Fifth Session, 41st Parliament

(2020) REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

(HANSARD)

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY,

SECTION A

Virtual Meeting

Thursday, July 16, 2020

Morning Meeting

Issue No. 9

ISSN 2563-3511

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Committee of Supply

Proceedings in

Section A

Estimates: Ministry of Citizens’ Services

(continued)

S. Thomson

Hon. A. Kang

S. Sullivan

B. Stewart

Estimates: Ministry of Agriculture

Hon. L. Popham

I. Paton

THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2020

The committee met at 9:35 a.m.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

Committee of Supply

Proceedings in

Section A

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

CITIZENS’

SERVICES

(continued)

On Vote 20: ministry operations, $551,650,000

(continued) .

The Chair: Good morning, everyone. I think we are going to try to begin

now, officially.

I want to recognize that I am participating today from the

homeland of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking people,

today known as the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations. We extend our

appreciation to them for the opportunity to undertake the work

before us on this land.

We are meeting today to continue consideration of the

estimates of the Ministry of Citizens’ Services.

S. Thomson: Good morning, Minister. Good morning to all the staff that are

supporting the minister.

I appreciate the opportunity to continue the questions here. Just

to advise the minister, I’ll start off this morning with a couple of

questions around the budget and then a few questions to finish up the

discussion and some of the questions we had around the privacy side of

the ministry responsibilities.

About ten to ten or five to ten, MLA Sullivan, Vancouver–False

Creek, will have a question, and we’ll turn the floor over to him for a

question or two. Then — it should be around ten o’clock — we’ll be

turning the questioning primarily over to the MLA for Kelowna West, my

colleague Ben Stewart, around the FOI component and side of the

ministry.

Thanks again to the minister. I appreciate the responses to the

questions last week and look forward to being able to

continue.

The first question is on the capital side of the ministry. Could

the minister explain the fairly significant reductions in the capital

expenses, both in terms of the real property side, a reduction from $251

million down to $186 million, and under the enterprise services, $51

million down to $37 million? Particularly on the enterprise services,

with increasing data requirements, increasing cybersecurity threats,

increasing need for robustness in our systems…. I’m really interested in

what the reduction on the enterprise services component of the capital

costs is.

[9:40 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: Thank you so much for this question.

The Ministry of Citizens’ Services’ capital budget for 2020-2021

is $350.266 million, which is a net decrease of 16 percent, or $66.974

million, compared to the 2019-2020 budget. This decrease is largely

caused by reduced cash flow requirements due to the stage of multi-year

major projects. The projects include the Capital Park building No. 2,

Abbotsford courthouse complex, government workstations refresh and

leading workplace strategies.

[9:45 a.m.]

Also, the decreases are partially offset by capital

in­creases to fund additional facility infrastructure for

government, including construction on the Nanaimo Correctional Centre,

renovations to support segregation and accommodation in correctional

centres, facility improvements for the Ministry of Social Development

and Poverty Reduction services delivery offices, information management

and information technology — sorry, this is for the maintenance and

rehabilitation — and, as well, the energy-smart program.

S. Thomson: Thank you for that response.

Perhaps the best way to deal with this, rather than get into

further follow-up and questions on this, is…. We’ll submit the questions

in writing to get some more specific answers and details around what

makes up the components — particularly, as I said, around the enterprise

services component of it. I think that is what the minister was

referring to on the workstation refresh side of things. We can follow

that up with a specific request in writing.

A couple of questions on the privacy side of things. The minister

will be aware…. One of the key areas of privacy protection is with

respect to health data and health records. I don’t think anybody will

argue. That’s a component of personal information that is very, very

valuable and important to protect.

We’ve seen, over the last couple of years, a number of incidents

and issues around that. There was an audit done in 2016 by the Privacy

Commissioner around video surveillance and privacy compliance in medical

clinics. Then this was followed up in September 2019 with another one

around a compliance review of medical clinics. One of the components of

the commissioner’s report on that was: “The troubling reality, however,

is that privacy issues occur regularly within the medical field.” So

flagging an area of concern and of importance.

Can the minister outline what steps government is taking to

address the concerns raised by the report, particularly the 2019 report

from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner?

[9:50 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: Yes, I do agree with the member for Kelowna-Mission on the

importance of privacy with health information. The audit that the member

is referring to dealt with private clinics.

Let me tell you about our role in protecting privacy. Government

completes and reviews over 1,000 privacy impact assessments each year in

order to be assured that all government initiatives operate in

compliance with privacy law. Government wards off over 300 million

unauthorized access attempts to the government network daily. In

instances where information is mishandled or inadvertently breached,

government relies on a robust and consistent process to ensure that

immediate action is taken and potential harms are mitigated and

prevention measures are put in place.

Mandatory training of all public service employees and additional

training offered for those that work with sensitive information or that

are in privacy and security specialist roles such as the privacy

officers and information security officers…. These roles ensure that

privacy and security are well understood to be everyone’s

responsibility.

S. Thomson: To the minister: thank you for that overview.

One of the very, I guess, significant high-profile breaches was

the breach with respect to health data, and that was the breach with

respect to LifeLabs currently being investigated by the Privacy

Commissioner. We know that there has been a report done and an

investigation done and that there are some determinations. Currently the

report is not available for review.

A quick question. Can the minister advise when the ministry…? I

think this may have predated the minister’s appointment, but can the

minister advise when the minister, ministry, deputy minister was advised

of the breach initially, and by whom?

[9:55 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: On October 30, 2019, LifeLabs had notified the Minister of Health,

and on the same day the Minister of Health notified our investigations

office in Citizens’ Services.

S. Thomson: Can the minister advise us whether she has received a copy of the

Privacy Commissioner report, and what, from her perspective, the status

of the report is? Has the minister started to take initial steps within

the ministry to respond to the recommendations and the findings of the

report?

[10:00 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: The answer is no. We have not received the report. It is an open

investigation.

As for other actions that the government is taking, it is not my

practice to comment on open investigations. However, this is…. The lead

ministry is the Ministry of Health, so they will be the lead on this

particular file.

S. Thomson: Now I’d like to turn the question over to my colleague MLA

Sullivan from Vancouver–False Creek.

S. Sullivan: As relates to the archives, which I know are technically under

culture and museums…. My question relates to legislation like the

provincial Information Management Act — basically arising from the

decision to keep the archives closed till 2021. I know that was recently

changed. Apparently, they will be opening much sooner than

that.

It relates to the issue of the provincial archivist. That position

was ended at that point. When we had a provincial archivist, we had an

advocate for the archives. It was always so important to have someone

dedicated to good recordkeeping but also dedicated to the love of

history.

Next year is the 150th anniversary of B.C. joining the

Confederation. What better way to remind ourselves of what this means

than to strengthen the B.C. Archives with a provincial

archivist?

Because of this issue, we did learn how important the archives are

and to whom. We’ve realized so many people are patrons of the archives,

who are legal professionals that are engaged in the pursuit of justice;

civil servants pursuing the public good; landowners seeking affirmation

of boundaries, etc.; scholars and educators who are discovering stories;

film-makers and cultural institutions; engineers; issues of

environmental remediation; tourists, etc.

The archives are such an important part of our community. They are

the keeper of our provincial narratives. I just wanted to ask the

minister: given the importance of the archives, will she consider

reinstating the provincial archivist?

[10:05 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: I want to say welcome to the member for Vancouver–False Creek to

today’s estimates.

I agree with the member about the importance of B.C. Archives. In

B.C., the role of the provincial archivist is shared with the Royal B.C.

Museum and the B.C. Ministry of Citizens’ Services, and we work very

collaboratively together on this particular function. The ministry has a

dedicated team of archivists, and we take this responsibility very

seriously. Due to the current impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the

archives are closed. We monitor this on an ongoing basis.

So yes, I do agree with the member that this is a very important

function.

B. Stewart: Minister, thanks very much.

I want to move to FOI. I know that this is a file that has a

constant amount of consternation. Can you give us an update in terms of

the on-time response for FOI requests in terms of the percentage as to

meeting the guidelines that are set out in FOIPPA?

[10:10 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: I’m very proud to report government’s on-time rate was 80 percent

for many years, with considerable effort. This raised to 89 percent in

2018-19 and 83 percent in 2019-2020. The province saw a 41 percent

increase in request volume over the last three fiscal years, with over

13,000 requests received in 2019-2020 alone at an all-time

high.

These requests continue to grow in number, size and complexity. We

are receiving the highest number of general requests ever, with one

requester responsible for 72 percent of the over 8,100 general requests

received in the fiscal year for 2019 and 2020.

B. Stewart: Well, thank you for that information, Minister.

I want to go to this process about…. There was a report done in

the spring of 2019 by Deloitte, and I want to talk about the cost

drivers that are mentioned in that report. I wonder if the minister

would comment or could confirm that six of the eight cost drivers

identified by Deloitte are attributable to government internal

processes.

Hon. A. Kang: The facts of the report are accurate.

B. Stewart: Thank you, Minister.

I want to go to page 10. The context of the review focuses on only

one of the eight cost drivers — noted specifically, applicant request

types. Can the minister list for this House the applicant types and the

fees that are applied to based on the applicant type?

[10:15 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: Thank you so much to the member for that question.

The fees are not charged by applicant, but they’re charged by the

effort — for example, the size and the scope of the particular request.

In terms of fees, fees are not charged for personal requests. So

personal requests are free, and only 1 to 2 percent of FOI requests

result in a fee. If the member would like a detailed breakdown, we could

certainly provide that for you.

B. Stewart: Okay. You mentioned that the fees are for effort. I do have the

schedule of maximum fees, but I just wanted to clarify the applicant

types. Can you just go back and tell us: besides personal, what are the

other applicant types that you categorize them into?

[10:20 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: The request types include media, personal or individual, business

group, political party, interest groups, law firm, researcher and other

public bodies.

B. Stewart: Maybe I could just…. On page 10 of the Deloitte report, Minister,

it mentions “political party” three times. Can you just explain

why?

[10:25 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: In response, page 10 of the report mentions this request type

several times. In the last three years, we have seen the biggest

increase in this applicant type. In fiscal ’18-19 and ’19-20, a

political party submitted more than 10,700 requests. To give you an

order of the magnitude of these requests, it is approximately 68 percent

of all general requests at an approximate cost of $32 million to the

process.

This report, I would like to note, was written by an independent

third party.

B. Stewart: I certainly know that in the past…. You know, it’s not any

different in terms of who’s in the official opposition. Questions need

to be asked. Technology changes rapidly and is changing. And

unfortunately, the complexity of requests does increase that.

On page 6 of that report, the FOI processes across “government

ministries are highly variable.” Would the minister agree with this

comment in the executive

summary?

[10:30 a.m. - 10:35 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: To the first part of the question, I would have to respectfully

disagree. It is incorrect. During this government, we have seen a

significant increase in the number and complexity from political

parties, as indicated by the Deloitte report.

I do agree with the member and acknowledge that the facts in the

report…. The reality is that the ministry resources differently and uses

different technologies to help manage information. However, our staff

work constantly to improve information management practices and ensure

as much consistency as possible across government. We have a community

of practice. We’ve developed guidelines to ensure a cross-government

approach in our practices and do that consistently.

B. Stewart: Well, Minister, I know we would like to get the cost of this

down.

In terms of this report, it’s my understanding that you were

briefed on the Deloitte report about recommendations to make FOIs work

better. There are ten recommendations, I believe.

I wanted to ask you about what necessitated a need for guidelines

to be updated. With that, can you also explain an example of the

difference between non-topical and topical requests provided in the

training guide sent across government? And what is the process for

preparing electronic records after September of 2019, when these

guidelines were put in place?

[10:40 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: I’ll answer this question in two parts. With respect to change,

there is no change in practice since September 2019. Further to the

previous question, this is a good example of the provisions of

guidelines to reinforce consistent practice. We always look to

continuously improve, so this isn’t a change but, rather, an enforcement

of good practice.

In terms of the second part of the question, some examples of

non-topical requests versus topical requests. A non-topical request is

one that asks for all emails for the entire month. So there’s no topic

there. For the topical requests — on particular requests or policies,

for example, child care policy or housing policy. So just reflecting on

my previous experience as a teacher, being able to continually reflect

on the process and good practices is something that we continue to do,

similarly, in Citizens’ Services.

B. Stewart: I just had some technical difficulties there. I am hard-wired in,

and I missed some of the minister’s response. I’ll accept that my

colleague who is co-critic has heard it, and we’re going to move to the

last

part in this section.

We just want to…. I guess, in terms of this recommendation, is

it…? The recommendation to attempt to narrow and eliminate fees has been

removed. Is this applied to all applicants? Are they are evenly

treated?

[10:45 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: All applicants are treated the same.

B. Stewart: I want to move on to…. Just in terms of another OIPC report, an

adjudicator came out in September 24 of ’19 and essentially stated that

they were not convinced that the opposition requests were an abuse of

the right of access under FIPPA.

I just want to clarify. What is the “political party applicant,”

and what is the “opposition applicant”? Are they the same or

different?

[10:50 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: We track status as political party. We do not track the actual

party name. It could be one of the many political parties that reside in

B.C.

B. Stewart: I appreciate that. I do know that there are quite a few registered

in British Columbia.

I want to move on to proactive disclosure. I know that this is

something…. I’m sure that within government, more proactive disclosure

makes it less onerous on FOI to have to do all this work.

I want to go to a report by the Information and Privacy

Commissioner released on June 11, 2020. Privacy Commissioner Michael

McEvoy states: “Proactive disclosure is more than just a helpful

suggestion or best practice. It is a legal obligation under FIPPA.

Public bodies can help themselves and the public by proactively

disclosing frequently requested records.”

The report has three recommendations for all public bodies in

British Columbia: all public bodies should establish additional

categories of records; categories of records should be published and

easily accessible to everyone; government should update its open

information and open data policy to include guidance and tools to help

ministries identify and establish categories of records for routine

release.

I think the other thing that’s most important in this conclusion

is…. This investigation found that while some public bodies are

complying with

section 71, others must take action now to comply with

their legal obligations.

I think that probably the key in this particular report is it’s

looking at how the costs can be driven down by the bodies that are

required, under FOI or FOIPPA, to be able to do that.

I’m wondering if the minister can tell us: which of the expanded

categories for proactive disclosure have there been since forming

government? What are those categories? If we could receive that

first.

[10:55 a.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: We agree with the importance, that proactive disclosures are very

important. A reminder to the member that FOIPPA covers 2,900

organizations. It’s not just core government.

Currently there are eight proactive disclosure directives. In

2016, the first eight ministerial directives were issued. These

directives require ministries to disclose specific categories for

information without an FOI request. In 2018, two of these directives

were repealed and replaced with amended versions.

The eight categories of records are as follows: ministers’ travel

expenses, ministers’ and deputy ministers’ calendars, summaries of

information about directly awarded contracts, summaries of open and

closed FOI requests, records released in response to FOI requests,

summary of information about contracts with values over $10,000 Canadian

and summaries of information about alternative service delivery

contracts.

As well, in response to issues about more directives, as part of

this corporate proactive disclosure initiative, the OCIO continues to

track the FOI requests received by government to identify trends and

establish new categories for records for disclosure under

section 17.1.

The OCIO also continues to work with ministries to identify future

categories of records for disclosure under

section 71.1 and is actively

monitoring developments in other jurisdictions.

B. Stewart: I just want to be clear that I know some of those categories that

you just listed off there were things that…. When we were in government,

we introduced ministers’ travel, calendars and expenses.

Anyways, my question really is: if there are new ones, will you

agree to share that information with us so that we at least have an idea

of where we can cut down requests and help in terms of trying to make

this an easier process?

Secondly, I want to go back to a question that you answered with

the many political parties. I asked you the question about what is a

political party applicant and what is the opposition applicant. Are they

the same or different? What I really want to ask you is: is the

opposition considered to be a political party, or is it a different

category?

Hon. A. Kang: Yes, we will share that information about proactive disclosures

with you. In response to the second question, the opposition is a

political party.

[11:00 a.m.]

B. Stewart: I know time is tight. It always seems like a lot of time and a lot

of questions. But I want to just thank the minister and her staff for

what they’ve done.

One area where we do want to send in some written requests on,

that we’ve had quite a bit of correspondence on, is Service B.C. offices

during the effects of COVID-19 and the challenges for both the offices

as well as the people, the citizens, of British Columbia that are

actively having difficulty and some misunderstanding about the

preparations and rules around fair access to that information and a

number of other written questions.

I think at this point I’d just like to turn it over to my

colleague from Kelowna-Mission, Steve Thomson. He has the final

word.

S. Thomson: On behalf of my colleague and other colleagues who have

participated in this process, I just want to thank the minister and her

staff who supported her in the process for all the work and the

questions. As we said in our opening comments, this is a very, very

important ministry that touches all of our citizens in British Columbia

— an important role. We recognize that, and we look forward to

continuing to work with the minister and her team as we go

forward.

As my colleague mentioned, we will follow up with some written

questions and some other specific questions. The minister has been very

responsive to those kinds of questions in the past, and we appreciate

that.

Again, just on behalf of all of us, thank you very much, and we

look forward to continuing to work with you.

The Chair: Thank you. Seeing no further questions, I ask the minister if

they would like to make any closing remarks before I call the

vote.

Hon. A. Kang: Yes. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

My staff are in and out of this room, but all of us are very…. We

appreciate the questions from our critics. They have been wonderful

critics. I thank them for their kind words. As well, I want to thank all

the members opposite for participating in estimates. This has been my

first one. Very enjoyable. The questions that came forward really give

us a sense of how well we work together as government and our

critics.

I want to thank everyone on behalf of my ministry.

The Chair: Thank you, Minister. And thank you to all the

members.

Seeing no further questions, I’ll now call the

vote.

Vote 20: ministry operations, $551,650,000 — approved.

The Chair: Thank you, Members.

Now I will call a short recess of ten minutes while we prepare

for the Minister of Agriculture.

The committee recessed from 11:03 a.m. to 11:14 a.m.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE

On Vote 13: ministry operations, $77,261,000.

[11:15 a.m.]

The Chair: Minister of Agriculture, do you have any opening

remarks?

Hon. L. Popham: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do.

I’m happy to be joining all of you. It’s nice to see my critic,

MLA Paton. We don’t get to see each other very often these

days.

It’s nice to see your face, Ian.

I’d like to introduce my staff that are joining me today. This is

a very unique way of doing estimates, but I think that we have been all

working hard to find a way to do it smoothly. With me today, in my

office, is my deputy minister, Tom Ethier. I have my assistant deputy

minister Arif Lalani and my assistant deputy minister Jennifer McGuire.

I have my chief financial officer, Brian Fraser. And I have the CEO of

the Agricultural Land Commission, Kim Grout.

I also have a whole herd of Agriculture staff that are joining me

via teleconference, and I’d like to mention them as well. It takes a lot

of team effort to prepare for estimates and get through the day. I

appreciate everybody’s hard work. We have Graham Knox, Martha Anslow,

Shelley Canitz, Lonny Steward, Gavin Last, Mark Raymond, Wes Shoemaker,

Rotimi Famodile, Kirsten Pedersen, Ursula Viney, Brian Cotton and David

Travia. That’s the team that I have to support me today.

I’d like to say, just briefly…. I think we only have about six

hours. So I won’t give too much of an introduction.

This has been a very difficult year, which we’ve all been

experiencing, due to the pandemic. There have been some silver linings

in ways that our sector has changed the way they’re doing

business.

We’ve seen some extraordinary numbers coming out of last year’s

financials. So I think, given the setback we’ve seen because of

COVID-19, there is some hope that we’re on the right track. I feel

strongly that agriculture, fish and processing are part of the way that

we can become more resilient as a province. I look forward to continuing

the work that we’re doing.

Thank you very much. Happy to be here today.

The Chair: Now I’d like to ask if the member for Delta South would like

to make some opening remarks as well.

I. Paton: Thank you to the Minister of Agriculture for a lot of good work

that goes on. Being the Agriculture critic, I’m sure we’ll have six

hours of lots of critiques. I’ll put it that way.

I want to introduce myself. I also want to say that I’m kind of….

My partner, the co–Agriculture critic — I’ll call her Linda — from

Boundary-Similkameen, couldn’t be with me today. She has some family

issues. Anyways, I’ll be on my own here, along with some fellow MLAs

later on this afternoon.

I think I’ve said this a million times. I’ve been in agriculture

my whole life. A third generation Paton living on our farm in Delta. My

grandfather came to the farm about 1937. I’m living in my grandfather’s

house. I was actually born and raised on the farm that I’m still living

on today, 63 years later. So very involved in the dairy industry — I was

a dairy farmer for many years — and also in the farm auction

business.

I’ve been on so many committees, over the years, for agriculture,

whether it’s the Delta Farmers Institute, the board of directors for

agriculture at the PNE, the B.C. Youth in Agriculture board at the PNE,

the Metro Vancouver and the Delta ag advisory committee.

As the minister has said, it has been a very trying year since the

start of 2020. So many things, because of COVID-19, have affected

agriculture in this province. We can start with things such

as….

My history goes back to the auction business. So many ranchers in

this province depend on the bull sales and the auction sales that all

take place in February and March and April in this province. Those had

to be set aside or reworked to make it work, but it was very difficult.

Farm equipment auctions have been put on hold or cancelled.

Very disappointing for kids in agriculture and 4-H. All the fairs

and agricultural fairs have been cancelled, pretty much, this summer.

We’re still trying to figure out how we can pull off the 4-H auction at

the PNE, which we’ve done every year since the 1960s. Yeah, a lot of

trying times.

[11:20 a.m.]

Labour shortages, of course, are a huge thing in the province.

Then, with the COVID-19 outbreak, we saw some of the craziest things,

such as rationing of toilet paper. I must say, I’m probably not the only

one, but my prediction back then in February was we haven’t seen

anything until people stop and think: “What if there’s a positive

testing in our processing plants for fruit, for vegetables, for poultry,

for beef.” We saw that happen, and suddenly there was panic in the

streets. There were empty grocery store shelves.

The system of processing in the beef industry certainly got backed

up because of closures and shutdowns of processing plants, not only here

in B.C., with poultry, but also in the prairie provinces, with some of

the big meat production companies. It’s taught us a lot of things about

being prepared. It’s taught us a lot of things about the future and

being prepared with personal protective equipment in our processing

plants.

Anyways, I’m happy to get started. I thank you for this time. I

certainly wish we had 12 or 14 hours, but we’ll try and get through this

as best we can.

I’m going to start off with a news release that came out on

February 19, 2020. This is from a very respected group, probably the

most respected agricultural group in the province, the B.C. Ag Council,

out of Abbotsford.

On February 19, 2020, they put out a news release. It says: “B.C.

NDP Government Releases Disappointing Budget for

Agriculture.”

“The B.C. Ministry of Agriculture received a $2.8 million reduction

in funding for 2020. The reduction is primarily targeting travel and

office expenses, a freeze on hiring and anticipated program slippage.

Out of all the provinces, British Columbia continues to have the lowest

government expenditures in agriculture as a percentage of agriculture

GDP.

“Grow B.C., Feed B.C., Buy B.C. will not increase in its third year

as originally planned, meaning new food hubs will be on hold….

“‘As recent studies have reported, agriculture has significant

potential to grow Canada’s economy,’ says Stan Vander Waal, BCAC

president. ‘We believe this is also possible in B.C.; however, our

province still invests less money into the agriculture sector, relative

to its size, than any other province in Canada. We need to invest in

this sector if we want to realize the potential that it can

bring.’”

My question to the minister. How can this government possibly

stand up and tell farmers, ranchers and processors that agriculture is a

priority in our province?

[11:25 a.m.]

Hon. L. Popham: Thank you for the question. It’s always a pleasure to talk about

how much of a priority agriculture is and the successes that we’ve seen

with the supports that we’ve put in place.

I just wanted to mention, before I address the member’s question

specifically, that the Ministry of Agriculture budget is more than $95.4

million for ’20-21, which is almost $14 million larger than it was under

the previous government. I can say that the fiscal adjustment was an

untargeted budget reduction to each ministry for the years 2021 through

2023. It was untargeted, and the strategy for managing the reduction was

left to ministries to modify their budget allocation, applying their

knowledge of priorities and stakeholder needs.

This is consistent with the direction that was provided in

alignment with the government and ministry priorities. We focused on

protecting staff and the delivery of our core services with minimal

disruption to our stakeholders. We also protected existing funding for

Grow B.C., Feed B.C. and Buy B.C. and removed the planned expansion

funded in prior budgets. As a result, we primarily targeted operational

expenses such as travel, contract expenditures, information technology,

office and business expenses, and other discretionary

expenditures.

We’ll continue to monitor and evaluate operational work during the

fiscal year and then adjust accordingly, depending on emerging issues

and needs. I can say that the decisions that were made reflect our

strong fiscal management as a government. I believe that was a

responsible choice to make.

I. Paton: Thank you to the minister for that answer, but I’m going to ask it

one more time.

I’m going to frame it this way. The minister says that agriculture

is certainly a priority in the province of British Columbia. But the

first three or four things that would pop into my head if I were a

newcomer in agriculture in B.C…. I’d say there was virtually nothing

mentioned in the throne speech about agriculture. That tells you

something. The budget has declined by $2.8 million this year.

Agriculture is not even part of the B.C. economic recovery task force.

That certainly tells you something.

A group was formed called Changes to Bill 52. There are over 4,000

members of a Facebook site that are just so adamantly upset about the

direction of agriculture in Bill 52 and Bill 15 in this province. They

came to the Legislature as a protest back in May, with 38,000 names on a

petition.

Again, how do these four things add up to priority for agriculture

in B.C.?

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. L. Popham: I find the question that the critic has posed to be quite

interesting. We have the highest budget that Agriculture has ever seen

in the history of British Columbia, and that’s to the credit of our

government believing that food security is an extremely high priority

for us. It’s hard for me to understand the critic criticizing the

highest budget that Agriculture’s ever had, and much higher than it was

under his government’s leadership.

I think we’ve seen some incredible support coming forward for the

sector. Agriculture is significant when it comes to the economic

framework. I think COVID-19 has put a focus on the need to continue the

path that we’ve been working on. The critic says that we’ve decreased

the budget, that we’re not listening to the thousands and thousands of

stakeholders that there are in agriculture.

I can tell the critic this. When the pandemic struck, we began

making calls and contacts through our ministry. We’ve made over 6,000

contacts over the last few months. That’s listening to people who are in

the business, listening to farmers, listening to every part of the

sector. We have been checking in non-stop, and we’ve heard about the

challenges that they’ve faced, which included not just the challenges

around COVID, but in general.

Also, we’ve heard about some of the successes that people have

seen. The silver lining right now is that consumers are very aware of

the food system. I think that the focus that we’ve put on having a

strong domestic supply and demand is going to allow us to continue

making a plan for resiliency.

I’m not quite sure where the critic is going. Maybe he could tell

me again. If we have the highest budget that the province has ever seen

for Agriculture, how would that be something negative?

I. Paton: I’ve got several questions related to the budget, but to answer

the minister’s question briefly…. As years go by, everything tends to go

up, including…. Budgets will go up. The cost of farming goes

up.

[11:35 a.m.]

Interestingly enough, the government put out quite a release just

yesterday, I believe it was, to say that our sales are up $3.9 billion

in British Columbia for agricultural products. But what they failed to

say is that one of the biggest contributors to that increase is

cannabis. I think most people know my position on cannabis on farmland

in British Columbia.

It goes on to say, in an

article by Mr. Fletcher, that the

Agriculture Minister “credits the improved revenues to the province’s

work in ‘helping farmers farm and strengthen food security.’ But

two-thirds of the revenue increase over 2018 is from cannabis sales,

which rose $300 million as legal retail expanded.”

There’s really no mention of the aquaculture industry, including

salmon farming, which added to a huge part of this increase in cash

receipts into the province. But what we don’t see is the talk of what it

costs in increased expenses to run farms in B.C. A farmer may see

increased revenue from cash sales, but under this government, we have

seen increases to carbon tax, to the EHT, to minimum wage, to farm

equipment and farm building insurance rates, electricity, heating fuel,

machinery fuel, fertilizers, pesticides, seed, veterinary care and

business insurance.

We can see cash receipts going up, which looks good, but the costs

of production in this province are going through the roof, with all of

the added taxes and red tape that are happening under this

government.

My question to the minister is: can you tell me what is the single

biggest hit to the Agriculture budget regarding COVID-19?

Hon. L. Popham: I’m just going to briefly touch on some of the comments that the

critic said, but I also need to qualify his question, I

think.

B.C.’s farm cash receipts increased 13.3 percent, or $462 million,

which is bringing it to a record of $3.924 billion in 2019. Farmers’

total net income rose from $24 million to $66 million, which is a 174

percent increase. But the critic asked what the biggest hit to

Agriculture has been due to COVID-19, and I’m not quite sure what he

meant by that, if he could just maybe restate his question.

I. Paton: Well, I’ll rephrase this to the minister. How has COVID-19

impacted government revenues within the scope of this

ministry?

Hon. L. Popham: I guess I’m still a little bit unclear on the question. The critic

asked: what is the biggest impact on revenue to the ministry? Our

ministry doesn’t have a lot of revenue. But if he means the impact to

the entire sector, I’d have to say, honestly, that I think it’s too soon

to tell what the impact is.

[11:40 a.m.]

We do know that there have been some very big challenges for the

restaurant sector, which has impacted our farmers. There has been an

enormous impact on our seafood sector because of the challenges around

moving products internationally.

There are a lot of things that we will have to see, in the longer

term, how it turned out. We recognize that there have been big

challenges. On the positive side, we do know that there has been an

increase in domestic sales for farmers. We don’t have those numbers

officially. We have been hearing reports from farmers, for example, that

sell at farmers markets.

We offered a program to help farmers and seafood producers and

food processors get online with their products. We offered an e-commerce

program. Very popular. It was actually subscribed to immediately, the

first release of finances, and then the second time, again, very much

subscribed to. We could probably add more to our budget around

supporting e-commerce, and we’re looking at that. These are new ways

that farmers and fishers and food processors are able to move their

products.

COVID has posed many challenges, but we are looking at new ways of

doing business. We hear the term “the new normal.” We’re not going to go

backwards with this. We’ve even heard reports from up in the Comox

Valley. Someone who raises cattle has seen a threefold increase in their

sales online. There are definitely bits of good news throughout this

very challenging time.

I. Paton: My next question would be: were any additional funds provided to

the Ministry of Agriculture for COVID-19, and how were these allocated

within the departments? In other words…. So many things had to be dealt

with, whether it was hotels for migrant workers, meals for migrant

workers, travel costs, PPE to go to farming operations and processing

plants. What were the additional funds provided to the ministry because

of COVID-19?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. L. Popham: I’ve got four areas that I can talk to the critic about. We have

domestic migrant agricultural worker accommodation, this was $1.6

million; AgriRecovery, which is $15 million; and animal care facilities,

over $6.5 million. We’re also looking at, at this point, almost $20

million for the temporary foreign workers quarantine process.

I. Paton: Thank you to the minister for that answer.

I guess to continue on about declining revenues, my question to

the minister is: how have the agricultural revenues declined since COVID

shutdown? I’m thinking of bees, laboratory work in Abbotsford, permits,

licences — all the different things that would bring in revenue to the

Ministry of Agriculture.

Hon. L. Popham: The ministry gets less than $1 million in revenue annually. In

fact, about $982 million this current fiscal for the

ministry.

[11:50 a.m.]

Sorry, $982,000. My deputy corrected me. I was way, way up. It’s

$982,000 for the ministry, about $530,000 for the ALC fees.

Around the fees collected at the lab, the Abbotsford lab did not

stop at all through COVID. So there has been no decrease in revenue

there.

Another area where there are fees is around meat applications,

processing applications. We’ve seen a significant increase since January

1 of our class E applications. We’ve already had 28 applications come

through for class C. Last year, in total, we had about 23. So we see

significant more activity there. Then we’ve seen 11 class D applications

come in, in Alberni-Clayoquot since the changes were made there by our

government.

I. Paton: Thank you, Minister. My next question would be: how much of the

$1.5 billion in recovery funding that’s left is being requested by the

Ministry of Agriculture, and for what purposes?

Hon. L. Popham: Thank you to the critic for the question. Those discussions are

ongoing. Of course, we will be putting forward initiatives that we

believe are priorities, but there is nothing to report out as of

now.

I. Paton: Through you, Madam Chair, nothing to report yet on the recovery

plan for moneys left over for agriculture in British Columbia. Is that

correct, what I just heard?

Hon. L. Popham: It’s an ongoing process, and we are putting forward our

priorities.

I. Paton: To the minister, what agriculture groups in the province of B.C.

have come forward so far with priority requests for a portion of the

$1.5 billion in recovery funds?

Hon. L. Popham: Because the critic asked that, I will say that we won’t see a

complete list until the end of August. I’d like to also remind the

critic that this doesn’t pertain to the budget estimates

today.

I. Paton: Now that the province is in deficit, how will the ministerial

holdbacks be impacted?

[11:55 a.m.]

Hon. L. Popham: We believe that that question is better directed to the Minister

of Finance.

I. Paton: My question to the Minister of Agriculture. Could you tell me why

agriculture is not being represented on the Premier’s economic recovery

task force?

Hon. L. Popham: Our ministry has been hard at work making sure that we’ve made

contact with all of our stakeholders right across the province. All of

that information is being fed into the economic recovery task force, so

there is large representation from agriculture, fish and food

processing.

The Chair: Member, noting the hour, can this be your last question,

please?

I. Paton: Certainly. Thank you, Madam Chair.

This has been a very trying time — very disorganized — through

this pandemic for almost everyone, including farmers, including

agriculture, people trying to figure out where things are going with

changes to legislation.

My question to the minister…. A couple of your staff were very

well liked, Mr. Mack and Mr. Shoemaker. Why would there be a change of

DMs and ADMs in the middle of this pandemic?

Hon. L. Popham: I’ll note that that question is not relevant to estimates, but I

will say that any HR issues are handled through the public

service.

Hon. Chair, I move that the committee rise, report resolution and

completion of the estimates of the Ministry of Citizens’ Services and

report progress on the estimates of the Ministry of

Agriculture.

Motion approved.

The Chair: Thank you, Members. This committee now stands

adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 11:59 a.m.

Copyright © 2020 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

The Report of Proceedings (Hansard) and webcasts of

committee proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca .

For inquiries contact:

Hansard Services

612 Government Street

Victoria, BC V8V 1X4

Telephone: 250-387-3681

Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca

Published by Hansard Services under the authority

of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.