills they need to succeed.

The funding allows 15 public post-secondary institutions to

replace obsolete equipment and acquire the latest technology — to

respond to industry changes and curriculum requirements, which will

benefit students and employers. Training equipment funded by the program

ranges from a computer lab set for a digital media technology program to

3D printers, industry-standard cooking equipment, and hot water boilers

and furnaces for plumbing and gas fitting programs.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Getting K-to-12 students involved and interested in pursuing a

career in the trades is one way the province is ensuring a steady supply

of homegrown talent. We need to ensure that we’re training enough

tradespeople, because we expect 100,000 job openings in trades in the

next ten years.

In partnership with the Ministry of Education and secondary

schools, the Industry Training Authority, the ITA, delivers youth

trades-training programs that help get students involved and interested

in the trades earlier in their school years. The mission of the ITA is

to build the trades that build B.C.

The Industry Training Authority’s youth trades-training programs

allow youth to start apprenticeship training and earn high school

credits at the same time. ITA works with employers, with apprentices,

industry, labour, training providers and government to fund training,

issue credentials, support apprenticeships, set program standards and

increase opportunities in the trades.

The programs map out a clear path for youth to start their trades

training earlier in high school, through post-secondary and into the

workforce. Discover, explore, train and work.

Youth Discover the Trades provides hands-on events to connect

students, parents and teachers with local tradespeople and

employers.

Youth Discover the Maker Way allows students to build creative

solutions to design challenges. It encourages design thinking and

building prototypes.

Youth Explore Trades Skills is a 120-hour, for-credit course

delivered in high school and covers three trades plus core

content.

Youth Explore Trades Sampler is a 300-hour, 12-credit course,

delivered with post-secondary partnerships. It covers five or more

trades, plus essential skills and common core. Workforce certificates

are also included.

Youth Train in Trades is dual-credit, where students attend a

foundation program and can earn credit for the first year of technical

training. They can earn credits towards graduation at the same

time.

[10:10 a.m.]

Youth Work in Trades is also a dual-credit, where a student works

with an employer to earn work-based hours towards an apprenticeship.

They earn credits towards graduation at the same time. They may also be

eligible to receive a $1,000 scholarship.

There are 4,795 participants in the ITA’s youth programs. More

than 40,000 B.C. secondary students are also participating in

school-based applied skills training, including work

experience.

Now, this year, ITA’s youth trades training programs will connect

more than 5,000 students each year with trades training. Recently we

have increased access to trades training with 562 additional seats at 13

public post-secondary institutions throughout British Columbia that

offer foundation and apprenticeship programs. Through this approach,

more students will be further along the path to trades certification and

a career when they leave high school.

For example, Chris Kilshaw achieved his Red Seal status as a

construction electrician. In high school, Chris participated in ITA’s

dual-credit programs, Train in Trades and Work in Trades. By the time he

graduated high school, he already had his first year of technical

electrical training completed, along with lots of hands-on experience in

the field and work-based hours that counted towards his

apprenticeship.

ITA also works with the First Nation Education Steering Committee

to introduce trades to Indigenous youth across B.C. As of March 31,

2017, 10 percent of those that are enrolled in apprenticeship technical

training at B.C. public post-secondary institutions self-identify as

Indigenous.

Through the Canada-B.C. job fund program and its predecessor

labour market programs, 3,904 Indigenous peoples participated in

pre-apprenticeship training. ITA’s Indigenous initiatives focus on

breaking down barriers to entry and providing access to opportunities,

matching the skills of Indigenous peoples with the needs of B.C.’s

labour market.

Not only is it important to break barriers for Indigenous youth to

enter trades, but it’s also important to build equity in the trades for

women, starting with young women. This is an exciting time for women in

the trades. Doors are opening across B.C. for women who want to pursue

careers as plumbers, electricians, sheet metal workers, carpenters or

heavy-equipment operators, to name just a few. The WITT, women-in-trades

training program, provides training, financial assistance and support

for eligible women who might be thinking about a career in the trades

but are unemployed or may need skills upgrading.

Through the Canada-B.C. job fund program and its predecessor, more

than 3,800 women participated in pre-apprenticeship training. They were

registered in 70 different trades with nearly 50 percent registered in

traditionally male-dominated trades.

Services and programs include outreach and mentoring; leadership

development training to improve workplace culture by addressing bullying

and harassment in the workplace; employer–human resource supports,

including a virtual team, to help develop customized workplace policies,

plus on-site mediation to manage staff situations; and exemplary

employer campaigns to recognize employers.

For example, as a single mother….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

G. Kyllo: Thank you to the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin for providing me

an opportunity to speak about the importance of trades training for our

youth.

Many of the programs that were announced and actually spoken about

by the member opposite were those that were identified in the

skills-for-jobs blueprint, something the B.C. Liberal government was

very proud of.

Interjection.

G. Kyllo: There we go. Thank you, Member.

It’s extremely important to talk about the importance of trades

training for our youth. All students do learn differently. Not all

students are going to follow an academic career to be doctors or lawyers

or nurses. I think the opportunity of providing opportunities for our

youth to get that on-the-job skills training is so important.

[10:15 a.m.]

As a father of four daughters, I know that our four girls were

very different with their academic pursuits. One of my daughters,

Brittany, was having a bit of a time struggling in school, but there was

a program that was offered by the Pleasant Valley Senior Secondary, in

Armstrong, where they actually provide apprenticeship training

opportunities within the school. Brittany actually applied and took a

program on hairdressing.

Here we had my daughter who was struggling in the academics at

Eagle River in Sicamous, and she participated in a trades training

program at PVSS for two semesters. She went from struggling to actually

near the top of her class. She followed her passion. She was very

excited about it. After high school, she went on to Blanche McDonald

school of makeup artistry and design, and she has had a very successful

career in hair and makeup. Certainly, we have to provide those

opportunities for trades training for our youth.

I shared with my daughters, when they were at a very young age,

that it mattered not what career path they chose, but it was really

important that they find something that they were passionate about,

something that they were interested in. I knew if they found a career

path that they were interested in, they’d work hard at it. And if they

worked hard at it, they’d be successful.

I think that the trades training opportunities that have been

provided, largely through the skills-for-jobs blueprint, have been very

successful and provide that opportunity for youth across our province to

get those opportunities for skills development and education in the

trades.

There was a number of programs that actually were put together,

some which were mentioned by the member opposite. The skills-for-jobs

blueprint was…. A panel was put together by the previous Minister of

Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Labour, as well as the Ministers

of Education and Advanced Education. By coming together and pulling all

of those three ministries together, they developed a great program,

which included about seven different programs, including Youth Discover

the Trades.

The Youth Discover the Trades program is a program that provides

an opportunity for youth to get hands-on experience in a trade at an

event in local communities. The events connect students, parents and

teachers with local tradespeople and their employer, showcasing

firsthand what a career in trades is really like.

There’s also the Youth Discover the Maker Way program, currently

called Maker Day, where youths discover the maker way. Students get an

opportunity to put away the books for a day and work in small teams in

their classrooms to build a creative solution to a design challenge. The

program has offered one-day events throughout the province.

We also have the Youth Discover the Lions in the House. This is a

partnership with the B.C. Lions, where the Lions in the House initiative

is focused on the power of choice and being the best that you can be.

Students are challenged to examine their choices as they relate to their

own personal opportunities and those available in the trades.

We also have the Youth Explore Trade Skills. This program gives

students hands-on experience in four trades: carpentry, electrical,

plumbing and automotive. Students will learn the basics, explore their

interests and get a sense of what trades career they could potentially

pursue.

We also have the Youth Explore Trades Sampler. It’s currently….

There are various programs, such as TASK. This program allows students

to explore up to five trades in greater depth.

We have the Youth Train in Trades program, currently called the

ACE IT program, as well as youth work in trades. Now, this particular

program gives students the opportunity to get on-the-job training as a

youth apprentice. Students get a head start on the work-based training

needed for trades apprenticeship, with up to 480 hours while they’re

still in secondary school. They’ll be able to earn income, while also

earning up to 16 credits towards their secondary school

diploma.

Youth in trades is certainly a very important aspect of our

economy, but the most important part for youth training in trades to be

successful is to have a strong and growing economy — to actually have

job opportunities for our youth to participate in the workforce in order

to get that hands-on experience.

M. Dean: Thank you to the member for Shuswap. I wish his daughters very

well.

I would say that we do still have an awful lot of work to do. As I

said earlier on, 10 percent of apprentices are Indigenous, and 10

percent of registered apprentices are also women. Now, 15 percent is

considered to be the tipping point. When 15 percent of a workforce is

composed of women, workplaces become more accommodating and welcoming,

and momentum starts to build as the workplace dynamic changes. So we

really need to be continuing our investment in these programs and

encouraging people, especially youth, to change the culture through

participating in trades development and apprentices.

Tawny Fortier, for example, got her start in the skilled trades

with the help of ITA’s women-in-trades training program. She’s now a

fourth year electrical apprentice in Kamloops.

[10:20 a.m.]

The program gives her opportunities in skilled trades that she

never thought were possible for a young woman. It helped her get her

start by connecting her with funded training opportunities and providing

her with the support she needed to overcome the circumstances that were

holding her back from a fulfilling career.

She says: “The WITT program helped me get a head start on my

electrical training by providing the tools, safety gear, tuition, books

and even child care I needed to succeed. For all the powerful women out

there who might be hesitant to take the first step, my advice is to know

your worth and go for it.” What a great message for young

women.

Amy Carr, who just recently earned her Red Seal with Sheet Metal

Workers Local 276, says: “I love my work, and with these new supports,

more women like me will have the opportunity to not only find a trade

they love but to stay in it.”

Remember, it isn’t just about recruiting women; it’s about

changing the culture so they want to stay.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FUTURE

OF FIRST

NATIONS

E. Ross: I appreciate the opportunity to introduce this morning’s private

member’s statement entitled “Social and Economic Future of First

Nations.”

May 9 marked one year since the last provincial election and, for

many of us in this House, our first year of service as members of the

Legislature. I can attest to the fact that it has been a steep learning

curve on how best to represent the interests of my constituents, whether

they voted for me or not. Everyone deserves a voice in the

Legislature.

Before I became an MLA, I already had committed myself to public

service as a councillor and, later, a chief councillor of the Haisla

First Nation. I evolved throughout my entire experience on council and

so did my views on how to best serve my people and my community. That’s

why I thought it would be useful to consider the social and economic

future of First Nations, especially in the context of the United Nations

declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, otherwise known as

UNDRIP.

UNDRIP is a product of the United Nations General Assembly, of

which Canada was a founding member of the UN charter in 1945. Canada is

recognized for its contribution to the UN organization through numerous

and dangerous peacekeeping missions, participation and leadership in

specialized agencies like UNICEF and UNESCO and for our support for the

multilateral solutions to some of the world’s most challenging

conflicts.

One would therefore expect that Canada might have been a full

supporter of UNDRIP when it was adopted by a vote of the UN General

Assembly in 2007, yet it was not. At that time, there were 192 member

states of the General Assembly. A majority, 144, voted in favour of

UNDRIP. In fact, only 42, less than a majority of the 88 countries with

Indigenous peoples, voted in favour of UNDRIP. Furthermore, four

countries took a principled stand and voted again UNDRIP, notably

Australia, New Zealand, United States and Canada.

This begs the question why some of the most highly developed

countries in the world fundamentally rejected UNDRIP. It was not just

Canada also opposed the declaration. The fact is that there never was

any unanimity among First Nations respecting UNDRIP. That’s because

First Nations in Canada cannot be regarded as one single, solitary

entity.

There are 654 First Nations in Canada, speaking more than 50

distinct languages and each having their own distinct culture, history

and traditions. A well-known columnist recently pointed out that there

are 203 recognized First Nations in B.C. alone. That’s more than the

number of countries belonging to the UN who adopted UNDRIP at the time.

The chance of gaining unanimity amongst First Nations in Canada is about

as likely as having unanimous consent at the UN.

While many objectives of UNDRIP may be laudable, the issues for

Canada are both legal and constitutional. UNDRIP is not consistent or

compatible with

section 35 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and

Freedoms.

Section 35 affirms and recognizes the rights of the Aboriginal

peoples of Canada, including existing Aboriginal and treaty

rights.

This

section of our constitution upholds the legal standing of

Aboriginal peoples in confederation; affirms Aboriginal treaty rights,

Aboriginal people in any constitutional conference that would consider

amending the constitution itself. In fact,

section 35 of the

constitution has evolved into a duty to consult native populations.

UNDRIP is a far less relevant or even significant document to Aboriginal

people in comparison.

Retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci went as far as to

say: “Future legislation and judicial

interpretation will determine

whether UNDRIP differs significantly from Canada’s existing

jurisprudence on the duty to consult.”

[10:25 a.m.]

In other words,

section 35 of the charter already put us on a path

towards reconciliation about 30 years ago, long before UNDRIP was even

considered in 2007. Even today UNDRIP has no standing in Canadian law.

Although Canada did remove itself as an objector to UNDRIP in 2016, it

remains only a broad statement of values.

Recently legal expert Thomas Isaac appeared before the House of

Commons Standing Committee on the Indigenous and Northern Affairs to

provide his comments on a federal private member’s bill, Bill C-262,

that would supposedly ensure that the laws of Canada are in harmony with

UNDRIP. Isaac argues that this bill, and UNDRIP by association, fails to

take into account 70 hard-fought court decisions taken since the

landmark Supreme Court decision of Regina v. Sparrow in

Isaac concludes that UNDRIP does provide a benchmark for the rest

of the international community to follow, but in no way does it approach

the clarity that Canada has already established itself as a world leader

for the protection and respect of Indigenous rights.

Deputy Speaker: Esquimalt-Metchosin seeks the floor to make an

introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

M. Dean: Today we have students and teacher Stuart McLatchie from Wishart

Elementary School. I’d just like the House to make everybody very

welcome.

Debate Continued

A. Olsen: It is an honour to stand and to continue the debate, the

discussion with respect to the comments made from the member for Skeena.

I note the opportunity now that is evolving right here in this place,

the opportunity for Indigenous people of British Columbia to be elected

into this place, to stand and put forward important issues that face the

communities that we were raised in, that we grew up in, that we call

home, that we love, and indeed, to lead, as the member for Skeena has

indeed led his community for quite some time.

Now we find ourselves here on a Monday morning having a discussion

about the future of the social and economic future of Indigenous people.

This is truly another example, I think, of the evolution that’s

happening in this country but also in this province, where these debates

are happening on this red carpet.

There has been a time in this province’s history when, in these

debates and these discussions, these private member’s statements, we may

have been talking about it, but the one most important ingredient has

been missing. Of course, that ingredient is, I think, critical to this

discussion and these debates, and that is to have Indigenous people

leading them and being a part of them and being a part of working it

back and forth.

These are difficult discussions. None of this is easy. This is all

extremely difficult. While we may have an inclination to take offence or

to be emotional about some of the things that we hear, especially in

this place, I think that at most times, it’s good to pause and take a

breath and to work through what it is that’s being said for the benefit

of not only the Indigenous communities and nations that we are a part of

but also recognizing, as the member for Skeena did, that there is a

broad diversity in this province.

Of the 50 languages across our country, about 30 if them are right

here in this province. So not only do we come a diverse heritage in this

country with respect to First Nations and Indigenous cultures, but in

fact, right here in British Columbia, we have some of the broadest

diversity of anywhere in this great country, this beautiful place where

we live and now call British Columbia.

See, we were all Indians under the Indian Act, and the Indian Act

has so strictly defined who we are and what we can do. There was a time

in this country in which to leave the reserve, we had to get a pass from

the Indian agent. We’ve seen, certainly as things have evolved, that

we’re much further than that now, and we continue to evolve.

[10:30 a.m.]

The question about UNDRIP…. I think that it is fine to stand and

ask the questions of UNDRIP. I have a significant challenge, of course,

when there are a number of First Nations in this province that are, in

fact, looking at UNDRIP as a tool to implement their rights, their

inherent rights, treaty rights, rights over their land. So I think that

it’s important that we have to be careful that we’re not undermining

those that are working towards their self-determination.

That is part of the challenge that we have in this place as we

navigate through these conversations. While we may stand in this place

and represent the communities that sent us here, there are other

Indigenous communities across the province that are taking their own way

and taking their own path. That is, in fact, their right, and we have to

respect that. Where we disagree, we can push back. We can continue the

struggle that has been characterized in this country.

It is an honour to be able to stand and begin this dialogue with

the member for Skeena, a member from the Haisla. To have a WSÁNEĆ and

Haisla having this conversation is a unique opportunity in this place,

and I look forward to continuing this over the years. We can continue to

put these statements on and work these incredibly important issues for

this province and for this country and, indeed, for the world — back and

forth over the coming weeks and months.

I’ll take my seat and thank the member for Skeena for raising this

for discussion today.

HÍSW̱ḴE .

E. Ross: Thank you to the member for his contribution to this debate. The

fact remains that UNDRIP is a non-binding declaration by the United

Nations General Assembly that doesn’t require member states to ratify it

or bring it into law.

UNDRIP does not exist in federal or provincial legislation

anywhere in Canada, including British Columbia. As a matter of fact,

Canada’s Justice Minister and former Cape Mudge band Councillor Jody

Wilson-Raybould addressed the Assembly of First Nations in 2016 and

presented the clear fact that UNDRIP is unworkable with Canadian law.

The minister went further and stated: “Respectfully, it is a political

distraction to undertaking the hard work…to actually implement

it.”

I wholeheartedly agree with this, because it’s the truth. While

it’s commendable to acknowledge an expression of international support

like UNDRIP, nevertheless it carries absolutely no weight in Canadian

law. Mi’kmaq lawyer and Aboriginal leader Pam Palmater had this to say

about UNDRIP: “Governments can literally talk about good ideas, plans

and commitments for years and never take any real, concrete

action.”

That’s all that UNDRIP really represents — a feel-good document.

Progress on real issues has been my agenda for 14 years — issues like

reducing the tragic number of suicides on reserves, combating the

cyclical poverty that prevents a generation from finally liberating

itself, or giving First Nations the opportunity to benefit socially and

economically from natural resources located on their traditional

territories. These are the real issues.

UNDRIP cannot be reconciled within the existing Canadian legal

framework, period. In no way is it a binding instrument like a treaty,

which can be ratified and incorporated into legislation.

To suggest that no progress or reconciliation in Canada has taken

place is false. UNDRIP has the potential to bring Canada back to 1982,

which is not in the best interests of Canada or Aboriginals. Canada’s

relationship with First Nations has come a long way. We have a strong

foundation to build on. It would be a shame to waste the decades of hard

work in reconciling all Canadians’ interests for a better

future.

HOUSING THE HOMELESS

J. Brar: It’s a real honour for me to rise in this House today to make a

private member’s statement on housing and homelessness. It’s hard for me

to imagine that in a province as wealthy as ours, we have homeless

people living on the streets. I have absolutely no doubt that we can do

better. I’m sure that British Columbians want us to do

better.

[10:35 a.m.]

We have a collective responsibility to bring about a more stable

and more prosperous society, a society in which every person in our

province can reach their full potential. Our government has already

taken some crucial steps to make life better for the people of British

Columbia. We have established three key priorities to build a better

B.C.: make life more affordable for all British Columbians, improve the

services that people count on, and build a strong and sustainable

economy in every part of the province.

Our government believes in shared prosperity, where a good economy

benefits everyone, not only a selected few. Former U.S. president

Franklin Roosevelt once said: “The test of our progress is not whether

we add more to the abundance of those who have enough; it is whether we

provide enough for those who have too little.” The most serious

challenge to reduce homelessness, in my respectful opinion, is not the

resources that we have but the denial that it doesn’t exist or the

inaction based on a particular ideology.

After years of neglect, our new government has taken bold steps to

tackle the issue of homelessness. We want to give all British Columbians

a chance at a better life. We opened more shelters during the wet and

cold winter, but we realized very quickly that this is not a permanent

solution, which is why the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has

been working hard to find practical and permanent solutions.

Budget 2018 makes the biggest investment in housing in B.C.’s

history. It lays out a comprehensive housing plan that invests more than

$1.6 billion in the next three years to build and maintain affordable

rental housing, to increase rental assistance for low-income seniors and

working families and to provide supportive housing for at-risk British

Columbians.

New modular housing was also funded in cities across the province

of British Columbia. That includes Prince Rupert, Terrace, Vernon,

Kelowna, Kamloops, Smithers, Maple Ridge, Surrey, Victoria, Vancouver,

Chilliwack, Penticton, Abbotsford and New Westminster. It’s so that

people have access to safe and affordable housing in which they feel

safe and secure until they have a place to call home and to live in

dignity.

Similarly, new supportive housing is also springing up all over

the province. In January, our government announced funding for 450 new

affordable rental units in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. Government

also collaborated with the city of Vancouver and Vancouver Coastal

Health to build approximately 100 affordable rental homes, as well as a

new withdrawal management centre for people seeking treatment for

addictions. It’s because we are actually taking a kind of holistic

approach to homelessness.

A homeless count was coordinated in many communities across B.C.

this spring to help inform B.C.’s homeless action plan, which will focus

on permanent housing and services. Through the age-friendly grant by the

Ministry of Health, a mobile community care centre will provide support

and services directly to seniors who are homeless or unsettled in the

city of Surrey.

Helping the homeless helps everyone. The construction of

supportive housing is creating thousands of new jobs and boosting local

economies throughout the province. So it’s a win-win situation. We

continue to build new modular housing for homeless people, and the

construction of this modular housing is creating new jobs for the people

of British Columbia. We will continue to take major steps to make

housing more affordable, with a comprehensive ten-year plan to make life

better for the people of British Columbia.

L. Throness: It’s a truism to say that homeless people need homes, but it’s

also true. In Chilliwack, we’ve had an influx of homeless people over

the past few years. With it, there are many problems. There is an

addiction problem, a crime problem, a victimization problem of homeless

people themselves, a public health problem and what I would call a

public security problem.

[10:40 a.m.]

What I mean by that is that homelessness casts a pall of

insecurity over a city. We have, at last count, about 230 homeless

people, up from 76 a few years ago. They’re very visual. The sight of 20

or so homeless people camped out in the city square is unsettling. No

one likes the needles or the human waste or the garbage or shopping

carts filled with junk, and so on. People just don’t feel comfortable in

their own city.

In Chilliwack, we’ve been endeavouring to find solutions for

homeless people, assisted by a network of partners under the umbrella of

Chilliwack Healthier Community. A number of people have been working

very hard for several years to address this problem, and to very good

effect. Mind you, there are many obstacles. We will never house everyone

if for no other reason than some people will refuse help, but there is

much that we have done.

In this regard, I’m glad to see that the new government is

participating in what the former government started, and that’s more

help for homeless people. I will want to make sure that Chilliwack gets

its fair share of continuing government assistance just as my colleague

the member for Chilliwack and I made sure of in the previous

parliament.

Let me describe for you some of the things that we’ve been doing.

Yesterday I drove by the Salvation Army, which has just erected 46

modular units, temporary housing for homeless people. These are little

apartments. They’re new, they’re neat, and they’re clean. I think

they’re very acceptable. I lived in much the same thing for many years

as a student in dormitories. Across the street from the Salvation Army

is the MQHS project, just off Yale Road. It will be a total of 80 suites

of low-income housing. It’s nearing completion. It will be open to

anyone, but it targets, in particular, First Nations people who are at

risk. I was at the groundbreaking, and I hope to attend the opening

soon.

Near the downtown core is the old Traders Inn, which has been an

eyesore for a number of years. It will now be torn down and turned into

46 units of sorely needed affordable rental housing.

Close by, in the city centre, we have Ruth and Naomi’s, a mission

to the homeless that served, for example, 70,000 meals last year alone

and operates a wide number of other programs. It’s a sterling example of

a collaboration among churches in the city, now funded by B.C. Housing,

which gave approval last year to build another building for Ruth and

Naomi’s. It’s now under construction. It will have a daycare, a teaching

area, 35 suites for low-income singles and families.

Another private sector mission is the Cyrus Centre on Wellington

Avenue in Chilliwack, a four-bed centre that serves homeless youth 24-7,

because one in five homeless people are youth. It’s also a faith-based

mission. They’ve done a lot of private fundraising and have a bit of

B.C. Housing funds as well. They’ve just partnered with Chilliwack

Community Services and a church to open a new drop-in centre for youth

downtown.

Recently I went to the PEARL Life Renewal Society fundraiser,

which is yet another faith-based ministry to women who have been

sexually exploited on the street. We heard one woman’s story, which was

disturbing and redemptive as well. They now have an office in Chilliwack

from which they provide services to workers on the street, which is a

marvellous thing. Another project forecast for downtown is called the

Paramount project, proposed by Chilliwack Community Services — 45 suites

for low-income seniors and youth. Fraser Health has just an­nounced a

20-bed regional treatment centre for youth to be built in our city,

which is great.

We can’t forget the food banks operated by the Salvation Army in

Chilliwack and community services in Agassiz. Every year there are

fundraising events. I walked the Coldest Night of the Year, which raises

money for homeless people. We always have emergency shelters in the

winter at various places in the city. We can’t forget the Pacific

Community Resources Society, which provides services to people with

addictions.

We received notice about a month ago that we’re going to get an

assertive community treatment medical team from Fraser Health Authority.

We could talk about Griffin Security, which is a private company that

takes 20,000 calls per year about the homeless, and they try and keep

order in the homeless community.

I don’t have time to talk about the rent supplements or supportive

housing that the province has operated for many years, helping about

1,100 families that would otherwise be on the verge of

homelessness.

To close, in composing this little talk, I have counted 276 suites

recently built or soon to be built, and that will add, to those that

were already existing, another 40 or so. Not all of those will be filled

by homeless people, but many of them will be. I’ve simply been amazed,

once again, at the range of services that Chilliwack offers to the

homeless, often at great private expense. I’m so proud to represent a

community that has such compassion for those who have so

little.

[10:45 a.m.]

J. Brar: I thank the member for Chilliwack-Kent for his thoughtful response

to my private member’s statement on housing and the homeless. This is a

very important issue.

I just want to correct the member, to begin with. The member said

that maybe over 200 people have come to Chilliwack. I just want to

correct the member.

I’m the person who actually accepted the welfare challenge and

went through the province to understand what homelessness actually is. I

just want to say to you that 75 percent of the people who are homeless

come from the local community, not from anywhere else. There are no

aliens coming from any other part. It is from within the

community.

There was a time when homelessness was limited to, probably, the

city of Vancouver, and there were reasons for that too. But now

homelessness is in every community — when you talk about Chilliwack;

when you talk about, even, Prince George; when you talk about other

communities. It’s everywhere.

I appreciate the member talking about the response from the

private sector and the faith communities. I know they do an exceptional

job to help the people who are homeless and who need help. But the

question for us in this House is as to what we do in this House. That’s

the question, Member.

That’s where there’s a difference between our approach and the

approach from the other side of the House. They believe that the only

way you can eliminate homelessness is if you give wealth to the people

who are already wealthy, the top 2 percent of people, and they will

somehow address the homelessness issue. That’s what we don’t believe. We

believe that we need to step forward. We need to start working and

helping these people.

For 16 long years, the members on the other side, the previous

administration, have done absolutely nothing. When it comes to housing,

they listened to one person. There was one person in Vancouver — his

name is Bob Rennie — who was heavily involved in what you call the B.C.

Liberals’ fundraising committee. They didn’t listen to the people at

all. They continued singing the songs of the economy until it became

very hard, and then they suddenly introduced a 15 percent tax without

consulting anybody.

We believe in a more comprehensive plan, Madame Speaker. As I said

to you earlier, we are listening to the people of British Columbia. We

want to make life better for the people of British Columbia. That’s why

we are taking actions. We are taking actions that are going to deal with

the situation. That’s why we have a budget. We have put numbers here.

Budget 2018 makes the biggest investment in housing in the history of

the province. That will lay out the comprehensive housing plan that

invests more than $1.6 billion in the coming three years for building

housing for the homeless.

THERE IS ONLY ONE TAXPAYER

T. Stone: All members come to this chamber with the same intentions in mind.

I believe that that really boils down to coming here with good

intentions — to offer ideas, to debate changes to public policy, to make

a difference and to help people, to help our constituents, to help

British Columbians.

We differ on how to get there, on how to ensure that these

objectives are best met. I’m proud to get up each morning to go to work

as part of a team that’s focused on advocating for everything that can

be done to create jobs and opportunities for British Columbians. On this

side of the House, the official opposition members are united in our

core values, which are rooted in championing the spirit and the drive of

the individual. These core values are rooted in recognizing that a

strong, growing economy is the only way resources are available to do

what really matters and why we are all here. That is to encourage

opportunity for all British Columbians, to make investments in the

services that people need.

To make all of this possible, it means encouraging risk-taking,

celebrating entrepreneurship, generally getting government out of the

way of the private sector so that it can do what it does best, and

that’s to create good-paying, family-supporting jobs. It means valuing

investments in the public services that we all depend on — education,

health care, environmental protection, to name a few — investments in

our communities and investments in our loved ones.

It means honouring decisions made today for government to live

within its means and pay back debt so that our children and our

grandchildren aren’t saddled with the poor decisions of their parents

and grandparents. It means recognizing that British Columbians who work

hard for their money know how to better spend their hard-earned money

than government does.

[10:50 a.m.]

It is a widely accepted view that upon assuming office one year

ago, the current government inherited perhaps the strongest fiscal

framework of any incoming government in British Columbia’s history,

possibly the country’s: very strong economic growth leading the country,

the strongest jobs market in Canada, the lowest unemployment rate in

this province since 1976, five consecutive balanced budgets. The former

government was poised to eliminate B.C’s operating debt for the first

time since 1975.

The government inherited amongst the lowest corporate taxes in the

country, amongst the lowest personal taxes in the country. There was a

revenue-neutral carbon tax in place, proving that you can put a price on

carbon and grow your economy at the same time. The former government had

negotiated over 480 economic and reconciliation agreements with First

Nations. And, of course, there was a triple-A credit rating that was

created and that resulted from all of that strong economic opportunity

in this province.

Yes, less government is better than more. When government spending

goes up, private spending tends to go down. The countries in the top

quartile of economic freedom had an average per-capita GDP of $37,691 in

2010, compared to $5,188 for bottom-quartile countries. In the top

quartile, the average income of the poorest 10 percent was $11,382

compared to $1,209 in the bottom.

If you think about that…. The poorest 10 percent in the most

economically free countries are ten times as well off as the citizens in

the least free countries. Every time government takes an additional tax

dollar out of someone’s paycheque, whether at the local level, the

provincial level or the federal level, that’s another dollar that can’t

be spent on that parents’ kids’ activities or used to purchase products

and services from a local business or, if that family chooses, to invest

in their future.

Keeping a laser-like focus on job creation, as well as ensuring

that a competitive tax environment remains in place, are the best ways

to attract investment, create jobs and ensure that resources are there

for the services that people need. In order for employers to feel secure

enough to invest and create jobs, they need to know what their cost of

business is going to be, including government’s take, and that the rules

of the game are not going to change. Employers cannot have governments

releasing policy on a trial-and-error basis.

Over the past year, the jobs numbers in this province have

remained flat, since the summer of 2017. There are trade wars with other

provinces that have been instigated. Uncertainty has crept into our

economy due to numerous reviews and new and expanded regulations. Major

projects have been killed, delayed or are under major threat of not

proceeding. Yes, taxes have also gone up. Corporate taxes are up.

Personal income taxes are up. Carbon taxes are going up. Of course, the

carbon tax is no longer revenue-neutral.

Fuel taxes are up in greater Victoria by two cents per litre. In

the Victoria area, it’s worth noting that governments collect 41 cents

of tax on every litre before this additional two cents per litre is

added. Gas taxes in Victoria are already the fifth highest in North

America, rapidly moving into the third-highest position. Victoria

drivers pay over $135 million in gas tax annually.

As for the Lower Mainland, it now can boast of having the highest

gas taxes in all of North America. Forty-eight cents per litre at the

pump is actually tax. TransLink used to collect four cents per litre.

Today that is now 22 cents per litre when you include the federal

transfer TransLink collects.

Of course, we know that the Medical Services Plan premiums are

being replaced with the new employer health tax. This will hurt

organizations, from small businesses to school districts to non-profits.

It means businesses will be dissuaded from expanding. It means jobs will

be lost for some. It means higher costs to consumers. It also means

higher property taxes. In Kamloops, the community that I represent, it

means an additional hit of $700,000 per year in property tax, which will

have to be paid by local taxpayers.

Tolls will be replaced with a higher carbon tax. There’s a

development cost charge tax that’s coming from TransLink. The government

is talking about mobility pricing in the not too distant future. Of

course, there’s the new speculation tax, which has nothing to do with

speculation. There’s the school tax on luxury homes, which has nothing

to do with schools. There’s the hydro rate hike of 3 percent, even

though there was a commitment not to do that. And photo radar is coming

to an intersection near you, which will represent nothing more than

another tax grab for motorists in British Columbia.

There are some who want everyone to pay more tax. Folks’ costs are

going up. So much for the much-vaunted focus on affordability. And lost

in all of this is the simple reality that there is only one

taxpayer.

[10:55 a.m.]

N. Simons: It’s amusing a little bit, on Monday morning, to hear the fiction

being relayed. It’s almost like a series of extended cliché sports

interviews when the former minister responsible for the destruction of

ICBC gets to stand up and wax eloquent about the needs of our province,

as if he knows.

The title of the statement was: “There Is Only One Taxpayer.”

Well, the way I look at our system…. We have a lot of people who

contribute to the betterment of our society. We have a lot of people who

contribute what they can afford to the betterment of society. Because we

want to make sure our streets are safe. We want to make sure our

children are well-educated in our school system. We want to make sure

that our systems of protecting the environment are adequate.

This former minister, who had his own wake of destruction in his

career, is now talking about how, somehow, paying taxes is a punishment,

as if somehow he’s not been a singular beneficiary of the generosity of

the people of this province in order to get where he got today — for his

daughters, who he brings up constantly.

The success of our communities is in their safety, in our economy,

in running our system well, and that does involve the contribution of

British Columbians to the well-being of our communities. Different

people pay different amounts of tax. We try to make it fair. We try to

make it so it isn’t a bunch of regressive taxes punishing the least who

can afford it.

This member was part of a government that systematically made life

less affordable for middle-income and lower-income people in this

province. He looked out for his 2 percent, who he talked about proudly

just now. He looked out for his 2 percent. He looked out for the richest

of the rich and the most powerful of the powerful.

What we have to do here is regain a little bit of balance in this

beautiful province. We have to make sure that we invest properly to

ensure that our food systems are safe. We have to make sure that we

invest properly so that our children have the proper resources in their

schools.

This is a member who spent a lot of time making things very

difficult for families in this province, raising money to pay for

playgrounds for their schools. Isn’t playing an essential part of a

childhood, a part of an education?

No. This government did so…. In their first year of power, they

managed to put us in a position of being in need. Our social safety net

in this province has been ripped to shreds under that opposition when

they were in power. What we’re trying to do is restore a little bit of

balance.

We never saw homelessness the way we’ve seen it in the last ten

years. We never saw child poverty like we’ve seen it. Did this

government ever make an effort to address those inequalities in our

communities? No. That’s the sad part about this. He’s using dog-whistle

politics in order to try to get buddy-buddy with people who don’t like

to pay taxes.

I, quite frankly, like it when I see a school go up, a new school.

Guess who pays for that new school? It’s his family. It’s people in

Kamloops. It’s people in Fort St. John. It’s people in Powell River. We

all contribute to a better system of government. We all contribute to

better public services.

We all benefit when our brothers and sisters are not living

homeless on the street. You know, we all benefit when we have access to

proper educational systems. We all benefit when our air is clean, and

our waters are kept clean. But if this member…. If we took his ideas and

put them into practice like he put them into practice under his previous

government, we’ll see a continued erosion of the safety net that

protects our citizens and protects our environment.

I don’t think anybody on this side is going to take any lessons

from his clichés, from the empty words that he puts forward. I think we,

obviously, have learned a lesson from 16 years of bad government. We’re

investing in people. We’re investing in affordability, making things

better for the average people of this province who have sent us here to

do the work on their behalf.

I’m very proud to stand with the government — with their actions

to address the homelessness crisis; to address the health care issues,

wait-lists — that all grew under the previous government.

Yeah, there are many taxpayers. There are many people who are

served by the services provided by this government, by the province of

British Columbia. We’re proud of those services. We’re just going to

make them stronger.

[11:00 a.m.]

T. Stone: There’s nothing like a vigorous, high-energy debate first thing on

Monday morning.

The simple fact of the matter is this: this current government

inherited one of the strongest balance sheets in the history of this

province — almost a $3 billion surplus. In that context, this is a

government that has decided to increase taxes by $5.5 billion over three

years.

When the member opposite sits there and spews his rhetoric about

the former government’s record, let me refresh his memory on a couple of

points. Child poverty actually decreased by 42 percent during our time

in office. We had the best health care outcomes across the country. Our

children were doing amongst the best in the world in most subjects. We

built billions of dollars’ worth of world-class infrastructure in every

corner of the province, and we had amongst the highest take-home-pay

levels in all of Canada.

Now, in the context of that robust economic growth, that

exceptional job creation record — a triple-A credit rating, a $3 billion

surplus — the members opposite, the new government, decide it’s a good

time to impose $5.5 billion over three years onto the shoulders of

British Columbians.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

T. Stone: It makes one ask: what would the motivation for this be? Is it

because the members opposite come by it naturally? Is it because they do

believe that more government is better than less? I would suggest that

that’s partially the reason. Is it that they don’t believe that the

province’s balance sheet was as strong as it was when they inherited

it?

I don’t think that could be the case, because the Finance Minister

spends a lot of time trumpeting the strong economic record that is in

place, and it’s not due to any economic miracle of the current

government. Or is it because — and I think this is what is probably the

driving motivation — the government has got massive spending plans in

mind?

Public sector union contract negotiations begin to come up in the

months ahead. Perhaps this is a government that has decided they need to

squirrel away as many chestnuts as possible in order to be able to

afford the continued ramp-up in spending that we’re going to

see.

At the end of the day, it’s British Columbians that have to pay

this bill. It’s British Columbians that have to foot the bill for this

government’s decision to crank up spending and, as a result of that,

crank up taxes while they’re at it.

Hon. S. Robinson: I’d like to call Motion 22 by the member for Delta

North.

Deputy Speaker: Unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion

22 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the

order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 22 — IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE

ON COMMUNITIES AND

ECONOMIES

R. Kahlon: I move the motion:

[Be it resolved that this House recognizes that climate change is

in­creasingly impacting communities and economies.]

I’m amazed that it’s 2018 and we are actually even debating this

topic, but here we are. I hope all members of this House will be

speaking in favour of this and speaking about how issues are affected in

their communities.

I was actually quite moved last week. I was listening to the

member for Fraser-Nicola speaking about how climate change was affecting

her community. First it was fires and how her community was affected by

fires. Then she also spoke about how flooding now is affecting her

community.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

As I started looking into this, after listening to the member

speak, I actually found, on the ministry website, some pretty alarming

stats. What can we expect in B.C. with climate change?

“Temperature increases of 1.3 to 2.7 degrees Celsius expected by

2050, with projected impacts including growing seasons that are longer,

though hampered by more frequent and severe droughts; and shifting

infectious diseases and pests, with effects to our health, agriculture

and ecosystems,” such as the pine beetle. I’ll go into that a little bit

more.

[11:05 a.m.]

“More frequent and severe heatwaves resulting in increased

heat-related illnesses. Average rainfall is expected to increase from 2

percent to 12 percent by 2050, but summers will be drier, with projected

impacts including increased frequency and intensity of heavy

precipitation, resulting in damage to buildings and infrastructure;

higher risk of wildfire, insect outbreaks and disease in our

forests.”

I look across, and there are many members who know the pine beetle

devastation quite well. Their communities have been hit by it — climate

change. If you drive through some of these communities, you can see it

visually. Whether you’re talking to people who work in the mills and who

are trying to process some of the pine beetle or the safety impacts of

that product coming through the mills and explosions and all these

things that we’ve seen because of that product coming in…. Not only is

it affecting the environment and communities, but it’s affecting people

who are working in the forestry industry as well.

“Farmers and ranchers experiencing more frequent and severe

droughts, soil erosion and new pests. Up to 70 percent of our glaciers

may have disappeared by 2100, expected to result in changes in river

flows and temperatures, affecting fish habitat and hydroelectric power

generation; drinking water decreasing in quality and quantity; water

shortages, increasing competition between various water users.

“Sea level is expected to continue to rise along the B.C. coast,

with projected impacts including coastal communities and ecosystems

seeing more frequent and severe flooding; rising sea levels, straining

drainage and sewage systems and intruding into groundwater aquifers; and

low-lying agricultural lands becoming too saline for

cultivation.”

My community of Delta. I hope my colleague from the south will

speak to this motion as well, because he knows the effects that are

projected for the south of Delta. There was a study just done by a

non-profit recently. The study was focused on everywhere, but what the

study found was that the worst effects will be felt in Asia — in

Shanghai, in Osaka, in Hong Kong. Globally, 275 million people live

below five metres of sea level, 60 million within a metre.

What this study found was that with even the most conservative

flood mapping, the projections were that if the water levels rise to

what’s expected, Richmond, Delta and parts of rural Abbotsford and

Coquitlam could be under water by 2100.

What we’re starting to see is communities start to make those

investments to build up the dikes. Delta alone has, I believe, 62

kilometres of stretch that is protected by dikes. We’re starting to see

issues. We had a storm last year, I think it was — the hon. member

across the way may correct me — where the water levels from the storm

knocked water overtop our dikes. We have a huge farming community in

south Delta, and the dikes that we have are not going to be efficient

for their protection.

We’re starting to see fires more frequently in Burns

Bog.

My time is up. I look forward to hearing from members across the

way.

D. Barnett: I’m pleased to participate in this morning’s motion: “Be it

resolved that this House recognizes that climate change is increasingly

impacting communities and economies.”

As you can well imagine, I and my fellow MLAs in the Cariboo

region and central Interior are fully experiencing the devastating

effects of climate change. We felt it with last year’s floods and,

later, the worst wildfire season in the history of this province. We

still haven’t come close to addressing all the damage, both to property

and to people’s lives, that occurred last year.

Now we are once again experiencing terrible flooding throughout

the province. Without question, climate change poses all sorts of

challenges for the natural resource sector that drives our provincial

economy. In the Cariboo region, we are still dealing with the harm that

has come to guides and outfitters, tourism operators, the ranching

industry and, most certainly, the forest industry. Wildfire damage leads

to less forestation and greater soil instability, thereby increasing the

risk of debris flows and unpredictable stream flows.

[11:10 a.m.]

Moreover, outbreaks of spruce and pine beetle are increasing with

wildfire severity. In the 1990s, no mitigation was done when the pine

beetle devastated the forests. We talked about it, but nothing was done.

I was mayor at the time, and we begged the government of the day to do

mitigation work. We knew it wouldn’t stop it, but we knew it would slow

it down. Alberta listened.

Last week the final report of the independent review of the 2017

flood and wildfire seasons was released in the Legislature. It contains

108 recommendations that still require much review. Certainly we, as

official opposition, welcome the independent review. But the time to act

is now, not wait, like we did in the ’90s, until the forests were

totally devastated.

The government says it is already making progress on 13 or 14 of

the recommendations. I do recognize that we are talking about structural

damage over the long term. However, there are a lot of people out here

and there who need reassurance from the authorities that their property,

their livelihood and their very lives are better safeguarded right now

based on lessons learned from last year.

One cannot help but be impressed by all the volunteers and members

of our communities that pulled together in a time of crisis last year to

help our neighbours and friends. We owe it to them to learn from our

success and our mistakes from the last fire and flood

seasons.

Governments can make up all sorts of climate targets 20 years from

now, but these benchmarks well exceed the shelf life of the current

government. Proposed greenhouse gas reductions are laudable goals, but

that doesn’t mean a lot to someone who just lost their house from fire

or being flooded, or their workplace burnt down. What we do need is a

concerted effort. We need to take practical steps in the next three

years, two years, or even this year to effectively combat climate

change.

Charging more carbon tax during record gas prices does not instill

a sense of confidence among the general public. Starting trade wars with

neighbouring provinces and isolating British Columbia from the rest of

the country does nothing to advance the national climate plan. Nor do

deliberate efforts to halt natural resource development at the expense

of the next generation of this country. Yes, we need a long-term climate

plan, but that doesn’t include putting a national economy at a

standstill.

The people of British Columbia deserve a government that looks

after all their interests in the long term as well as the short term. We

are coming up on the first anniversary of the NDP and Green Party

coalition government that has achieved nothing and only divided a

country in the process. The time to act is now, and I’m sure that’s how

voters in B.C. feel at this moment.

D. Routley: I promise to remain non-partisan. I will be political, but I won’t

be partisan, as we’ve just heard from the previous speaker.

I rise to speak to the motion and emphasize that, indeed, our

communities and our economies are deeply impacted by climate change. I

want to talk specifically about the greatest of those impacts that B.C.

has felt so far — that to our forests. Our forests in B.C. are our

biggest contribution to the fight against climate change. They should

be. We can do everything that we’ve promised to do and are working

towards in terms emission targets, but the biggest effect, I would

argue, that B.C. can have, the biggest contribution we can make to

mitigating climate change, is to have healthy forests.

What I’m going to talk about has affected every community in this

province — every lake, every river, every species, every economy, every

family. That is the mountain pine beetle infestation.

[11:15 a.m.]

Of course, mountain pine beetle and other pests of the forest have

been present over millennia, but only in the recent past, with warmer

winters, have these pests survived one cycle after another and spread to

the extent that the mountain pine beetle did. It required three weeks of

lower than 30-below-zero Celsius weather to kill the mountain pine

beetle. We’ve had many years since we’ve had three weeks of that kind of

weather in this province.

That’s what led to the problem, which started in the early 2000s.

It presented as a risk to our province in the early 2000s. The peak was

in 2004 and 2005. A total of 731 hectares has been affected by the pine

beetle at this point, and that’s 54 percent of the pine forests in this

province. At that time, at the peak, it was affecting 140 million

hectares per year.

Currently there’s an effect on about a million hectares per year,

which is significant. But it has slowed down. It’s expected to end by

2020, at which time 55 percent of our pine forests will be lost — very

bad but better than the 80 percent predicted in the beginning. It’s a

cumulative effect, and the cumulative effect is 18.3 million hectares of

lands five times the size of Vancouver Island.

They talk about the green, red, grey attack, and that profiles the

colour of the trees as the attack occurs. It occurs over about a decade.

I would wager that not many British Columbians could answer you this

question: what is the green, red, grey attack? Even though it is the

singular issue propelled by climate change that has the singularly

biggest effect on all the lives of British Columbians, we have not had

the adequate discussion about this issue.

We have seen, instead, logging practices relaxed, waste in the

forest grow, fibre shortages throughout the province. We’ve seen the

abuse of forest practices that has, in fact, led to our problems with

the softwood lumber crisis.

The community effects have been deep and far-ranging. Jobs in the

community have been lost. Community members who were coaches and

volunteers now work in camps, or they’re not in those communities at

all. These are family disruptions. Local government is coping with the

lower income to be able to support more need, as is the province in

fact. First Nations communities are disproportionately affected

throughout the north and central regions of this province.

We all inherited this issue, with its baked-in effects — climate

change. We must mitigate and protect our province, do what we can to

solve the crisis, just as we are living the consequences of decisions

taken and not taken in the past 16 years when it comes to the pine

beetle crisis and the shortage-of-fibre crisis. It is devastating the

forest industry of this province. Those who come after us will live with

our decision.

This is a crucial time. British Columbians need a conversation on

which species should be replanted, on how we address this problem, on

what new products — biofuels and engineered wood products — we can turn

to, to add greater value to the fibre volumes that we currently and, in

the future, will have.

That requires a government that will not be pushed over by the

interests of the contributors to the previous government that got the

forest policies that they wanted at the expense of the forests, the

people of B.C., the economy of B.C. and the future of the

province.

M. Morris: Lots of discussion on the pine beetle, climate change and how it

affects the environment that we work in. Contrary to the previous member

speaking, the issues surrounding pine beetle were widely recognized back

in the 1990s. That had, actually, manifested itself over the

years.

British Columbia has been planting monocultural pine plantations

since the 1970s, perhaps earlier, because it’s a quick-growing tree, and

it was commercially viable. So a lot of the plantations that we

replanted back in the 1970s, the ’80s, the ’90s and 2000s were

significantly affected by the mountain pine beetle epidemic as a result

of climate change. We didn’t have the cold winters that we’d normally

had in British Columbia over the years.

[11:20 a.m.]

That affected about 20 million hectares of land in British

Columbia, of pine. The hardest-hit areas were the small communities that

rely on the forest industry. Quesnel, Vanderhoof and the Lakes District.

Over 50 percent of their pine trees were killed during the pine beetle

epidemic. And 100 Mile, Williams Lake and the Prince George area in my

own riding also suffered significant losses from that.

Industry adapted to deal with the pine trees that were dead. They

retooled their mills. They came up with technology that could do it in a

safer manner than we’d ever done it before — and more quickly. As a

result of changing their mills and adapting to the type of wood that we

have, production went up. They’re able to cut more wood with less

people, with the electronic and technology systems that they have in the

mills. Even in the logging industry itself, it’s far safer. There are

far fewer people getting injured in the bush because of the technology

that we have — with the machinery that we have in the forests, which

reduces the number of people that we have working there.

In addition to the pine beetle that we have in British Columbia,

we also see the spruce beetle taking over in many parts of the province

here. In my riding alone, we have about 500,000 hectares that have been

killed by the spruce beetle in the last four or five years. And 500,000

hectares is far greater than the GVRD. So an area larger than the

greater Vancouver regional district has been killed by spruce

beetle.

That was the mid-term timber supply that the interior of the

province was going to rely on for a robust economy. The spruce trees

that we had there were going to replace the pine trees that had been

killed off by the pine beetle. Even though there were aggressive

replanting schemes in place that saw a large portion of the forests

replanted, we’re still seeing that it’s going to be years before we get

back to that robust forestry economy that we had before.

The other effect of the spruce beetle, the pine beetle and the fir

beetle — we’re losing a lot of fir trees throughout the Cariboo region

as well — is the effect that they have on hydrology. That’s the amount

of water that comes running off in the springtime, when we have the

melts like we have right now, affecting the stream flows, affecting the

lake levels that we have across the province here. All that is affected

by the millions and millions of cubic metres of wood that has been

killed by the pests out in the forests in this country of

ours.

It’s a serious issue. Climate change is something that we have to

adapt to. It’s something that our economy has to adapt to in order to

look forward into the future and to make sure we’ve got the social

programs and the infrastructure in place that British Columbians have

become used to. With the differences in urban and rural British

Columbia…. Rural British Columbia has been so reliant on the resource

sector, and the forest sector has played such a significant role in that

area. There are going to be some big shoes to fill there.

Again, I can’t reiterate enough the impact not only on hydrology

but the effect that it has on wildlife, on fir bear populations, on

ungulate populations, on our bird populations. The number of species

that we have out there that are so reliant on mature forest canopies and

a robust forest that have been affected…. We see our moose population is

down by 80 percent in the Omineca — higher than that in some other

regions. We have our mule deer populations on the decrease. We have our

caribou herds on the decrease as a result of the loss of habitat. We see

that a number of our bird species have decreased right across the

province, here, as a result of the loss of habitat as well.

Climate change has done a lot to this province. It’s changing the

total landscape of this province. It’s something we’re going to have to

pay attention to.

B. Ma: Climate change is real. While there are those who still insist on

expending valuable, clean, fresh air debating this fact, the

overwhelming consensus across the globe is that it is in fact real and

that mankind is in fact causing it.

Not only is climate change real, but the impacts of it are as

well. Glaciers have shrunk. Ice on rivers and lakes is breaking up

earlier and faster, creating flooding, including flooding observable

right here in British Columbia. Plant and animal ranges have shifted.

Precipitation patterns have changed. The effects that scientists had

predicted in the past would result from global climate change are now

occurring — loss of sea ice; accelerated sea level rise; longer, more

intense heat waves; longer, more damaging droughts; stronger, more

intense hurricanes.

[11:25 a.m.]

There is fear. I hear from my peers and those younger than me that

they worry about the kind of world that they would be bringing children

into — one that, perhaps, they would not want to subject their children

to. So they aren’t sure if they ever want to procreate.

Then there’s the painful reality of knowing that climate change

has already resulted in disease, in famine, in death. The painful

reality is that even if we globally were able to meet the conditions of

the Paris accord to hold the increase in global average temperature to

well below 2 degrees Celsius, even then, millions will have died. The

painful truth is that a 2-degree global warming target protects the

privileged. It protects us in North America, those of us in countries

away from the equator. The painful truth is that 2 degrees means that

millions in the global south will have already died from the effects of

that change to our world.

It’s no wonder that so many have vividly, desperately cried out

that we must act immediately to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and

move towards renewable energy — hydroelectric, solar, wind, geothermal.

The possibilities for alternatives are endless.

Now, I know what some of you might be thinking. You might be

thinking: “But you use products every single day that wouldn’t exist

without petroleum. Isn’t it a little hypocritical to complain about an

increase in the use of oil and gas products?”

My answer to that is no. Despite the underdeveloped imagination of

some, it is actually possible to honour and appreciate what the past has

given us, while still pursuing an even better future. It is possible to

say, “Thank you, I am grateful for the successes of our forefathers in

making possible all of the advances that we benefit from daily,” while

still saying: “Let’s keep moving forward.”

I think one of the challenges with this transition is the chasm it

creates between generations, the feeling that our older generations

might get when younger generations insist on change. Perhaps what is

being heard is that their old ways are evil. It’s hard not to feel

defensive when something makes you feel disrespected, unwanted and

antiquated. But the conversation doesn’t have to be this way. I love my

parents. Their sacrifices, their trials, their tribulations have brought

me to be the person I am today. But I don’t want to be my parents. I’m

not interested in taking on the same challenges that they took on in

their lives. They would not want me to either. That is not what they did

all of this for.

The generations that have come before us have given us a gift in

petroleum. But the greatest mistake is thinking that the advantages of

petroleum products end at our ability to burn it, rather than

recognizing that the gains we have made with it should help us launch

towards a better future together.

We disagree on so many things, so many issues in this House — so

much talking, so much posturing — that sometimes we forget. The question

isn’t really about pipelines and whether they are better or worse than

tankers, or if they’re better or worse than railcars, for transporting

whatever substance it is that we are debating about today.

The real question we need to ask ourselves is: what kind of future

do we want for our children? What kind of world and what kind of life do

we want for our grandchildren? What opportunities? What experiences? How

clean their air, how crisp their water? If we could see the forest from

the trees, we would have our answers.

R. Coleman: I’m glad to take my place in this debate, or discussion, this

morning. I am planning a trip to Kona in June, hopefully. Looking at the

extreme power as something that’s totally out of control in nature,

which is the volcano that’s taking place on the Big Island in Hawaii,

should be a message to us that we as humanity don’t really have control

over everything that’s in our society.

We have been dealing with fires and floods and changes in climate

now for decades. As a Minister of Forests at one point in time, I know

we invested millions of dollars to try and deal with the pine beetle,

but the pine beetle brought with it its own aspects. The weather wasn’t

cold enough to kill the pine beetle at a certain time of year. That grew

in nature. Of course, the trees couldn’t be salvaged. They die, they

dry, and then we get catastrophic fires, like we did last spring and at

other times we’ve had it.

[11:30 a.m.]

I know that in the flooding that’s taking place in British

Columbia, it’s not just about climate. In actual fact, the word has

always been in emergency management: “It’s not the size of the snowcap;

it’s the speed of the melt.” If the melt is very fast, no matter what

the snowcap is, you get the pressure of nature coming down with the

water, which is probably the most unbelievable thing you can ever see —

the devastation of water and how we’re going to manage it.

It really shouldn’t be about saying who should be doing what with

regards to the air. People always talk about California as being a clean

state, yet 33 percent of its electricity still comes from burning coal.

A larger portion of the state’s power comes from burning natural gas. In

actual fact, even though people think it’s green, it’s not. It’s less

green than British Columbia, with the portion of power that comes from

green sources and renewable sources in B.C.

I think what we face is how we predict and how we manage the

future. We can’t go spring to spring or fall to fall like we’ve tried to

do, even though we’ve done things to basically do stuff within the areas

in and around our communities, to take down the trees and try and build

things up so we can anticipate what would happen with an interface fire,

with homes built out in small communities across B.C.

It’s important that we do that. We should learn from something

like, for instance, Grand Forks. After that flood is over, what do we

need to do now with infrastructure to build up to protect and divert

that type of flood in the future? What’s the reality of it? If you look

at the areas across the United States like Houston, which is actually

built just below sea level…. Thinking that you can have dikes and

barriers built, that you could actually hold the ocean back, is somewhat

crazy, when you think about it. When that water decides to breach, it

breaches. There’s nothing you’re going to do about it.

What we need to do, basically, is continue to plan and be ready.

But we need to actually invest more in infrastructure. Even though we’ve

spent millions of dollars on the infrastructure in and around pine

beetle, for instance, to be able to manage and try to cut the timber as

quickly as it was serviceable, at the same time, recognizing the fire

was coming, we just couldn’t predict how the winds would react with it.

We cannot predict those things.

I’ll never forget the Kelowna fire. We were trying to put in

equipment to take out about 20 $300,000 homes. We couldn’t get the

equipment up. That was to build a fire guard. That was at five o’clock

in the afternoon. At six o’clock, the front of that fire was like a

hurricane. It was actually creating its own weather. It came through and

devastated 300 homes.

You cannot predict this, so you have to find ways to be ready for

it in how you use the products that are fire retardant for fire and how

you’re going to deal with floods. It is a challenge for all of us to

recognize that we are going to be spending more and more on

infrastructure to deal with this in the future. It’s important we

recognize that, because that’s what our citizens expect.

After Grand Forks is over, the work to be done is really

important. There are communities that will tell you that the things that

were put in place the last time they had a flood are today standing up

and protecting their community because somebody made the investment

after the fact to make sure it didn’t happen again. Yet we still can’t

control nature. All we have to do is look at that volcano and those

fissures that are popping up out of the ground and what’s coming out of

that as well — pollutants that are actually entering our

airspace.

We have a country like China still building more coal plants at a

more rapid pace than anyone else. They need to replace it with a cleaner

form of energy. They put more particulate in the world from that alone

than we do in North America, in our communities and in places like B.C.

that are trying to be green.

We had a carbon tax that was revenue-neutral. It was reinvested in

the environment. We need to recognize that that’s where it should be

invested — invested in technology to do things that would make it better

and easier for us to do our jobs.

R. Glumac: Climate change affects every aspect of our natural environment. No

matter what we do, it’s going to get worse. It’s just a matter of how

much worse it’s going to get.

It’s difficult for me to sit here and listen to the opposition.

Some of them are claiming they care about climate change, when, in fact,

their previous government did nothing regarding greenhouse gas emission

reduction. They set targets, but they didn’t meet the targets. In fact,

greenhouse gas emissions went up. Who pays the price? We heard the

previous member talking about volcanoes in Hawaii, basically saying:

“Well, since volcanoes are emitting all of this stuff, we can’t do

anything about climate change.”

[11:35 a.m.]

Who pays the price? Who pays the price? Our communities pay the

price. Our economy pays the price. Unexpected costs are going to

continue to go up, with more storms, more flooding, more fires, more

drought. These events will cause major disruptions to business

operations, which can severely restrict economic output. What’s the

solution?

When Donald Trump walks away from the Paris accord, joining

countries like Nicaragua and Syria, things look grim. But are they? The

reality is that despite Donald Trump, despite other higher levels of

government that aren’t taking action, cities all over the world are

taking action.

In the United States, 250 cities have made a commitment to reach

100 percent renewable energy by 2035. Chicago has embarked on an

ambitious energy retrofit plan, reducing carbon emissions and saving $45

million a year on heating and cooling costs. New York is investing

substantial money, billions of dollars, in energy retrofits.

San Francisco has met its goal of reducing greenhouse gas

emissions, at 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2017, and they did this

when the population increased by 20 percent and the GDP grew by 111

percent, proving that dealing with climate change is not bad for the

economy. It’s, in fact, an economic opportunity.

Each of these cities alone won’t solve the climate crisis, but

together their impact is incredible. The climate crisis won’t be solved

by focusing on the enormity of the problem but by supporting existing

efforts of cities and businesses and individuals.

I met the CEO of a tech company recently, a clean tech company in

Vancouver. Vancouver is the greenest city. They’re doing great work on

this. He was trying to do energy retrofits on his home. He had so many

challenges doing this — finding the contractors, getting the grants. He

doesn’t think he’s even going to be able to get the grants because it’s

too complicated.

I met a city councillor who described to me how a homeowner wanted

to replace an oil furnace tank because it was leaking. There was a great

opportunity there to put heat pumps into the home. But they didn’t do

that. They bought another oil tank because it was easier to

do.

This city wants to provide low-interest loans through local

improvement charges to help homeowners upgrade to heat pumps, but it

struggled with the provincial legislation. Cities are at the front line

of the climate crisis. They produce 70 percent of global CO 2

emissions. They’re trying to do the right thing. We, as a higher level

of government, can partner with them and help.

A lot of these emissions, for example, are coming from existing

buildings. Together, we can remove the barriers that stand in the way of

energy retrofits on those buildings.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Together, we can provide a mechanism to amortize the high upfront

costs of these retrofits. Together, we can help reduce the complexity of

doing the upgrades, helping to find the appropriate contractors,

navigating the grant process and the permitting process. Together, we

can share knowledge of the benefits so that everyone knows how easy it

can be to upgrade their home and what the benefits are in terms of

greenhouse gas reductions and savings on energy costs.

The problem of climate change is enormous, but the solution is

simple. We can work together and work towards a solution that’ll address

the climate crisis.

R. Sultan: I am pleased to respond to the motion of the member for Delta

North concerning the impact of climate change in our communities. Quite

appropriately, much of the debate this morning is focused on the impact

of the forest industry.

I have in front of me two important but contradictory documents.

The first is a

summary report by Susan Yurkovich, the redoubtable head

of COFI, dated December 12, 2017.

[11:40 a.m.]

She points out the central role the forest sector plays in the

British Columbia economy — 140 communities dependent on the forest

industry, $4.1 billion in payments to various levels of government,

$12.9 billion in provincial GDP. On it goes. Then she goes on to mention

some of the issues and challenges, including the mountain pine beetle,

decreasing timber supply, constraints on the land base, ongoing softwood

lumber disputes with the Americans, not to mention the

wildfires.

Ancillary to that, I have in front of me a report from the Forest

Products Association of Canada titled Tackle Climate Change: Use

Wood . This very interesting report points out two fundamentals.

Namely, forests are extremely important carbon sinks, and regeneration

of the forest plays a key role in CO 2 management.

Every year the industry plants about half a billion seedlings.

Beyond that, the gradual introduction of wood as a construction product

in high-rise buildings — say, seven storeys and higher — is proceeding

apace, and there are 13 such buildings under construction

now.

Juxtapose this essentially optimistic but realistic view of the

industry with a second report that came out, not so long ago, by our

good socialist friends at CCPA, our always reliable socialist think

tank. It’s by Bob Williams, who cut his spurs both in the Barrett and

Harcourt regimes, and it might be summed up by saying: “The story of the

industry decline and the case for regional management committees.” He

paints a very bleak picture of the fact that we are a remnant of what we

once were, and the data are there to prove it. It’s a rather gloomy

report, I must say.

Mr. Williams, not to be content with criticism, suggests a

solution. He’s going to turn it all over to regional committees. And I’m

sure regional committees will come up with an answer to all the issues

he raised.

As I look at the industry, myself, I draw upon my experience 25

years ago when I was president of a joint venture with the giant Bechtel

Corporation out of San Francisco, and we were intent upon building a

large $150 million fibreboard mill in Williams Lake.

My forester, the experienced late Neil Desaulniers, reminded me

that the spindly Chilcotin forest had sprung up since the European

settlers had arrived and introduced firefighting to the equation and

that, inevitably, the forest we relied upon would be harvested, become

decadent and the bugs would eat them, or they would burn up.

That was 25 years ago, pre–Al Gore, pre–pine and –spruce beetle

epidemic crisis. Nobody thought we would end up, actually, with all

three, but we did.

After an investment of about $35 million, the B.C. Investment

Management Corp., which had been funding it, decided to go home. Bechtel

went back to San Francisco, and there was enough money left for me to

repay at least the money advanced by the good, hardworking citizens of

Wil­liams Lake, and the project was abandoned.

We regretted we had not chosen OSB instead, where the markets were

somewhat more robust. But the people who did, down at 100 Mile House,

had to shut down their mill the other day for lack of fibre supply. When

the chief forester told us our project couldn’t proceed because there

wasn’t enough fibre, he actually did us a big favour.

I’m not sure how the Williams committee would have resolved these

issues, but I will conclude with one sentence, if I may, Mr. Speaker.

I’ve figured out what the problem is. To quote Pogo: “We have met the

enemy, and it’s us.”

[11:45 a.m.]

J. Rice: Right now people across B.C. are reeling from the effects of

flooding rivers. People are displaced from their homes, defending their

properties with sandbags and preparing for more to come with an expected

record flood season.

Recent emergency events, both here in B.C. and around the world,

have highlighted the importance of emergency management and

preparedness, particularly in light of climate change. These events have

a devastating impact on individuals, their families and communities, as

well as the economy.

Recovery from these events can take many months or years. Often

these same communities are exposed to the very same risk year after

year. The taxpayers of British Columbia and Canada pay hundreds of

millions of dollars in costs related to emergency operations and

recovery efforts.

In addition, damage to the provincial economy from these events

can be substantial. For example, as the costliest natural disaster in

Canadian history, the Fort McMurray wildfire will ultimately cost over

$5 billion for rebuilding and repairing homes and restoring

businesses.

Scientists agree that the incidence, severity and fre­quency of

natural disasters will continue to increase as the effects of climate

change develop. According to the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, the

average annual temperature in B.C. will increase by 2½ degrees Celsius

by 2050, and that’s only if GHG emissions are reduced by half. These

changes in temperature will have wide-ranging consequences on a local

and regional scale with numerous negative provincial impacts.

The following impacts are occurring and are anticipated to

intensify: sea level rise, resulting in increased erosion and

accelerated decay of currently exposed infrastructure; rising tides in

coastal communities, which lead to more frequent flooding and an

increase in the potential for a catastrophic flood in the Lower

Mainland; melting glaciers, which result in less cold water in river

systems, negatively affecting fish populations; an increase in the fire

season in susceptible communities by a number of weeks; an almost

doubling of days that exceed 25 degrees Celsius, exposing vulnerable

populations to heat-related illness; and variations in precipitation

patterns, resulting in an increase in coastal and inland flooding in

some regions and sustained drought in others.

Factors such as climate change are increasing B.C.’s vulnerability

to a number of natural hazards, such as wildfire, flooding and

landslides. If B.C. is to become more disaster-resilient, we need to

collectively understand risks more fully; guide and coordinate the

efforts of governments, including First Nations, partners and the public

more effectively; prevent and reduce risks proactively; and prepare for

robust response and recovery efforts.

These needs align with the four priorities identified in the UN

Sendai framework document for which Canada is a signatory. The

importance of addressing all phases of emergency management —

mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery — and involving all

partners are two of the concepts that are central to the United Nations

Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction.

This document sets out an all-of-society, long-term approach to

reducing the impact of disasters. It sets out a practical and

evidence-based system that involves the following priorities:

understanding risks, strengthening disaster risk governance, investing

in risk reduction, preparing for effective response and to build back

better in recovery.

Hon. Speaker, as of yesterday, there are nearly 2,000 homes under

evacuation order, 1,300 homes on evacuation alert and more than 4,000

people estimated to be displaced from their homes at this time due to

flooding-related events in B.C.

Snowpack levels in many regions have reached 150 to 200 percent

above normal. The warm weather has started about a month earlier this

year, and average temperatures were six to ten degrees above normal this

past weekend.

With this combined high snowpack and rapidly warming temperatures,

British Columbia is facing beyond historic high river levels. The river

forecast models show river levels reaching heights never recorded

before. In the next week or two, many rivers are about to exceed what

experts call 100-year return rates. That is, we only expect to see this

much water in the river systems once every 100 years.

Adopting a disaster risk reduction framework, such as the Sendai

framework, here in B.C. will help us better prepare for and mitigate the

costs of climate change on communities and our economy.

S. Thomson: I’m pleased to rise and take my place today in debate around the

motion: “Be it resolved that the House recognizes that climate change is

increasingly impacting communities and economies.”

[11:50 a.m.]

I wanted to talk a little bit…. We’ve, obviously, seen this

firsthand in Kelowna and in the Okanagan and are certainly experiencing

it again this year.

I want to just comment on the comments made by the member

opposite, the member responsible for emergency management B.C., and

recognize the very, very important role that emergency management B.C.

plays in responding to all of these situations. We’ve seen the good work

firsthand on the ground in terms of the systems, the community

volunteers that are in place, first responders, neighbours helping

neighbours through the process.

This really is a time when communities do come together, because,

as was pointed out, as we speak now, we’ve got hundreds of people on

evacuation, without homes. We’ve got hundreds more on evacuation alerts,

and if you watched the news this morning, those alerts keep growing. New

alerts for the whole of the Similkameen, new alerts for the South

Okanagan, all continuing to grow — very, very significant

impacts.

The snowpack levels are greater than those in 2017, and the melt

is really just getting underway. As pointed out by the member for

Langley, often it’s not the level of the snow melt or the level of the

snowpack; it’s how the melt occurs and how it comes off that overwhelms

the systems.

All of this points to the fact that climate change, climate

variability, is really having a very significant impact on our

communities and on our local economies. Members have commented about the

impacts of fire, the impacts of flood, and how the fact that the fires….

Then floods follow, and the fact that you’ve had the fires exacerbates

the impact of the floods, because the ground doesn’t hold water like it

did previously.

All of those situations compound to promote and lead to these

promptings of local states of emergency, shutting down roads, causing

drinking and separate water issues, not to mention the financial impacts

to individuals, businesses and government.

Now, as the Okanagan and our ridings in the Okan­agan…. I’m not

discounting at all the impacts through­out the province from this. But in

the Okanagan, our residents are bracing for another battle with nature

and the floodwaters encroaching, and these are very, very significant

impacts. In fact, just looking, as the member responsible for emergency

management just noted, at the river forecast — the forecast for Mission

Creek, which runs right through the heart of my riding in Kelowna….

Forecasts for the middle of this week have Mission Creek rising to those

one-in-100-year levels. So it’s going to be nervous, nervous days as we

look to that.

I know that at the local level, the communities have prepared.

There has been more mitigation work and preparation being undertaken —

the management of the lake level to bring the lake down to as low a

level as possible, respecting fisheries values and international

agreements and creating a reservoir that can take some of this. We hope

that that’s going to mean that the impacts this year are not like they

were last year.

We, as a previous Liberal government, committed additional funding

for flood mitigation — $173 million along with federal and local

governments for 168 mitigation projects. We topped up funding for

emergency management B.C., $15 million for public safety preparedness

initiatives, and $50 million for 17 community-based hazard mitigation

projects and upgrades to dikes and flood protection. All is important

work that will need to be continued, to be enhanced, and continued

investments are going to be made as we work on all of this

together.

[11:55 a.m.]

The members opposite talked a lot about the impacts of climate

change on forest health and forest mitigation, another area that’s going

to require continued attention. We must work together to manage this as

best we can, and it will take collective efforts.

B. D’Eith: I’m pleased to rise today to talk about climate change in our

province.

First, I’d just like to, as the last speaker, get back to some of

the core issues and some of the work that people have done in the world.

For example, Al Gore has spent pretty much all of his time since getting

out of office dealing with the crisis of climate change.

He kind of brings it all together in a very understandable way,

and you know, the science is basically there. The science community

overwhelmingly says, “We have to change,” but the question is: why? As

he says, 110 million tonnes of man-made carbon pollution is released

into the atmosphere every 24 hours. That’s amazing.

We have a thin shell of atmosphere, similar to the skin of an

apple. What’s happening is that layer is getting thicker and trapping

the heat, so the temperature is rising. What’s happening is the oceans

are heating up rapidly and leading to extreme weather, and we’re seeing

record downpours and record flooding. We’re seeing this right now in

B.C., with Grand Forks, Midway, Osoyoos, Kelowna, Smithers, East

Kootenay and all over British Columbia.

Land is drying out. Vegetation dries out. That means droughts are

deeper, which means wildfires are increasing. We saw that last year in

our summer. It cost the province over half a billion dollars and

affected the lives of thousands of British Columbians.

The heat is also melting the ice. Greenland’s glaciers are

melting, which means a rise in the ocean levels. Many cities in the

world are at risk, which means a refugee crisis.

The warmer temperatures also mean insects and the rise of disease.

We’ve seen the increase of invasive species like pine beetle, for

example.

Climate change is one of the biggest threats to the world economy,

but can we change? Absolutely. Renewable energy such as solar and wind

is becoming far more economical now, and we’re lucky that we have hydro

already. But we really should be making the change to reduce our

reliance on fossil fuels, and that’s happening. We have the ability,

now, for large storage batteries. We’re using LEDs, making electricity

more efficient, and nearly all automobile manufacturers are now offering

electric vehicle options. But will we? Will we do this?

Well, the Paris accord happened, and nearly every country in the

world agreed to reduce carbon emissions to a net zero by 2050,

notwithstanding the fact that the Trump government in the U.S. has

pulled out of the Paris accord. As some of the other members have

mentioned, many of the U.S. states and cities are actually moving

aggressively to meet their carbon targets and, in fact, are showing that

you can actually increase your economic benefits while decreasing your

carbon footprint.

Many say: “Well, B.C…. We’re a small player. What kind of

difference can we make?” The fact is that Canada should be, and can be,

a leader in creating industrial models that reduce carbon footprints,

and B.C. can be a leader in Canada. Our cleaner industrial models can be

exported around the world.

We need to make sure that the world acts, because flooding and

wildfires in B.C. are going to get worse until we can turn this around.

This means that, in the meantime, we have to adapt to the present

reality of climate change.

As we move forward — our mining, forestry and energy industries —

the world is going to demand that suppliers provide more green products

for export. B.C. can and should be a leader in producing export products

that are an example to the world about how things can be done. In fact,

with many industries I’ve met with in the past year — mining, LNG,

cement, forestry…. Many of these companies are showing a commitment to

producing the cleanest products to export in the world. That drive to

produce a lower carbon footprint is laudable for many of our

companies.

Having said that, though, the government has a huge role in

ensuring that we actually move towards a smaller carbon footprint, and

companies need to be encouraged — shall we put it? — to reduce their

carbon emissions. In fact, the previous government had a plan for

meeting climate change reduction targets, and none of those targets were

met. We’ve actually set legislative targets of 40 percent reduction in

carbon emissions from 2007 levels by 2030, and 60 percent reduction from

2007 levels by 2040. The current target of 80 percent reduction in

emissions by 2050 remains.

The new Climate Change Accountability Act will now require

detailed public reports from public sector organizations on climate

change adaption and enable the minister to set sectoral greenhouse gas

emission targets.

On carbon tax, we are gradually phasing in the federally mandated

carbon price, starting with a $5-per-tonne increase in the budget of

2018. The higher price on carbon will help put the province on a path

towards meeting B.C.’s legislative 2050 greenhouse gases. That is the

plan that we’re taking.

B. D’Eith moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Robinson moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 12 noon.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2018: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada