British Columbia Hansard — 20140501am Hansard v11n6

20140501am-Hansard-v11n6

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session, 40th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Th ursday, May 1, 2014 Morning Sitting Volume 11, Number 6

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC Second Session, 40th Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Linda Reid EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council .............................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing ......................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Amrik Virk Minister of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Norm Letnick Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development ........................................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Minister of Education ..................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister Responsible for Core Review .....................................................................Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Environment ..........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Minister of Finance .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations......................................................................................Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health ............................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of International Trade and Minister Responsible for Asia Pacifi c Strategy and Multiculturalism ..................Hon.

Teresa Wat Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ...................................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of State for Tourism and Small Business ....................................................................................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto Minister of Justice ...............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation......................................................................................................Hon. Don McRae Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ................................................................................... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon.

Todd Stone LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ......................................................................................................................................................Adrian Dix Deputy Speaker .............................................................................................................................................................................Douglas Horne Assistant Deputy Speaker ...............................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ....................................................................................................................................... Marc Dalton Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ................................................................................................................................................... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees .................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................Roderick MacArthur, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary Lenz

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Anton, Hon. Suzanne (BC Liberal) .............................. Vancouver-Fraserview Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal).....................................................................Penticton Austin, Robin (NDP) ................................................................................ Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP) ....................................................................Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ............................................... Cariboo-Chilcotin Bennett, Hon.

Bill (BC Liberal) ...................................................Kootenay East Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) ................................................... Peace River South Bing, Dr. Doug (BC Liberal) ................................ Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Valemount Cadieux, Hon. Stephanie (BC Liberal) ................................Surrey-Cloverdale Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .................................Vancouver–West End Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................

Burnaby-Edmonds Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) ........................................ Westside-Kelowna Coleman, Hon. Rich (BC Liberal) ...........................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .............................................................. Kootenay West Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ..................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Dalton, Marc (BC Liberal) ............................................. Maple Ridge–Mission Darcy, Judy (NDP) ..................................................................New Westminster de Jong, Hon.

Michael, QC (BC Liberal) .............................. Abbotsford West Dix, Adrian (NDP)............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ......................................................................... Stikine Eby, David (NDP) ..........................................................Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP) ................................................... Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ............................................................ Port Coquitlam Fassbender, Hon.

Peter (BC Liberal) ................................... Surrey-Fleetwood Fleming, Rob (NDP) .......................................................... Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) .......................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Scott (NDP) ............................................................Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) .............................................

Abbotsford-Mission Hamilton, Scott (BC Liberal) ...........................................................Delta North Hammell, Sue (NDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Heyman, George (NDP) .................................................... Vancouver-Fairview Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ............................................... Surrey–White Rock Holman, Gary (NDP) .......................................Saanich North and the Islands Horgan, John (NDP) .......................................................................

Juan de Fuca Horne, Douglas (BC Liberal) ..............................Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ....................................................Surrey-Panorama Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, Carole (NDP) .........................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................Esquimalt–Royal Roads Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) .............................................................

Nanaimo Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ........................................................................ Shuswap Lake, Hon. Dr. Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .........................................Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Letnick, Hon.

Norm (BC Liberal) ..............................Kelowna–Lake Country Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McRae, Hon. Don (BC Liberal) .................................................. Comox Valley Martin, John (BC Liberal) ..................................................................Chilliwack Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ..................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Hon.

Coralee (BC Liberal) .............................................Cariboo North Pimm, Pat (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River North Plecas, Darryl (BC Liberal) ....................................................Abbotsford South Polak, Hon. Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon.

Linda (BC Liberal) ..................................................Richmond East Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ........................................ Port Moody–Coquitlam Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ........................................................................North Coast Robinson, Selina (NDP) .............................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Routley, Bill (NDP) .................................................................. Cowichan Valley Routley, Doug (NDP) ............................................Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, Hon.

John (BC Liberal) ................................................ Nechako Lakes Shin, Jane Jae Kyung (NDP) ...............................................Burnaby-Lougheed Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Shane (NDP) ..................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal) ........................................ Parksville-Qualicum Stilwell, Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) ........................................ Vancouver-Langara Stone, Hon. Todd (BC Liberal) .........................

Kamloops–South Th ompson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal) ..................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal) ...........................................Vancouver–False Creek Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal) ..................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ............................................................Fraser-Nicola Th omson, Hon. Steve (BC Liberal) .......................................Kelowna-Mission Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ..........................

North Vancouver–Seymour Th roness, Laurie (BC Liberal).................................................Chilliwack-Hope Trevena, Claire (NDP) .................................................................... North Island Virk, Hon. Amrik (BC Liberal) ............................................. Surrey-Tynehead Wat, Hon. Teresa (BC Liberal) .............................................. Richmond Centre Weaver, Dr. Andrew (Ind.) .......................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wilkinson, Hon. Andrew (BC Liberal) ........................ Vancouver-Quilchena Y amamoto, Hon.

Naomi (BC Liberal) ................ North Vancouver–Lonsdale Y ap, John (BC Liberal) ......................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission ......................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South ............................................................................Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West ...................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Alberni–Pacifi c Rim ..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Boundary-Similkameen ................................................................ Linda Larson Burnaby–Deer Lake ................................................................... Kathy Corrigan Burnaby-Edmonds ..........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .............................................................Jane Jae Kyung Shin Burnaby North .............................................................................. Richard T.

Lee Cariboo-Chilcotin ........................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North .................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ......................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Hope ....................................................................... Laurie Th roness Columbia River–Revelstoke .................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley...........................................................................Hon.

Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .....................................................Douglas Horne Coquitlam-Maillardville........................................................... Selina Robinson Cowichan Valley ................................................................................

Bill Routley Delta North ..................................................................................Scott Hamilton Delta South...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola....................................................................................

Jackie Tegart Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ..................................................Hon. Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country ..................................................... Hon. Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon. Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon.

Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................ Dr. Doug Bing Nanaimo ........................................................................... Leonard Eugene Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan .........................................................

Doug Routley Nechako Lakes ........................................................................ Hon. John Rustad Nelson-Creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall New Westminster ............................................................................... Judy Darcy North Coast......................................................................................Jennifer Rice North Island .................................................................................. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................Hon.

Naomi Y amamoto North Vancouver–Seymour ..................................................Jane Th ornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...................................................... Dr. Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum .................................................................Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................

Pat Pimm Peace River South ............................................................................Mike Bernier Penticton............................................................................................ Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam ..........................................................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam ................................................................Linda Reimer Powell River–Sunshine Coast ................................................. Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie .............................................................

Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ................................................... Hon. Shirley Bond Richmond Centre ......................................................................Hon. Teresa Wat Richmond East ..........................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ..............................................................................John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands .................................................... Gary Holman Saanich South ................................................................................

Lana Popham Shuswap ................................................................................................Greg Kyllo Skeena .............................................................................................. Robin Austin Stikine ....................................................................................... Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Fleetwood ........................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ................................................................................. Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................................... Marvin Hunt Surrey-Tynehead ......................................................................Hon. Amrik Virk Surrey-Whalley..............................................................................

Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ....................................................................... Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Fairview ..................................................................George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek ................................................................... Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview ......................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Vancouver-Hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara .................................................................Dr. Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .........................................

Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey .........................................................................David Eby Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................ Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Vancouver–West End ...............................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill .......................................................................Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.........................................................................Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................. Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ..........................................................Jordan Sturdy Westside-Kelowna ................................................................

Hon. Christy Clark Party Standings: BC Liberal 49; New Democratic 34; Independent 2

CONTENTS Th ursday, May 1, 2014 Morning Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members ..................................................................................................................................................... 3355 Statements (Standing Order 25B) ......................................................................................................................................... 3356 Cystic fi brosis awareness and fundraising walk S. Simpson Bonny Makarewicz J. Sturdy Canadian Motion Picture Park in Burnaby R.

Chouhan Historic Joy Kogawa House Moira Stilwell Burnaby school district K. Corrigan Liam Firus J. Th ornthwaite Oral Questions ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3358 Changes to forest tenure system A. Dix Hon. S. Th omson Hon. M. de Jong N. Macdonald Environmental assessment of natural gas plants and consultation with First Nations D. Donaldson Hon. M. Polak R. Austin Environmental and health impacts of proposed U.S. coal transports through B.C. communities V . Huntington Hon.

T. Lake Hon. M. Polak Income assistance policy on child support payments M. Mungall Hon. D. McRae Statements ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3363 Leader of the Offi cial Opposition B. Ralston A. Dix Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole House ............................................................................................................................................ 3363 Bill 20 — Local Elections Campaign Financing Act (continued) S. Robinson Hon. C.

Oakes Reporting of Bills ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3367 Bill 20 — Local Elections Campaign Financing Act Th ird Reading of Bills ......................................................................................................... .................................................... 3367 Bill 20 — Local Elections Campaign Financing Act

Committee of the Whole House ............................................................................................................................................ 3367 Bill 21 — Local Elections Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 S. Robinson Hon. C. Oakes D. Eby G. Heyman S. Simpson S. Chandra Herbert Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply .............................................................................................................................................................. 3372 Estimates: Ministry of Education (continued) R. Fleming Hon. P . Fassbender

THURSDAY , MAY 1, 2014 Th e House met at 10:04 a.m. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers. [1005] Introductions by Members Hon. T. Lake: I rise in the House today to introduce a group of representatives from the Health Sciences Association here in British Columbia. In particular, I would like to recognize Val Avery, who is a physiother- apist at Royal Jubilee Hospital here in Victoria and has been the HSA president since September 2013.

Many members of the House on both sides had the opportunity to experience the HSA generosity this mor- ning, being hosted for breakfast and getting the chance to be introduced to members from all around the province. HSA represents more than 17,000 health care and social service professionals in over 80 diff erent disciplines. So if it ends in "ist," they are likely represented by the HSA. Th ey deliver health promotion, diagnostic, clinical and rehabilitation services throughout the province in acute, residential and community care settings.

I would just like to have the House welcome the HSA and thank them for the very important work they do for the people of British Columbia. J. Darcy: I'd like to join with the minister in welcom- ing the Health Sciences Association here today. Th ey represent, as the minister said, 76 diff erent professions in every corner of the province, in every aspect of health care, from acute to community care to residential care. I know that their members work very hard and profes- sionally every single day.

I know that they also all give their very best every day, oft en under very stressful con- ditions, to provide the highest degree of professionalism in health care. I enjoy very much working with them, most recently on issues like lab reform. I look forward to continuing to work with them on the many, many issues that they have to bring forward to the members of this Legislative Assembly. Will the House please join me also in making the members of HSA, and especially the president, Val Avery, very welcome today. J.

Thornthwaite: I would like to welcome, actual- ly, a daughter of a very, very good friend of mine, Ava Slykhuis. She and her school, Vancouver Talmud Torah, will be touring the Legislature today with their teachers Lisa Romalis and Becky Chan. I'd like for the House to please make them welcome. I'm sure they're going to be coming in shortly. Welcome them to Victoria, and wel- come them to the Parliament Buildings here. M. Karagianis: Although I know it's not common to try and single out people from the contingent that's here, with the Health Sciences Association today is actually a very good friend of mine.

Ali Gaul served as a munici- pal councillor in Esquimalt for some time. She's a terrifi c woman, a great friend, and I'd just like to give her a spe- cial welcome this morning. Hon. T. Stone: I would like to join with the other members who have spoken already this morning in wel- coming all of the HSA members here to the House. In particular, I would like to welcome one of their mem- bers who is a constituent of mine in Kamloops–South Th ompson, Carol Blake. Carol is a social worker at Royal Inland Hospital. She works with about 900 patients at risk for kidney failure.

Her valuable work helps keep these patients healthy and prevents or delays the need for dialysis. I want to thank Carol for the extremely important work that she does for patients in Kamloops. I would ask the House that you please join me in welcoming her here this morning. K. Conroy: I have a number of introductions. First, I'd also like to welcome an HSA member. Gwen DeRosa is from Rossland, in our community. She is a commun- ity liaison for the West Kootenays and does an excellent job of that. Also, I have a delegation from the city of Trail.

With us, we have Councillor Kevin Jolley; the chief administrative offi cer, David Perehudoff ; and also Mayor Dieter Bogs. Now, Dieter has been active in municipal and regional politics for over 30 years. He served on Trail city council for 27 years and was fi rst elected mayor in 1997, serving as mayor for 17 years. He has served on numerous boards and was a founding member of the Columbia Basin Trust. It's the last time, I think, that I will be introducing him as His Worship, as Dieter has announced he is retiring this fall from municipal politics.

He will be sorely missed and will leave big shoes to fi ll. [1010] I hope everybody would join me in welcoming them all to the House today. R. Sultan: In the precinct today are 32 representatives from Johnson and Johnson, a large health science organ- ization which markets biopharmaceuticals and diagnos- tic, surgical and consumer products. J&J are in British Columbia this week identifying part- nership and investment opportunities. Th eir 160 local employees are engaged in almost 50 clinical trials with, for example, Julio Montaner's Centre for Excellence in 3355

British Columbia Debates3356 Thursday, May 1, 2014 HIV/AIDS at St. Paul's, the B.C. Cancer Agency, the Canadian Diabetes Association and our outstanding re- searchers at UBC. Th eir subsidiary, LifeScan, in Burnaby is a world leader in diabetes management. Would the House please welcome J&J to the precinct. G. Heyman: I'd also like to welcome Joe Sebastian, the region 4 director for the HSA, on their executive. I had the pleasure of meeting Joe and talking with him to- day. He's a medical radiation technologist. He not only works in Vancouver-Fairview, but he's one of my con- stituents.

Would the House please join me in making Joe very welcome. S. Simpson: I'm pleased today to welcome my sister. Debbie Simpson is here, along with her son, my nephew, Liam. I'd ask the House to make them welcome. Statements (Standing Order 25B) CYSTIC FIBROSIS AW ARENESS AND FUNDRAISING W ALK S. Simpson: I was happy to introduce my sister, Debbie, and nephew, Liam, earlier today. Th ey've joined us here specifi cally around the commencement of Cystic Fibrosis Awareness Month for this, the month of May.

Th is is a critical event for the 4,000 mostly young Canadians who suff er from this most serious genetic disease and for their families and loved ones who support their care and are concerned for their futures. CF causes mucus buildup that damages the lining of the lungs as well as blocking an enzyme required for the intestinal digestive system. Sadly, there is no cure today for CF , and too oft en this disease is fatal. Since 1960, Cystic Fibrosis Canada has invested over $140 million in research, care and support for those suff ering from CF and for their families.

For Liam and the thousands of other young people with CF , this sup- port is critical in so many ways. While there is no cure today, we do know that real progress is being made through research, including treatments that are now in play that have had positive results around certain strains of CF . Th e research is on- going to expand on these successes, with the hope that we will build on these current discoveries to soon fi nd treatments that either cure CF or ensure that it becomes a chronic disease that is manageable. Th at work is ongoing, but it does need more support.

On May 25 the annual Great Strides event will take place again at Queen's Park in New Westminster. Th is fi ve- kilometre walk raises money and awareness for the fi ght against CF . I look forward to participating again in this walk and want to encourage all members of this House and those watching to be part of the walk or to make pledges to support those who are walking. I truly believe that we are making real progress on this tragic disease. However, we all want this work to come more quickly to a successful conclusion, a conclusion that will be realized when we win the fi ght against CF . BONNY MAKAREWICZ J.

Sturdy: I rise today to acknowledge the passing of a long-time Whistler resident and award-winning photo- journalist, Bonny Makarewicz, who lost her courage- ous two-year battle with melanoma on March 27 at the age of 51. For more than two decades Bonny had a unique role in documenting pivotal moments in Whistler's history and its development into a world-class resort, while at the same time capturing the spirit and personality of the community, the people who came to work and play, and the natural beauty that inspired her work.

She received numerous provincial and national awards for her images, which were published regularly in the Vancouver Sun and Province, the Whistler Question and Peak newsmagazine, as well as national daily newspapers. Her work was also featured in Ski Canada and other magazines and in the book Top of the Pass: Whistler and the Sea-to-Sky Country . [1015] Bonny and her photos were incredible ambassadors for our province.

Her work showcased Whistler, Vancouver and other B.C. locations in the New York Times in many articles, as well as assignments for the european pressphoto agency, including the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, which garnered international exposure for her work and for Whistler. She photographed not only members of various royal families, world leaders, international athletes, celebrities and a politician or two, but also school children, aspir- ing athletes and other locals in their everyday lives, doing what makes living in the Sea to Sky so special.

Her contributions to her community are many and will live on in her photographs and in the hearts of her family, friends and peers and the countless people she came in contact with through the Sea to Sky and be- yond. Certainly, that was refl ected in her memorial at the Fairmont in Whistler. She will be admired for her brave fi ght against can- cer that took her life, as it takes the lives of so many British Columbians.

As we leave Cancer Awareness Month, it's only fi tting that we honour people like Bonny Makarewicz, and all those touched by this insidious dis- ease, and recognize the people working hard to fi nd a cure.

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3357 CANADIAN MOTION PICTURE PARK IN BURNABY R. Chouhan: It gives me great pleasure to speak about the fi lm industry in Burnaby-Edmonds — in particular, the Canadian Motion Picture Park. CMPP , as we call it, was created in the year 2000 with one stage and offi ces near Marine Way in Burnaby. Over the past 14 years CMPP has built 11 fi rst-class, purpose-built film stages and approximately 65,000 square feet of offi ces.

Furthermore, CMPP manages a fi lm production backlot which consists of a ten-acre site with fi ve support buildings, studios and — the only one of its kind in Canada — a standing New Y ork street set with six streets on 6.5 acres of land. CMPP is one of the largest, if not the largest, purpose- built film production centres in B.C. and in Canada. Th anks to the leadership of president Alec Fatalevich, vice-president Wolf Isachsen and business development manager Jennifer Fatalevich, CMPP is expanding even further and just about to start the construction on a site called Cineprep.

Th is new production centre will have a 45,000-square-foot stage, which will be the largest of its kind in Canada. Th e fi lm productions that lease CMPP facilities fi nan- cially support hundreds of companies throughout B.C. and Canada. Th ey employ from 500 to 1,200 specialists and tradespeople on site at any given day. In addition to creating green jobs, these productions are a huge benefi t for the local community beyond what one can see. With the necessary support from the federal and provincial governments, fi lm production on site can be doubled in a very short period of time.

I wish the CMPP a very prosperous future. HISTORIC JOY KOGAW A HOUSE Moira Stilwell: I rise in the House today to recog- nize the Historic Joy Kogawa House in Vancouver. Th is house, which is the childhood home of renowned poet and novelist Joy Kogawa, stands today as a symbol of rec- onciliation and a cultural and historic reminder of the internment of Japanese Canadians during World War II. Author Joy Kogawa lived in this house as a child with her family until 1942, when the house was confiscat- ed and the family was forcibly removed to the Interior of British Columbia.

Th is injustice is featured in many of Joy Kogawa's books, including her award-winning and widely read novel Obasan. For her contributions to preserving Japanese-Canadian history, Joy Kogawa was awarded the Order of Canada in 1986 and the Order of British Columbia in 2006. Today the Joy Kogawa House stands as a cultural and historic landmark of provincial signifi cance. It has been reclaimed as a symbol of resilience and hope. Th e Historic Joy Kogawa House Society and land conservancy have reclaimed and transformed the house into a com- munity arts and literary hub.

Th e Joy Kogawa House holds an annual writers-in- residence program, cultural and educational programs and regular public workshops and events. Today I ac- knowledge Joy Kogawa and the Historic Joy Kogawa House Society for preserving and maintaining this com- munity treasure, and support them in their continuing work. BURNABY SCHOOL DISTRICT K.

Corrigan: I'm pleased to acknowledge the accom- plishments of the Burnaby school district — a leader in innovation, effi ciency, academic excellence, inclusiveness and environmental sustainability, thanks to the wonder- ful teachers, administrators, staff and board. [1020] The district has one of the largest advanced place- ment programs in Canada, high rates of completion and transfer to post-secondary education and leading-edge literacy programs.

Its vibrant visual and performing arts programs are the most comprehensive in the province, including specialized music teachers and band programs in every elementary school. Specialized programs include French immersion, a Mandarin language arts elementary program, a fi ne arts elementary school and fi ve sports academies in hockey, soccer, swimming, soft ball and basketball. Burnaby has an extensive on-line learning program and one of the largest community and continuing education programs in the province.

Burnaby is also an inclusive and caring district — as evidenced, for example, by the Hub program, school meal programs and eight community schools serving the more challenged neighbourhoods of Burnaby. It's a highly effi cient district, with one of the lowest ad- ministrative costs at 2.4 percent of the budget. In addi- tion, revenue is generated through a variety of means, including a highly successful and carefully administered international education program, which brings in more than $14 million annually.

Th e district is also well served by many partnerships, including with the city of Burnaby, which has provided recreation facilities and playing fi elds at many school sites. As well, the city of Burnaby supports the eight commun- ity schools, in addition to adult crossing guards. Th ere are 30 child care centres at district schools. Partnerships with B.C. Hydro and Fortis fund 1.5 positions and save approximately $1.2 million per year in energy costs. A partnership with the board of trade has meant that 1,500 employers off er work experience in Burnaby.

A strong parent advisory council works closely with the district and a very active district student advisory committee as well — all of this despite having the low- est per-pupil funding in the province. Congratulations

British Columbia Debates3358 Thursday, May 1, 2014 to the board. As well, I'd like to particularly congratulate James Sanyshyn, who was recently elected to the board of the B.C. Teachers Federation. LIAM FIRUS J. Th ornthwaite: It's with great pride that I rise to- day to speak about Liam Firus, an accomplished athlete, North Vancouver resident and Canadian Olympian. Liam started skating at the age of nine and quickly transitioned from hockey player to fi gure skater, com- peting at various levels before deciding to pursue his Olympic dreams.

Since hanging up his hockey skates, Liam has found lots of success on the ice. He gained national recognition when he won the 2010 Canadian junior title and is the 2014 Canadian national bronze medallist. Despite Liam's many achievements, his road to the Sochi Winter Olympic Games was long and painful. He suffered a debilitating groin injury in 2013, which forced him to stop training altogether. He was still undergoing physiotherapy and rehabilitation at a time when other athletes had already completed months of training and were competing in summer games.

He held back, but he was back on the ice and practi- cing full programs by September, leaving him just five short months to train for Sochi and earn a spot on the Canadian figure-skating team. His hard work paid off , and in January 2014 he nabbed the third spot in men's singles. He realized his Olympic dream on February 13 when he competed at the Iceberg Skating Palace in the men's short program, placing 28th overall. I had the fortune of meeting Liam when I presented the Vancouver Skating Club with a gaming grant cheque, and I was immediately struck by his tenacity and deter- mination.

In Sochi he represented our country with pas- sion and humility, and the entire North Shore is very proud of him. Many local sponsors, such as Western Stevedoring, provided donations and helped Liam make it to Sochi. He now has his eyes set on the 2018 games and is look- ing forward to getting helped to PyeongChang. I want to encourage anyone who can give to sponsor Liam and help to send him to South Korea. I know we'll be seeing many more great things from Liam, and I ask the House to join me in wishing him well on his journey to the 2018 Winter Games.

Oral Questions Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Opposition. [Applause.] [1025] CHANGES TO FOREST TENURE SYSTEM A. Dix: Now who do I ask the question to? [Laughter.] Th e question is to the Minister of Forests. Over the past 12 years B.C. has lost 30,000 forest jobs. We've seen the health of the forest degrade. We've seen raw log exports shoot through the roof. So you'd think that forestry chan- ges would address these enormous problems. Instead, the government is essentially attempting to privatize vast tracts of public lands, without any real benefi t to British Columbians, through an area-based tenure scheme.

Can the minister explain why he's rushing to give huge private corporations de facto ownership over pub- licly owned land when there is no good reason to do so? Hon. S. Th omson: With the recognition provided to the Leader of the Opposition, I'm pleased to take the question. What I want to point out and point out very clearly: the mid-term timber supply committee process toured the province, received input, brought forward a recom- mendation that said to investigate, to look at increasing the diversity of area-based tenures in the province.

Very clearly, if you look through the recommendations of the committee, we are responding directly to those recom- mendations. Th e recommendation said to "gradually increase the diversity of area-based tenure using established criter- ia for conversion." Th at is what we are consulting about currently. It said, "Before considering a conversion of the licensee's replaceable volume-based tenures, in whole or in part," evaluate the criteria. Th at is what we are doing. We are in the process of consulting around those cri- teria. We are in an engagement process with commun- ities, with industry, with stakeholders.

In doing that, we are responding directly to the recommendations of the mid-term timber supply committee report and direct- ly to the recommendations that were supported by the members opposite who were part of that mid-term tim- ber supply committee. Madame Speaker: Th e Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental. A. Dix: Th ese changes simply make no sense. Th e min- istry's own science disputes the minister's claims, and key players in the industry think this is a bad idea in forestry today and tomorrow.

Don Kayne, the CEO of Canfor, for example, has said that making wholesale changes to the management of publicly owned land can't be done with- out the consent of the owners of the land. He says: "To Canfor, the public opposition to this proposal is a deal- breaker. It risks setting forest companies against…pub- lic land owners." Th ere are simply other priorities, and this will under- mine public control of the land. Again, can he explain

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3359 to whose benefit are these changes being made? For whose benefi t? It doesn't appear to be the forest indus- try. It doesn't appear to be workers. It doesn't appear to be communities. Hon. S.

Th omson: Again, the process — we are under- way — responds directly to the recommendations of the mid-term timber supply committee, recommendations to look at increasing the diversity of area-based tenures, to take a walk-before-you-run approach, to look at how this tool can be one of the tools in the toolbox to respond to the mid-term timber supply committee recommenda- tions. Th at is what we are doing. I appreciate Canfor's perspective on this. I think if you look at that, it would clearly say that this is not be- ing done just in the interests of the large licensees.

If you look at the responses that we've had through this process and you look at companies like C&C and companies like Dunkley, independent companies through that region all believe that area-based tenures can be a tool in the tool- box that helps fi ll in some of the gap in the mid-term timber supply committee. It is not a panacea, but it's one of the tools in the toolbox that we feel is worth moving forward on, one that we feel is worthy of consultation.

Th at is the process we're in, a process led by a well- respected former chief forester of the province — a per- son who was directly involved in the mid-term timber supply committee review process. Th at process is under- way, and the direction forward will be informed by that consultation process. Madame Speaker: Th e Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental. [1030] A. Dix: W ell, what Mr . Kayne is saying is what the opposition is saying. It's what scientists are saying. It's what the Forest Service is saying, which is that the pri- ority should be forest health. What does he say?

He says: "We believe that government resources should be focused on maintaining the health of the interior forest sector, completing an updated forest inventory to support planning and decision- making, resourcing smaller tenure holders and the B.C. Timber Sales program so they can access their timber tenure volume and assisting communities with any necessary rationalizations in pri- mary manufacturing." In other words, he's suggesting a completely diff erent direction, as are most communities and most people who are watching this, including the minister's own staff .

Can the minister explain why this is the priority, why the gov- ernment is engaging in this scheme, when they should be focusing on the health of our forests? Hon. M. de Jong: Th e Leader of the Opposition has raised an important issue that I'm sure will be pursued at length, but I think it is appropriate to recognize that there are changes afoot, and the next time the hon. mem- ber rises, it will be to ask a question in a slightly diff er- ent capacity.

I frequently disagreed with the Leader of the Opposition but have always respected the passion that he has brought to this place and to public aff airs gener- ally and certainly recognized his abilities. He has held a post that is diffi cult, challenging and thankless, but it has also been a post that is integral and essential to the practising of parliamentary democracy and has made a unique contribution to this place. Question period is per- haps the most appropriate time for this House and this side of the House, all sides of the House, to say thank you. [Applause.] N.

Macdonald: Th e minister refers to the work of the mid-term timber supply committee, of which I was the Deputy Chair. I've been through this with the minister before. I just want to be clear that the committee did not recommend TFL rollovers. Th at was never a recommen- dation, and it's wrong to misrepresent the recommenda- tions of the timber supply committee that way. It's not the case. In an FOI asking for any information, any evidence, that the direction the government wants to go is in any way scientifi cally based, we got nothing back. Th e min- ister refers to studies that don't say what he says they do.

Th ere is no evidence this is the direction to go. When he refers to industry desires to go in this direc- tion, let's be clear. When you have both Canfor and the Coast Forest Products Association president, Rick Jeff rey, saying this is a terrible idea, it's a terrible idea. Th at's the fact of it. Don Kayne is worried that this is going to set off an- other war in the woods. I'll just quote exactly what he says. To Canfor, "public opposition to this proposal is a deal- breaker.

Changes of this scope require broadly informed public support, not a brief and limited consultation." Will the minister admit that these changes are being rammed through precisely because he knows that any informed consultation would completely reject this ter- rible scheme? Hon. S. Th omson: As the member opposite points out, we have debated this issue extensively through the estimates process.

The member opposite is wrong to continue to portray what we're doing as a rollover of tree farm licences, a full conversion of tree farm licences, and continues to be wrong, continues to be inconsistent with the process we're under in terms of responding to the recommendations. If you want to look specifi cally at the recommenda- tions: "Gradually increase the diversity of area-based tenures, using established criteria…before considering a conversion of a licensee's renewable volume-based ten- ures in whole or in part." Tick. Th is is what we're doing. We're consulting on the criteria.

British Columbia Debates3360 Thursday, May 1, 2014 [1035] It also says to ensure that you look at the licensee's past performance; commitment to sustainable forest manage- ment; investment in forest management, including but not limited to silviculture investments; and community and First Nations support. Th at is the process that we're undertaking. Th at is the engagement that is underway. Th e studies are all part of the engagement website. Th ose have been listed there for everybody to review. To be fair, some studies point to some concerns with respect to it.

Th ere are a number of studies there that point to the value of it. Th at's the purpose of the consultation, again, led by a respected chief forester who was directly involved in the mid-term timber supply committee process. Th at pro- cess is underway, and very clearly, this is looked at to be a tool in the toolbox but one that will need to proceed with community, First Nations and industry support in those areas, focused on responding to the mid-term tim- ber supply committee challenges. Madame Speaker: Columbia River–Revelstoke on a supplemental. N. Macdonald: Let's be clear.

All we're talking about is TFL rollovers. Th at's all we're talking about. We saw the legislation that came before this House before the last election. Th at is all that is being talked about. Everything that the minister wants to do around com- munity forests or woodlots — that law exists. Th e minis- ter can do that at any time. All that we're talking about is — let's be frank — a sham consultation to get to a point that the minister and this government has already de- cided upon, regardless of what is said. Let's just review the pattern here.

Th e ferry consulta- tion — sham; the ALR consultation that apparently is go- ing on now — a sham; TFL rollover consultation — let's be clear: it's a sham. Th at's all that this is. Look, Don Kayne, the CEO of Canfor, says that the government should be focused on forest health, on in- ventory, on putting more eff orts into smaller tenure hold- ers. Instead, the government is moving to privatize the Crown lands that we have.

Th e question is: can the minister tell us the real reason he's pushing ahead with changes that are only going to hurt industry and are only going to further degrade this province's most valuable asset, our public lands? Hon. S. Thomson: Again the member opposite is wrong. We have a consultation process going through the communities, ten diff erent communities, meeting with key stakeholders, key organizations, industry represent- atives, and the member opposite continues to point out one company's views. Th ose views will be considered in the consultation process. Th ey've communicated directly.

Th ey've communicated publicly on their views. If the member opposite cares to look at the responses that are coming in, he will see clearly that there are a number of companies that support the conversion of whole or in part…. And again, emphasis on conversion of renewable licences, because that was the recommenda- tion of the mid-term timber supply committee, of which the member opposite was the vice-Chair.

We are responding directly to the recommendations, and as I've said clearly, the way forward will be informed by those consultations and by the recommendations of Jim Snetsinger, a well-respected former chief forester who is leading the process for us. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL GAS PLANTS AND CONSULTATION WITH FIRST NATIONS D. Donaldson: On April 11 this government signed an order-in-council exempting new natural gas produc- tion facilities and ski hills from the B.C. environmental assessment process — no public debate, no consultation with First Nations.

Th en 48 hours later the Minister of Aboriginal Relations visited Fort Nelson First Nation, where many of these new gas facilities are planned. For two days he met with Chief Sharleen Gale and her coun- cil. He said nothing about the new law. Chief Gale de- scribed it as getting stabbed in the back. [1040] Could the Minister of Natural Gas Development ex- plain how such behaviour by his government is an ex- ample of building relationships and trust? Hon. M.

Polak: Ver y oft en in this House I've had the occasion of being able to stand and be very proud of something that I've managed to accomplish, or together with my colleagues. Th is is not one of those occasions. I felt absolutely just devastated to fi nd out that actions of mine and my ministry had had this impact. Th ere is no way that that order-in-council should have proceeded without discussions taking place with Chief Gale and, indeed, likely with other First Nations as well. I have apologized. I realize that doesn't undo the dam- age. Th ere is work that will have to be done there.

I have written to Chief Gale also apologizing. We will certainly be engaged with First Nations to ensure that something like this does not occur again. But I take full responsibil- ity for it. I should have been on top of it, and I was not. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Stikine on a sup- plemental. D. Donaldson: Well, I'm certain that the minister is sincerely sorry, but this is a betrayal of First Nations by her government and her ministry. Y ou can under- stand why Chief Sharleen Gale said, in connection to the Minister of Aboriginal Relations' and the Minister of

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3361 Natural Gas Development's apologies, that "'sorry' ain't good enough." A declaration signed by 28 First Nations after this backstabbing behaviour came to light puts this govern- ment on notice that their liquid natural gas strategy is on hold. Th e declaration was also endorsed by the First Nations Summit, the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs and the B.C. Assembly of First Nations. To the minister: how can any First Nation or member of the public now trust what this government is promis- ing on LNG? Hon. M.

Polak: Again, I understand that apologiz- ing doesn't undo the damage that occurred as a result of my inability to process this in the appropriate way with First Nations. Over many years when I have fulfi lled roles in Children and Family Development, Aboriginal Relations and even, to a certain extent, in Ministry of Transportation but certainly, again, in the Ministry of Environment, I have developed very personal relationships with many of the leadership who are involved in this issue, who are con- cerned about it. I know many of the chiefs and leaders in the northeast of B.C. on a personal level.

I understand there is work to be done now to rebuild that trust. I am committed to playing a role in doing that. Again, I apologize for what this has done to that relation- ship. Certainly for me personally, it has also had just a devastating impact to know that I was the one respon- sible for that. R. Austin: If B.C. First Nations are not brought on board, it doesn't matter how oft en the Premier goes to Asia. We will miss out on our LNG opportunity.

Chief Sharleen Gale made that clear when she said: "All agree- ments with the province are under review, and we're looking at all options regarding our relationship with the province and industry." Y et an e-mail from Doug Caul in the environmental assessment offi ce suggests that this is not the only order eliminating environmental assess- ments in the works. Can the minister tell this House whether the Liberals plan to further undermine the LNG industry and public trust by unilaterally lift ing requirements to do environ- mental assessments? [1045] Hon. M.

Polak: My mandate letter — indeed, the com- mitment from our government — is that we have work to do in the fi eld of LNG that not only involves having the cleanest liquefi ed natural gas industry in the world but also reviewing our environmental assessment to make sure that it is working well — not only to protect the en- vironment but to ensure that it is working well for those proponents and for environmental organizations who are engaged as we go through the environmental assessment. Part of that work has to be fi nding new and better ways for First Nations to be involved.

We have had on- going discussions with First Nations such as Nisga'a, for example. We will continue to look for new and better ways for First Nations to be involved in our environ- mental assessment, because we know that just as all of British Columbia will benefi t from liquefi ed natural gas, there is a huge opportunity for First Nations to benefi t from the prosperity that can be brought in from lique- fi ed natural gas. ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACTS OF PROPOSED U.S. COAL TRANSPORTS THROUGH B.C. COMMUNITIES V . Huntington: Last summer a trade delegation led by an American governor arrived in B.C.

It didn't come to meet with the province or with municipalities, and we heard about it only through U.S. media. Th e delegation met with the port about exporting Wyoming's thermal coal — eight million tonnes of thermal coal annually. Meanwhile, the U.S. is curbing coal generation plants.

Referendums have been held to stop thermal coal from transiting U.S. communities, state and civic leaders have taken stands on the export of thermal coal from U.S. ports, and the state of Washington initiated the most in- depth environmental review ever undertaken in that state to assess whether a thermal coal terminal should be al- lowed at Cherry Point. Now, our government won't even talk to us about it. Study the issue? "Y ou've got to be kidding." An environ- mental assessment? "Not our jurisdiction." Health impact study?

"Not our problem." We need our government to respond to demands from the public and its own chief medical health offi cers for an independent health impact study on the movement of thermal coal through B.C. communities. Participating in a non-binding municipal review is fi ne, but ignoring calls for a full health impact study is nothing more than negligent. Will the ministers of our health and our environment stop passing the buck, do their duty and initiate a full health impact analysis of the movement of thermal coal through Lower Mainland communities? Hon. T. Lake: I thank the member for the question.

Our public health system here in British Columbia is one of the fi nest in the country, and our public health offi cers have done a remarkable job. We have seen that recently with the measles outbreak in the Fraser Valley, and there are many examples of that. Our public health offi cers have been engaged, because they know there is some concern around this proposal. Our public health offi cers in both Vancouver Coastal and Fraser Health Authority have engaged with Port Metro Vancouver and have encouraged them to look at the im-

British Columbia Debates3362 Thursday, May 1, 2014 pact on public health of this proposal. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Delta South on a supplemental. V . Huntington: We now learn that the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is double-tracking its line all through Delta just so it can carry that annual eight mil- lion tonnes of thermal coal. Th ese tracks sit below major residential subdivisions. Th ey go through a park. Th ey are beside a walking trail. Th ey follow the Metro Vancouver linear park and sewer line. Th ey go through the Delta Nature Reserve, which is part of the Burns Bog conservancy.

And they are right beside a fi sh-bearing stream that has already been dam- aged by BNSF , which has just paid a heft y fi ne to DFO for that damage. Railroads may fall under federal jurisdiction, but the people of this province, the health of our streams, the quality of life in our communities and the protection of the Burns Bog conservancy are the jurisdiction and re- sponsibility of this province.

Will the Minister of Environment assess whether B.C. should be conducting an environmental review of the double-tracking of the Burlington Northern rail line, and will she approach her federal colleague to request an environmental assessment of the proposed expan- sion in Delta? Hon. M.

Polak: I know it can be frustrating for mem- bers of the public and, indeed, for ourselves, when we have to deal with the multiple jurisdictions that arise in the event of a proposal that involves a port and in- volves rail. [1050] However, in Canada we have an established set of juris- dictions that operate under our federal constitution. Th at means that the federal government, acting in its agent of Port Metro Vancouver, has the jurisdiction to make the environmental assessment of a proposal that involves the port. Th ey have the jurisdiction with respect to the rail.

With respect to health, the Minister of Health a mo- ment ago spoke about the work of the medical health offi cers. It is also true that in the event that the medical health offi cers come to the conclusion that there is going to be an adverse impact on human health, they have the authority to make orders that would confront that chal- lenge. So we can respect jurisdiction, and at the same time, we can respond in the event that there are human health needs.

I will add that the Ministry of Environment is also participating on the group that the mayor of Delta has formed up in order to assess what kinds of concerns there are in the community and if there is a place for us to act. INCOME ASSISTANCE POLICY ON CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS M. Mungall: A few weeks ago the Minister of Social Development said he was angry when answering my re- quest to end the B.C. Liberals' cruel clawback of child support payments from B.C.'s poorest kids. He was angry, but he has taken no action since. Th at is making the single mothers of these children angry.

It makes them angry to say no to soccer for their kids, to needed school supplies, to fruit and healthy food. Moms like Angelina Gilroy in Kamloops. She's upset be- cause she can't aff ord a bed for her three-year-old child. My question is to the minister. Will he take action now to end the clawback? Hon. D. McRae: I'm proud of the actions of this gov- ernment as we try to support the needs of the most vul- nerable people in British Columbia. I know I don't need to talk about what the Minister for Housing does and the investments that they do in that ministry.

I don't need to talk about, through the Minister of Finance, the lack of income tax people in low income don't pay. Defi nitely the Ministry of Health…. There are 800,000 British Columbians who do not pay MSP premiums. In this ministry we spend about $2.5 billion to support vulnerable British Columbians. We do things through in- come assistance, through persons with disabilities and employment programs.

We also have about 70 programs where we work with individuals to provide assistance for those in need, in- cluding — as the member opposite mentioned, there are some issues — for example, the food and vegetables in the classroom program that reaches over 500,000 British Columbians in almost every school in the province. It's an amazing program, and it's just recently been expanded to include milk. Th at's an example of how we evolve a program to better serve British Columbians in need. I've said it before in this House, and I'll say it one more time.

We continue to look at the supports that we pro- vide vulnerable British Columbians. We know that a sup- port program is never going to be perfect forever. As the needs of British Columbians change, our programs, too, will evolve to meet those needs. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Nelson-Creston on a supplemental. M. Mungall: We're talking about the government tak- ing away money from B.C.'s poorest kids. Th at's one of the programs that the minister failed to mention just now on his list. Th e well-being of these children is a very serious issue, and it requires government action now.

Single moms like Charlene Quinney in Kamloops rely on charity as much as it is available, and what is available isn't always suit-

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3363 able. To be sure, expired food from the food bank is not suitable for children, but it's oft en the only option these families have. Again to the minister, rather than get angry like he did a few weeks ago, can he get active and end the clawback? Th at would be an order-in-council the public would wel- come. Hon. D.

McRae: Like I said in my previous answer, we continue to evolve supports for vulnerable British Columbians in this province. [1055] I think there are many programs that people not just in this province but across Canada recognize are really, really benefi cial and leading. We've evolved programs, for example, like the bus pass program, where we help indi- viduals of limited means, making sure they have access to public transit. Increased earning exemptions are ex- amples of where we've made changes that we were talking through advocacy groups, because we heard what they needed.

Th is is something they asked for, and we gave it to those individuals. We have also heard that people want supports for child care. Th at's why, starting in April 2015, children under six will have access to a $55-a-month early childhood tax credit. Why? Because we continually evolve supports for vulnerable British Columbians, and we will continue to evolve those supports. [End of question period.] Statements LEADER OF THE OFFICIAL OPPOSITION B. Ralston: I want to say a few words about the mem- ber for Vancouver-Kingsway on this particular day.

He took over the leadership of our party at a particu- larly diffi cult time and drew us together again. He has brought to the job that he occupies today an energy, a passion, an intellect and, I think everyone would agree, an unrivalled work ethic as he travelled relentlessly throughout the province in pursuit of his many policy interests. He has served the people of British Columbia well. I know the voters and citizens of Vancouver-Kingsway are grateful that he will continue as their elected repre- sentative and bring all those qualities to the public life of British Columbia.

Madame Speaker: Th e Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. A. Dix: I love it when you mention Her Majesty, hon. Speaker. I'd say that it's true. I just want to confi rm that some- time between fi ve — for those of you who use the other clock, 1700 hours — and 17:01:30 today we're going to have a new leader of the B.C. NDP . Th e good news is that we're going to elect just an extraordinary individual who is going to make a great Leader of the Opposition and an even better Premier of British Columbia, my friend the member for Juan de Fuca. Interjection. A. Dix: We'll have that debate later on.

I wanted to thank the Government House Leader for his comments and my friend the Opposition House Leader for the comments. It's a great honour. I mean, I couldn't have expected the honour in my life to lead a political party that had been led by people that I admired so much like Dave Barrett and Mike Harcourt and Glen Clark and Joy MacPhail and particularly my friend and mentor, the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill. It's been a great honour in my life. Th ank you very much. Th ank you very much for your comments today. If I had only known I could unite people so well, I would have left a long time ago.

But thank you very much. Th ank you to all of you and thank you to my friends across the way. I'll see you on Monday. [Applause.] Orders of the Day Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A, Committee of Supply, for the information of members, the ongoing es- timates of the Ministry of Education followed by Social Development; and in this chamber committee stage de- bate on Bill 20. [1100] Committee of the Whole House BILL 20 — LOCAL ELECTIONS CAMPAIGN FINANCING ACT (continued) Th e House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 20; D. Horne in the chair. Th e committee met at 11:02 a.m. On

section 82 (continued). S. Robinson: I'm just wondering if the minister might be able to once again review item 2. We were right at the very end yesterday, and I didn't actually record what she said So if she wouldn't mind just repeating her explana- tion for 82(2), that would be really helpful — item 2. Hon. C. Oakes: I would ask clarifi cation on what the

British Columbia Debates3364 Thursday, May 1, 2014 question was. S. Robinson: It's interesting how quickly we sort of forget the whole orientation from yesterday. What I was asking about was

section 82(2). Th ere's a whole lot of language that isn't very simple. It's actually very com- plicated language and a bit circular. So I want to, just for clarity, hear how the minister understands that piece of legislation. [1105] Hon. C. Oakes: Th ank you for the question. Th is is consistent with what is currently within the Election Act. Really, what it is…. When the document is signed by the Chief Electoral Offi cer, it's admissible and submitted. So it's the signature of the Chief Electoral Offi cer that sets this in motion on this particular clause. S.

Robinson: If I'm to understand, the minister and her staff just took chunks of an existing act and plunked it in here rather than making sure that it's easy to under- stand. Th is is probably the most complicated paragraph I've ever read in terms of trying to understand that. I just want to check if that's what the minister and her staff did. Hon. C. Oakes: Th ank you for the question. It certain- ly wasn't…. We take advice of legislative counsel on how to move forward with draft ing signifi cant legislation such as this, and that was their advice on this. Sections 82 to 84 inclusive approved. On

section 85. S. Robinson:

Section 85 talks about higher-penalty of- fences. I notice that if an individual commits an off ence, there is imprisonment as a possibility, but in the next item, (3), there is no imprisonment for an organization that commits an off ence. I'm wondering if the minister can explain. Why the distinction? Hon. C. Oakes: Th ank you for the question. An indi- vidual of an organization can be held liable, but an or- ganization in itself cannot be held liable. Th at's what the signifi cance of this clause is.

Section 85 approved. On

section 86. S. Robinson: Th is

section refers to lower-penalty of- fences. Can the minister please provide some examples of what lower-penalty off ences might be? Hon. C. Oakes: Th ank you for the question. An ex- ample of a lower — say, failing to open a bank account or to apply a fi nancial agent. Th at would be the example of the lower amount. Th e higher amount — providing false or misleading information.

Section 86 approved. On

section 87. S. Robinson:

Section 87 speaks to the role of the B.C. Chief Electoral Offi cer. Subsection 2(

b) speaks to the Chief Electoral Offi cer having to prepare a report but doesn't specify when the report is due or how long it needs to be presented aft er the election. If the minister can speak to what they had in mind and what the ex- pectations are. [1110] Hon. C. Oakes: Th is is up to Elections B.C., and it's not prescriptive in this act. Sections 87 and 88 approved. On

section 89. S. Robinson: In

section 89 it speaks to minor correc- tions to disclosure statements and tries to make a dis- tinction about the kinds of corrections. What caught my attention was: "…does not materially aff ect the substance of the statement or report…." What does "materially af- fect" mean to the minister? Hon. C. Oakes: An example of this would be a mis- take with arithmetic. S. Robinson: I just want to make sure I understand the minister. Ones that don't alter the bottom line, the bot- tom number, where there might be a typographical error or inversion — that would not be material eff ect.

But if there was an omission that actually changed the bottom number, that would require a diff erent…. Th at would not fall under this. It's not considered a minor correction. It's considered…. Th ey'd have to fi le a separate update. I just want to see if I have that understanding correct. Hon. C. Oakes: Th ank you for the question. Again, a minor one: a typo. Say you've made an error in some addition or how you put information in. Th at would be the minor.

Th e more signifi cant: if Elections B.C. deter- mines that the error or the omission materially aff ects the disclosure statement, a supplementary report would be required.

Section 89 approved. On

section 90.

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3365 S. Robinson:

Section 90 is about late fi ling extensions and speaks to providing extensions. When is it appropri- ate to provide an extension? Hon. C. Oakes: Th is was added or included. For ex- ample, say something, a signifi cant illness, happens to the fi nancial agent two days before an election, or there's a fl ood or a natural disaster that happens within a com- munity. Th is clause helps to address that and provide a little bit of leeway. S. Robinson: I'm assuming, then, that it's discretion- ary, based on the decision of the election offi cer? Hon. C.

Oakes: Again, this does allow Elections B.C. the ability to do that. However, it prohibits the extension of the fi ling deadline beyond 120 days aft er the election.

Section 90 approved. On

section 91. S. Robinson: Th is one is about retention of disclosure records. Are records to be destroyed aft er fi ve years? Is that the intention of this? Hon. C. Oakes: It authorizes the transfer of campaign fi nancial records to the British Columbia Archives, once the initial retention period has ended. S. Robinson: I sit on Public Accounts, and I've been learning about the destruction of records. Are records to be kept, then, forever and ever? [1115] Hon. C. Oakes: Th is would fall under the Document Disposal Act, which isn't within this document. We would have to get back to you on the specifi cs of that timeline. Sections 91 to 94 inclusive approved. On

section 95. S. Robinson: I have to jump up quickly before my col- league shouts out "no" instead of "aye." Th is

section on advisory committee meetings. Are there a minimum number of meetings that the minister is expecting this group to have? Hon. C. Oakes: It was very important when they were looking at adding this new provision that there was the fl exibility for the advisory group to determine the meet- ing schedule. I have no authority to implement any type of meeting schedule. S.

Robinson: So they could have this in the legislation, and it's possible that there would never be any meetings — that we would read this and perhaps make some assump- tions there were some advisory committee meetings and would have no idea at all if they were even meeting. I draw attention to item (6) that says: "Th e advisory committee must make available to the public, on re- quest, a

summary of the proceedings of a meeting of the committee." It's on request. It's not even like it gets posted on a web- site. Unless you even know that this committee exists…. We would have no idea, unless we asked to see meeting minutes, whether or not a meeting was even held. We don't really have an accountability piece, is how I'm understanding it. Perhaps the minister can speak to what accountability measures there are around this ad- visory group. Hon. C. Oakes:

Section 95, really…. When we looked at rules pertaining to the technical advisory committee, it was important we were making signifi cant changes to legislation — the most signifi cant in 20 years — and felt that having a technical advisory group to look at any things that potentially could come forward, whether it's increased need for education or something within the legislation that we need to be addressing, that a tech- nical advisory group made of stakeholders from vari- ous organizations that this legislation will in fact aff ect is advisable.

As we go through this process, if something comes up, we've got a technical advisory committee that we felt was signifi cantly important enough to frame up in legislation, which has the tools and ability to really act on any things that come out of this legislation. S. Robinson: While I appreciate the intent, I do have some concern that it's only on request that any minutes or any reports would be made available to the public. If you have no way of knowing (

a) that they exist or (

b) wheth- er or not they've met, you don't even know to even ask. I would encourage the minister and her staff to con- sider removing the "on request," and that whenever they meet, it's public. It's on the website, perhaps. Th at will sort of let us know that they're working and that they're continually addressing these issues. If you know, in fact, that there are issues, and you ask the ministry to address them and the advisory commit- tee goes off and makes some recommendations, you don't know that has actually in fact happened, unless you ask if something has happened. I think the intention is a good one.

Just making sure that it's public and transparent is, I think, part of what's lacking in this. [1120] Sections 95 to 98 inclusive approved.

British Columbia Debates3366 Thursday, May 1, 2014 On

section 99. S. Robinson: We're almost at the end here,

section 99. I'm wondering if the minister can speak a bit to this one in terms of what the intentions were here and perhaps provide some examples that might help us understand what the intention of this

section is. Hon. C. Oakes: Th is just establishes that the minis- ter "may make any order the minister considers appro- priate to achieve the purpose of this Act" and fi rst must determine whether special circumstances warrant mak- ing such an order. It also establishes certain restrictions in relation to the relief and clarifi es the relationship with other election order authorities. An example of this would be if a fl ooding in a region makes it diffi cult for a candidate in that region to fi le their disclosure statement, the minister may extend fi l- ing times for a specifi c geographical area.

Section 99 approved. On

section 100. S. Robinson: Can the minister again, in this section, perhaps provide some examples as well? Hon. C. Oakes: Broad regulation authority is neces- sary, given the untested application of campaign fi nan- cing rules to electoral organizations, third-party sponsors and non-election assent of voting sponsors. Th ese regu- lation authorities will provide needed fl exibility to re- spond quickly to issues that may arise. An example of this: it allows for some customization of regulations for particular circumstances such as diff erent requirements for by-elections. S.

Robinson: I appreciate the example, but I still didn't understand. Perhaps the minister can just explain that last piece about having to make special circumstances a by-election. It didn't resonate with me. Perhaps if she has another example, that might be helpful. Hon. C. Oakes: It's diffi cult to think of another ex- ample. Really, the whole purpose of this

section is to ad- dress those unintended situations that may arise. Th is just helps capture that and provides tools in order for those unexpected things that may arise. Th e one example we talked about in the by-elections was one of the items we specifi cally thought of. But it is really to address un- expected items that may arise through the course.

Section 100 approved. On

section 101. Th e Chair: Th e member has given notice, on

section 101, of an amendment. Hon. C. Oakes: I move the amendment to

section 101 standing in my name in the orders of the day. [SECTION 101, by deleting the text shown as struck out and adding the underlined text as shown: Commencement and application 101

(1) Th e provisions of this Act referred to in column 1 of the following table come into force as set out in column 2 of the table: Item Column 1 Column 2 Provisions of Act Commencement 1 Anything not elsewhere covered by this table Th e date of Royal Assent 2 Sections 34 and 35 In relation to anonymous sponsorship contributions, on the day aft er the date this Act receives First Reading in the Legislative Assembly March 27, 2014, being the day aft er the date of First Reading

(2) Th is Act does not apply in relation to elections referred to in

section 1 [elections to which this Act applies] , or voting referred to in

section 2 [assent voting to which this Act applies] , held be- fore the 2014 general local election.] On the amendment. Hon. C. Oakes: Th is amendment provides clarity re- garding the eff ective date of

section 34 and 35 in the bill that relate to anonymous sponsorship contributions. [1125] Currently

section 101 specifi es that these sections will come into force on the day aft er the day this act receives fi rst reading. Th rough this amendment the actual date, which is March 27, 2014, will be identifi ed. Th is will provide clarity for election participants when the rules regarding anonymous sponsorship contribu- tions for third-party election advertising will apply. Th e retroactivity of the amendment is limited to the anonym- ous sponsorship contribution roles that are new to third- party sponsors. Amendment approved.

Section 101 as amended approved.

Schedule approved. Title approved. Hon. C. Oakes: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete with amendment. Motion approved. Th e committee rose at 11:26 a.m.

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3367 Th e House resumed; Madame Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills BILL 20 — LOCAL ELECTIONS CAMPAIGN FINANCING ACT Bill 20, Local Elections Campaign Financing Act, re- ported complete with amendment. Madame Speaker: When shall the bill be considered as reported? Hon. T. Lake: With leave, now. Leave granted. Th ird Reading of Bills BILL 20 — LOCAL ELECTIONS CAMPAIGN FINANCING ACT Bill 20, Local Elections Campaign Financing Act, read a third time and passed. Hon. T. Lake: I now call committee stage of Bill 21, Local Elections Statutes Amendment Act, 2014.

Committee of the Whole House BILL 21 — LOCAL ELECTIONS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2014 Th e House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 21; D. Horne in the chair. Th e committee met at 11:29 a.m. On

section 1. S. Robinson: Can the minister please provide us with the origins of this section? Hon. C. Oakes: Th is supports the Local Government Elections Task Force recommendations to change the local government election cycle from three to four years. UBCM endorsed this resolution in favour of extending the term of elected local offi cials to four years at its 2013 convention. Th is will be consistent with the term of offi ce for local governments in all other provinces in Canada.

A four- year term reduces the number of local elections over time, thereby reducing the potential for voter fatigue over time and increasing voter engagement with local elections. [1130] S. Robinson: Can the minister let us know if this change actually has broad support among the local gov- ernments that serve our communities across the prov- ince? Hon. C. Oakes: Again, the legislation that has been put forward — we followed with recommendations from the Local Government Election Task Force, which repre- sents members from across British Columbia. As well, it was endorsed at the UBCM Convention.

It passed, and UBCM represents members from small, large, urban and rural communities from across British Columbia. S. Robinson: I'd just like to remind the minister that the year before, it failed; the year before, it passed; and the year before that, it failed. So I would actually argue that it doesn't have as broad support as she might be- lieve or report. I also want to remind, I guess, the minister — and if she's given it any thought — that while it might reduce the number of elections overall and this concern about voter fatigue, it also reduces….

In some ways, demo- cracy might be put at risk as well — that when you have a council that isn't serving you well, you're actually with them a little bit longer. I'm wondering if the minister could speak to what some of those challenges would be with a four-year term. Hon. C. Oakes: It's very important for me to stand on this, because the one thing that we are doing with both of these pieces of legislation is modernizing local gov- ernment elections acts. Local government elections are changing. Th ings are being more modern.

When we look at reports from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and when you look at infra- structure investments that happen within local gov- ernments, they are…. Th e reason why the rest of the provinces in Canada have gone to four years is because of the cycle of time that it takes to move very important infrastructure projects, which are key to local commun- ities, forward. By moving to four years, it provides that time for communities to get those much-needed projects, those infrastructure projects, the things critical to driving local communities forward.

Th is is what we felt — in alignment with the rest of the provinces across Canada, to ensure the greatest results for local governments in British Columbia. Sections 1 to 21 inclusive approved. On

section 22. S. Robinson: If the minister could perhaps share with us if there has been any push-back from any smaller com- munities that she has heard about regarding the shift

British Columbia Debates3368 Thursday, May 1, 2014 from three years to four years, I would appreciate hear- ing about that. Hon. C. Oakes: I travelled throughout the province, and I met with area associations. One thing that was crit- ically important is I went…. In each of these meetings I would go around the room, and I would ask questions of each individual on their thoughts. Absolutely, there are varied opinions. Th ere are opinions as varied as each of our communities across British Columbia.

What we felt, based on the task force recommenda- tions, is that we needed to align with what the majority of individuals and local governments felt. Th is is what was put forward through the Union of British Columbia Municipalities. We are also going to, however, work very tirelessly on the education campaign to support communities or indi- viduals that may have felt that this move had signifi cance. We'll be working with them to support that. S. Robinson: I thank the minister for her response.

Given that there are such varied opinions and varied experiences — given the vast kinds, the variety, of local governments that we have across this province — is there any intention of the ministry to monitor these concerns to actually see if they do come to fruition? Hon. C. Oakes: We will be continuing to monitor, and we'll be continuing to look at how we ensure legislation meets the needs of the people. [1135] One of the processes that we have talked about as staff is that you should always regularly look at legislation to see if it meets the needs of the population that it serves.

So we'll absolutely continue to look, to evaluate and, if changes are needed, to modernize as we move forward. S. Robinson: I appreciate the minister's response. I just want to clarify. I mean, I've certainly heard concerns that we're not going to fi nd people to run in our small com- munities: no one wants to commit; there will be people who won't want to commit to four years; three years is hard enough; it might cause more by-elections, as people can't stay for four years. One of the other issues is that young people won't.

If I hear of any concerns, I am assuming that the min- ister would like me to forward them on to her for track- ing. I would certainly encourage the minister to pay very close attention, moving forward. Sections 22 to 74 inclusive approved. On

section 75. S. Robinson: Can the minister explain

section 75 and what this is doing to legislation? Hon. C. Oakes: Th is is a consequential amendment that is more explanatory around the term of "assent vot- ing." It just updates the terms and defi nitions from "other voting" to "assent voting." It just modernizes the language that we now use in accordance with this type of vote. S. Robinson: So modernizing the language from "other voting" to "assent voting." I asked people in my family, because I was doing this work at home. I said: "Do you know what assent voting means?" Th ey had no idea. I'm interested to hear who or what prompted these changes.

Whose language is "assent voting"? I don't think it's the language of voters. Is this just bureaucratic language or legal language? Where did this come from? Hon. C. Oakes: It really is to be more prescriptive and to provide that greater understanding of what voting is. "Other voting" is so vague and general. "Assent voting" really defi nes and is descriptive. We'll be ensuring that we educate folks on what that means. Sections 75 to 114 inclusive approved. On

section 115. S. Robinson: Can the minister speak to this

section and explain to us what it means? Hon. C. Oakes: It's amending the Vancouver Charter to allow for the four-year term. S. Robinson: Is there support in Vancouver for these changes? Hon. C. Oakes: The Lower Mainland Local Government Association was the sponsor of the resolu- tion that went forward to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities in 2013, of which Vancouver is a member. S. Robinson: I just find it interesting that it's the Vancouver Charter. I would have thought that there might have been a phone call made to Vancouver.

I mean, I recognize that LMLGA may have supported it, but I understand that there are some folks who sit at that table who aren't all that excited about going to a four-year term. I would have hoped that at least there would have been some consultation. Perhaps I'm making the assumption. Can the minister let us know if she actually contacted Vancouver to fi nd out if they fully support this change? [1140] Hon. C.

Oakes: I've met with the mayor, and I've cer- tainly met with members as well, including this area as- sociation that I alluded to, when I travelled throughout the province and talked to individuals on what their

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3369 thoughts were. Th is was one of the items that came up in those conversations. S. Robinson: I guess it's a little bit disappointing. I mean, I'm grateful that the minister spoke to the mayor, but Vancouver has a party system, and there are several diff erent parties around that table. It's unfortunate that not everybody was consulted, given that there's quite varied opinions sitting around that table in terms of changing their charter to a four-year term. Sections 115 to 136 inclusive approved. On

section 137. S. Robinson: I have an amendment to this section. The Chair: Y ou can proceed on introducing your amendment. S. Robinson: I move: [To amend

section 137 by deleting the text shown as struck through and adding the text shown as underlined Division (8) [Campaign Financing] of

Part I as repealed 137 Sections 55-65 are repealed and the following substituted: Campaign Finance 55

(1) Council is permitted to enact a bylaw or bylaws in or- der to (

a) establish limits on election expenses incurred in a campaign period by candidates or electoral organi- sations; (

b) establish maximum limits on campaign contribu- tions to candidates or elector organisations; (

c) establish a limit or a ban on a contributor class; and (

d) establish fi nes or penalties, including disqualifi cation, for violation of a bylaw enacted under this section.

(2) Enactments and amendments of bylaws under this sec- tion are prohibited within a campaign period.

(3) For the purpose of this section, defi nitions are as estab- lished in the Local Elections Campaign Financing Act.] On the amendment. S. Robinson: In this amendment, given that we are speaking about the Vancouver Charter…. Vancouver is unique in that they have their own separate charter. Th ey're very diff erent from any other municipality that we have in this province. Th ey have unique needs and unique challenges.

I'm not saying that other communities don't have similar challenges, but given that they have a charter that governs how they operate and given that we are right now going through sections that deal with their charter — I want to really emphasize "their charter" — I can't see any reason why this government wouldn't ad- dress what they have asked for. Clearly, the minister has met with the mayor. I am con- fi dent that the mayor reminded the minister that they are really challenged about campaign expenses and really do need some caps.

I don't need to remind the minister, as well, that when you have contributors that give $1 mil- lion to one party, it actually skews the democracy and the opportunities for people to fully participate in this electoral process. Given that she's met with the mayor, I would like to believe that she's heard what he had to say and certainly willing to go to four years, because that's what he wanted. Th e LMLGA as well, I believe, supported their request. In fact, the UBCM has as well. Y et they are not given the opportunity to set their own campaign limits, even if it's just for this election.

I don't think I need to remind the minister that this has been going on for years. Th e fi rst time that they asked for some help was 2004. Th at's ten years ago that they were recognizing things were getting out of control, that this was not good democracy. Time and time again this gov- ernment has failed them. It's fallen on deaf ears. Th ere's been zero response, absolutely none that recognizes that in that community it is ridiculous the amount of money that has to get spent in order to participate in an election.

Given that they have their own charter, given that they're already seen as a special case, it is not that diffi cult to provide them with the tools that they need to just set their own limits. Th ey can do that, and that's what this amendment is about. Th e other things that we want for Vancouver are the opportunity, if they so choose, to establish a limit or ban on a particular contributor class; to provide maximum limits on campaign contributions; to establish limits on election expenses. Give them the power to do as they see fi t. Th is is a real opportunity to make a diff erence for that community.

Th e minister earlier just talked about voter participa- tion and voters sort of rolling their eyes and throwing up their hands. When voters see how much money gets spent, they are so jaded about it. No wonder they don't want to participate. [1145] Now, in my community it's an issue, but it's not a huge issue. It's still sort of manageable, as I'm sure it is in the minister's community. People aren't spending gobs and gobs of money. I think we can all agree it's gobs and gobs of money in Vancouver, and it's out of control, and it's been getting out of control.

I am predicting that this next election is going to be outrageous yet again. I think it's time that this government stood up and said: "Enough." If you really stand up for good demo- cracy — at least in this community, which has its own charter — let them fi gure it out. Th ere's no reason to be mucking in it. Let them muck in it. I think that's an op- portunity for them to sort out. They are continually mucking in it and struggling with it. Th eir electorate keeps coming to them and say- ing: "Th is is ridiculous." Th ey just had a discussion this week — I was following it — about a voluntary expense limit.

Th ey recognize that they can't, that to do it volun- tarily means that people who are outside of the current

British Columbia Debates3370 Thursday, May 1, 2014 council won't be beholden. Like, they recognize that they are struggling, and right now the only barrier is this gov- ernment. So I'm asking the minister, on their behalf, to do the right thing and give them the opportunity to set their own limits. D. Eby: I rise to speak in support of the amendment. I think it's an incredibly important amendment for a num- ber of reasons, which I'll go into very briefl y. In 2011 in the municipal election, a single individ- ual, Rob Macdonald, gave $960,000 to the Non-Partisan Association.

It's important to note this donation wasn't just for anybody. It went directly to the campaign of the current Attorney General, when she was running for mayor at that time. I've said that before in this House, and I'll say it again, and I'll say it until we get reform on this issue, because it's important to try to understand why this government will not act on the city of Vancouver's request over years to fi x this problem. I go home to my constituency, and people say: "I can- not believe what's happening with election spending and fundraising in our communities. We're losing control of what's happening here.

Why won't the government act?" I can't explain it, except to wonder if it's related to the fact that the Attorney General received this huge dona- tion. Otherwise, it's completely bizarre. Th e Attorney General is one of two Vancouver MLAs who understands this issue fi rsthand. She lives in the community, and she ran for mayor.

She was fi rsthand in those campaigns and yet, when in these cabinet discus- sions, apparently doesn't propose — in these laws that are coming forward before us to reform municipal campaign fi nance rules — that we amend the Vancouver Charter to give the city the power to fi x these rules for themselves. We're not talking about imposing something from Victoria on Vancouver. We're talking about simply giv- ing them the power to fi x this themselves and to be ac- countable for that at the polls in the upcoming election. If you hear some frustration in my voice about this, it's because I'm frustrated.

I have to go home and explain why we can't see any action on this. It would be so easy for the government to fi x this. I'll quote again — I've read this quote before, and I'll read it again, because it is true — from city of Vancouver councillor Andrea Reimer: "What I've learned from that is that in the absence of rules, be prepared to be shocked." She was talking about election spending and donations in Vancouver. Vancouverites are routinely shocked. Th ey will con- tinue to be shocked.

Th ese donations and spending have gone up 175 percent in the last eight years, and it's been eight years that the city of Vancouver government has been coming to this level of government and saying: "Please, give us the power in our Vancouver Charter to fi x this problem." Th is is not at the municipal level. Th is is not a partisan issue at all. Every major civic party — the NPA, Vision V ancouver, COPE — all agree that this fi x needs to hap- pen, that the city needs this power and that it should be imposed.

Th at's why city council has asked — not one time, not four times but six times, formally, through mo- tions passed — for this government to act. In the last election the NPA spent $2.5 million; Vision Vancouver, $2.2 million. As I said, they're not going down. Th ese numbers are going up.

To quote the NPA execu- tive coordinator in terms of the feeling among the civic parties about what needs to happen: "We feel that it has to be legislated to bind all the parties to the same rules." We wouldn't be giving Vancouver some kind of crazy power that we don't know what's going to happen, be- cause there are many other jurisdictions that have these rules, and they work well. [1150] In Brandon, Manitoba, there's a $16,000 limit for a can- didate running to be mayor — $16,000. In Toronto's ward 7, $27,000 for a councillor. In Mississauga the spending for mayor: $319,000.

Keep in mind that the maximum donation as an individual donor in Mississauga is $750. So you'd need over 1,200 people to raise the amount that a single donor donated in the Vancouver election. I shake my head, because I'm at a loss. I try to fi ll up my fi ve minutes, but I just can't imagine what arguments I could bring to this House to convince the minister and the cabinet — including the Attorney General, who has fi rsthand personal experience with this — to act in this incredibly important issue that is not controversial in Vancouver. It's not. Everybody agrees it needs to happen. Th e law needs to change.

In the absence of that, every party will do the best they can to raise as much and spend as much as they can. Y et at the same time, they are com- ing forward, asking us to put the rules in place that bind all the parties to the same standard. Th is government must do it. It must do it. Th is amendment must pass. I thank my colleague very much for bringing this for- ward and putting the government on the spot for their inaction on this. G. Heyman: I'd like to add my voice in support of this amendment.

Y esterday in this chamber we debated an amendment that would see some of the provisions of this particular amendment, which follows the requests of the city of Vancouver, enacted provincially. I still believe that's a good idea. I believe, as many do across the prov- ince, that it's not just a good idea for local government; it's a good idea for the provincial government. It's in fact in place, in terms of corporate and union donations, federally, and quite frankly, the world hasn't fallen apart.

One of the most important things that we can do in this chamber, one of the most important things we're sent here to do, is to represent the best interests of

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3371 our constituents and to liaise with the local governments in the areas in which we represent and help them achieve their aspirations and their proposals for what they think will benefi t the citizens in the smooth functioning of lo- cal government. As my colleague from Vancouver–Point Grey and my colleague from Coquitlam-Maillardville have pointed out, it is, in some ways, inexplicable to me that we are debating this instead of passing it.

It's a great disappoint- ment to me that friends on the opposite side of the House who are also from the city of Vancouver are not repre- senting the wishes of a local government that was over- whelmingly elected by the people of Vancouver. I think we have a responsibility here, and I'm con- cerned that we're not meeting it. I'm concerned, as my colleagues have said, about the complete ramping up out of control of spending on municipal elections.

We spend much time in this Legislature talking about eff ective use of money and responsibility to taxpayers, and what we are seeing is people being elected to lo- cal government in Vancouver with just absolutely gar- gantuan expenditures in order to out-campaign each other, to out-advertise each other. Th is, frankly, could be addressed by limits, which the city of Vancouver has asked for. It could also be addressed by taking big money, wheth- er it's union or corporate donations, out of the local elec- toral process.

One very direct impact that this has is to make it almost impossible for well-meaning people with good ideas to get elected to municipal council in the city of Vancouver unless they're tied to a big moneymaking machine. Th at's not in the interests of democracy. It's not in the interests of the people I represent in Vancouver- Fairview. It's not in the interests of good government or democratic participation. We know, I think, that massive amounts of advertis- ing and excessive campaigning dampen voter partici- pation. Th ey raise cynicism among voters. It's simply wrong.

And when the city of Vancouver asks repeatedly if the government is not willing or can't achieve a con- sensus among local governments across the province that this is a good idea provincially, despite the fact that I and many others believe it to be, at least let the city of Vancouver, Vancouver's largest community, set and chart its own course in the interests of its citizens. I urge that this amendment be passed. [1155] S. Simpson: I'll be very brief with this. I want to thank my colleague from Coquitlam-Maillardville for bringing this amendment forward.

As a Vancouver member and one who's keenly followed and watched the municipal scene and been active in it, I've seen the eff ect of money. It is true: Vancouver is a unique place. Maybe Surrey is getting there now. Maybe some other jurisdictions are getting there as they grow, but Vancouver is a place where money plays an inordinate role in local politics. Millions and millions of dollars are spent. As my colleagues have said, there simply is no way, if you're not invested with people who can generate that money, that you're going to have any opportunity to be elected.

We know the democratic processes, and we recognize them at the provincial and federal levels, where we do have spending limits in place, where we do have transparency around contributions and, in the case of the federal level, where they have put bans in place on certain types of donations — in that case, corporate and union donations — and put further limits in place. Here, provincially, we deal with the matter, where we do truly have spending limits. It makes a diff erence. Th ere's still enough money there for me to get my mes- sage out, but it's not just about money. It is about ideas.

It is about candidates and the quality of candidates. Th ose things are bigger than the money at the provincial level. I believe that that's true, and it's true at the federal level. It's not true in Vancouver. Money is a dominant force. As has been pointed out, this is not a partisan issue. Every major political organization in Vancouver understands what's happened there because of money and under- stands that money is hurting the democratic process in Vancouver. And they want the capacity to deal with that. Vancouver is a sophisticated jurisdiction.

It's a jurisdic- tion with lots of capacity to deal with this, to do it prop- erly and to be politically accountable for it. A change to the charter would make Vancouver politically account- able for this. It would make the mayor, would make the political parties there, accountable to demonstrate their willingness to deal with this. I would urge the minister to really just consider this one amendment.

It would dramatically improve this legislation, I believe, and it would then allow the people of Vancouver to have a more fundamentally democratic process that is based on ideas, principles and values more than money. Sadly, today it's mostly based on money. Th e Chair: Member for Vancouver–West End. Perhaps, noting the hour, we can resume aft er. S. Chandra Herbert: Y es. Noting the hour, I move that we adjourn debate, but I reserve my place to take

part in this debate. Interjection. S. Chandra Herbert: I rise and report progress, as my friend said, and seek leave to sit again. Motion approved. Th e committee rose at 11:57 a.m. Th e House resumed; Madame Speaker in the chair.

British Columbia Debates3372 Thursday, May 1, 2014 Committee of the Whole (Section B), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again. Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported resolution, was granted leave to sit again. Hon. T. Lake moved adjournment of the House. Motion approved. Madame Speaker: Th is House, at its rising, stands ad- journed until 1:30 this aft ernoon. Th e House adjourned at 11:58 a.m. PROCEEDINGS IN THE DOUGLAS FIR ROOM Committee of Supply ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (continued) Th e House in Committee of Supply (Section A); M. Dalton in the chair.

Th e committee met at 11:03 a.m. On Vote 18: ministry operations, $5,350,361,000 (con- tinued). R. Fleming: I have a number of questions in the re- maining time that I'll try and make short. First, where I'd like to begin is just to go back to Decoda Literacy funding. My colleague from Alberni raised it in regards to literacy outreach in his commun- ity. Th is is something that the minister has had to spend a lot of time on. I know he has received a lot of letters. Th e Select Standing Committee on Finance made a recom- mendation, which did not make it into the budget, to have multi-year stable funding.

I would ask him, given that there is all-party support for this…. Th ere is a pattern in the ministry of making less money available for literacy outreach programs — cutting funds — and then the minister swooping in at the 11th hour and saving it because it will create chaos. It will reduce things that MLAs and everybody that repre- sents communities and constituents, whether it's mayors or school trustees, want.

We're talking about a very relatively small, amount of money — because we've been talking about some big numbers in this set of estimates — $2½ million just to have the historic funding level guaranteed going forward, at least on a three-year basis. Th at gives the minister lots of time to review it. But it seems that we are stuck in this pattern where uncertain funding happens annually. [1105] Th e literacy problem is not going away any time soon in B.C. It needs a sustained, long-term eff ort in B.C., and therefore it needs a funding strategy that goes along with that.

We are lagging behind places like Yukon, Ontario, Alberta and Prince Edward Island in terms of literacy rates. Th ere was, once upon a time, a great golden goal that this government had to have the highest literacy rates on the continent. Y ou just have to ask yourselves: where has this all gone? It's small communities in particular where improving literacy is essential for economic development, includ- ing goals that this government has set out, and they just can't do it when they're using duct tape and baling twine to keep literacy outreach eff orts going on an annual basis.

Th ey're driving people out who are experienced literacy trainers. Th ey risk losing and alienating their volunteer base, which is worth millions and millions of dollars to this government. I would just ask the minister if he can answer, you know, in his own personal way, if he chooses…. Th ese programs are valuable. I know he knows that. Th e ask is the same one that the Standing Committee on Finance had: stable multi-year funding. Can he fi nd a way to do that in the budget that we're examining here in estimates? Hon. P .

Fassbender: Before I answer the specifi c ques- tion, I wanted to read a couple of things into the record — questions that were asked yesterday that I can ensure are on the record. Th e usage of 555 West Hastings — the member asked the question about it and the cost. Just some statistics that can be on the record. We have 70 all-day meetings in boardrooms from January 1 to April 4. Estimated cost of $550 each for off -site facilities that might include catering, if we had to do that off site, off of that particular site. Th e projected 12-month value of these all-day meet- ings is over $115,000.

We have daily bilateral and small- group meetings of a short duration. We have offi ce space for four full-time Vancouver-based ministry staff that are housed there. We have a drop-in offi ce for use by Education and Advanced Education staff . Th e minister's offi ce uses it on a number of occasions, as I've mentioned. I think what's important here is the learning workplace strategy's lease savings. We calculated over $565,000. Th e second one I wanted to read into the record was a question from a member from Surrey about the Punjabi language program. I was asked about that. We'll provide that in writing.

I just want to say that the work is going on with the school district. Th e superintendent has had a number of very productive meetings. Going to the literacy issue. Th e member said, and I do know, clearly, that we have a number of facets of literacy across our communities. We're focused on the K to 12.

British Columbia DebatesThursday, May 1, 2014 3373 We've been working with other community agencies to make sure that Decoda and other agencies embrace those kinds of activities with other stakeholders, businesses and so on. Even in my own community, with the diversity of population that comes in, literacy for new immigrants is very important. We are looking at, as I said yesterday, the funding formula. [1110] I appreciate that Decoda would like us to make a com- mitment. But because of the way we have invested in literacy and continue to do it….

I think the member is aware that we have some of the best literacy outcomes in the K-to-12 system of any jurisdiction in this country. Th e proof of the pudding is the actual delivery of pro- grams for students and their outcomes in their journey through education. B.C. students have been ranked amongst the highest in the world, and we recognize that Decoda is doing good work. When I met with them and I was able to then sub- sequently inform them that we were able to fi nd some additional funding….

One of the things I've challenged them to do, as I've done other community agencies, is to look at other ways to raise the support they need. But I will say this very clearly. We recognize the value of community organizations, but our focus has to be on K-to-12. When you look at that since 2003 the ministry has invested over $33 million with Decoda to give them the opportunity to develop the infrastructure that they have, I think the proof of the pudding is that we have been very supportive. We will continue to work with them as we move forward.

As we look at funding formu- las and the delivery of services as they aff ect K-to-12, we will continue to see if we can fi nd additional solutions. R. Fleming: I hope the minister can do better than that. He knows literacy outreach programs benefi t 400 com- munities in B.C. We've got 102 literacy outreach coordin- ators that are funded by Decoda. It's not about Decoda. It's about all of the regional-based literacy organizations, including one in his own constituency. No organization can survive with a prospect of 35 per- cent funding and a 65 percent liability, zero percent fund- ing, on an annual basis.

Th ey cannot recruit and retain boards of directors. Th ey can't keep volunteer morale up. We will lose this. We will lose the services that they pro- vide, which are extremely valuable to tens of thousands of British Columbians annually, many of whom are in the K-to-12 age or recently above the age of 18. I think the minister also appreciates — and I just don't understand why he won't commit to fund it properly — that the services that are provided by these organizations are incredibly nimble.

Th ere is no way that a government– directly run literacy outreach system could do what this informal network of professional literacy trainers do for British Columbia every day. Th ere's no way government could do it at $2½ million. Th ey leverage tens of mil- lions of dollars of volunteer services. Th ey partner with the business community in their own regions and so- licit donations. Th ey are effi cient. Th ey've been willing to go through government's core review. I think they've done that.

They've made their case over and over again, and they've persuaded MLAs on the Liberal side of the House and New Democrats. Th ey have an all-party appreciation — 85 MLAs know and appreciate what they do in their communities. It's the Minister of Education's job to make sure that that's advocated properly at cabinet so that we can move past this issue and have stable multi-year fund- ing. I'm going to leave it there. I'm going to move on to libraries — again, a service mostly funded by municipalities but one which is incred- ibly important to K-to-12 education.

Here we have seen some funding changes that have had to be picked up by regional library services and municipal taxpayers, be- cause beginning in 2009 the historic grant was cut from $18 million down to $14 million. Provincial funding is now only 5 percent of library budget totals, but it's an im- portant 5 percent. I think that point has been made loud and clear by advocates of library services and by those who are making seamless the K-to-12 system schools and the public libraries that are in their communities.

I know from the minister's own advice that he's re- ceived internally that the funding decrease in 2009 "had a signifi cant eff ect on the province's infl uence in the li- brary sector" and that it "worsened trust relationships with libraries and key partners." Now, I know we're not facing a cut in this year, but we're keeping the historic reduction that has been ongoing and caused a lot of dif- fi culties where it is. [1115] I wanted to ask the minister not about the grant per se but about ministry employees, library branch staff , in his ministry.

It's my understanding that library branch staff in the Ministry of Education are now one-third of what they used to be, in terms of FTE numbers, just a few years ago. Recently the competition for the director of libraries position was cancelled. Maybe the minister could provide some information as to why that hiring was cancelled. I think it's particularly interesting that it is a legal statutory requirement under existing provincial legisla- tion.

"Th e minister must designate as director of public li- brary service a person who is appointed under the Public Service Act and is a qualifi ed librarian." Th is legislation remains in place. Th e hiring posting was cancelle

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20140501am-Hansard-v11n6
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20140501am Hansard v11n6
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	087497211e1e2810e17a73ed838d92b81c6a1297

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).