Third Session, 41st Parliament

(2018) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, April 23, 2018

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 121

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

STEAM

J. Brar

M. Hunt

First Nations participation in the resource

economy

E. Ross

N. Simons

The new economy

R. Glumac

T. Stone

Fuelling British Columbia

J. Yap

R. Kahlon

Private Members’ Motions

Motion 19 — Agricultural land and farming

R. Leonard

I. Paton

M. Dean

S. Gibson

M. Elmore

L. Larson

B. D’Eith

D. Barnett

A. Kang

B. Stewart

D. Routley

MONDAY, APRIL 23, 2018

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[10:05 a.m.]

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

STEAM

J. Brar: I’m very pleased to rise in this House today to make an important

private member’s statement regarding our fast-changing education system, with a

special focus on a newly emerging system known as the STEAM

approach.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

We need to first understand the meaning of STEM education in order to

understand the STEAM approach. So what is STEM education? The simplest

definition of STEM education is that it stands for science, technology,

engineering and mathematics. STEAM takes STEM to the next level. It adds the

arts to the mix. STEAM stands for science, technology, engineering, the arts

and mathematics.

More than 40 years ago, the focus of our education system was that you

had to first become fully grounded in your own discipline and then be exposed

to other disciplines. But now, the going view is that we have to have that kind

of mixture much earlier on in the student’s experience to give them a

jump-start in their professional life.

What combination of skills will be needed in the workplace of the future

is a challenge for educators and policy-makers. The province that will find the

right answer to this question will be able to develop and implement the

education system that will serve the young people as a springboard to acquire

the right types of skills needed to compete in the ever-changing global

economy.

With the rise in technological changes over the past 20, 30 years, the

nature of work is always going to change. We live in a global economy with

businesses now able to sell their products, find employees and target new

markets in the global village.

The technology revenue, as it’s often called, will force change on us

all. The reason is partly because of the way in which high-tech sectors are

changing the economy and hiring students who not only know technology but also

understand sales, marketing and other social sciences disciplines.

No doubt, the type of work we do is changing. But what does this really

mean for the way we train our young people? It is an interesting and important

question. On the one hand, we have a skill shortage in many industries, and on

the other hand, there is this growing sense that jobs will actually disappear

and be replaced by robots. Driverless vehicle development will change and shape

the world more than the Internet has changed.

What does it all mean for training future students and employees? The

STEAM education system seems to be the answer. STEAM is an educational approach

of learning that uses five disciplines — namely science, technology,

engineering, the arts and mathematics — to prepare students for a rapidly

changing economy and labour market.

In this interdisciplinary program, students learn through inquiry,

dialogue, critical thinking and project-based learning. The STEAM program

offers a special focus on developing independent learners, critical thinkers,

collaborators, innovators and contributors. The end result is students who take

thoughtful risks, engage in experiential learning, persist in problem-solving,

embrace collaboration and work through the creative process.

These students of today are the innovators, educators, leaders and

learners of the 21st century. They will have the skill set to solve the key

problems we are facing as a community — global warming, poverty and so

on.

[10:10 a.m.]

The STEAM movement has been taking root over the past several years and

is surging forward as a positive model of action to truly meet the needs of a

21st-century economy. The objectives of the STEAM movement system are to

transfer education approach and research policy to place art and design at the

K-to-12 education and influence employers to hire artists and designers to

drive innovation.

That’s why our government is committed to supporting the tech sector,

turning to innovation as the way to ensure a prosperous future. We will expand

tech co-op education opportunities. We will partner with public post-secondary

education to advance technology and innovation centres in key areas of our

economy.

It is no surprise that the tech sector in B.C. is one of the

fastest-growing sectors of our economy, generating approximately $29 billion in

revenue and supporting 106,000 good-paying jobs. It is home to more than 10,200

businesses. Over 83,400 tech-related job opening are expected by 2027, jobs

like computer programmers, engineers, information systems analysts and software

designers.

Our government is creating a B.C. that works for people by making

informed decisions that allow them to follow their passion and reach their full

potential at home, in the community and in the workplace where they

work.

M. Hunt: The topic that’s brought up by my friend on the opposite side today is

STEAMD, which is, as he said, science, technology, engineering, art, math and

design. I find it interesting that when we talk about this, we deal with issues

skills?

I think this is great. Maybe this is a program to get rid of lawyers,

because I don’t see lawyers fitting into this one very well. But hey, that’s

okay.

You see, when we come to technology, my question is: in technology, what

are we actually talking about? Over at Simon Fraser University Surrey campus,

we have a beautiful new energy systems engineering building going up, and one

of the things that’s going to be inside it is a mechatronics technology

incubator. Well, we get these really long handles for things — mechatronics and

all the rest of it. We used to call that mechanical engineering. Now we get

these new, fancy terms for it all, but it’s all similar. That’s called

technology.

I find it interesting that that’s technology. We have all these changes

going on in our education systems — and as the member said, fast-changing — but

it’s still a basic truth of education that grade 8 math skills are a good

indicator of how successful you’re going to be in post-secondary

education.

Back when, I know, the earth was cooling down and I was young, we used

to have that when you got to grade 9, you had the great choice, the great

divide: you either matriculated and went on to academics and universities or

you went to technical school. You had skills. That’s where it was

separated.

I keep wondering about what we are doing today for those young people

that are skills-oriented and learn with their hands. I know the member for

Surrey-Fleetwood is from Surrey, and he knows as well as I do that the number

one industry in Surrey is construction. That means the trades. That’s those who

are carpenters, plumbers, electricians. They gain their skills very differently

from those who are the academics. They gain their skills and learning by using

their hands, working with their hands and developing with their

hands.

I think many times, in the midst of our academic excellence, we forget

or we leave out those who are skill-based. MIT recently had a study that was

published in the MIT Press Journals . It said career and technical

education actually increase the graduation rates by 21 percent among those who

are low-income students.

[10:15 a.m.]

I think that’s really significant, because many times these are the

people who have the hands-on skills, the skills to be able to do different

things. They work with their hands; they learn with their hands.

I know in the automotive industry…. We recently had the automotive

retailers here in the House lobbying us. I have a friend who has an automotive

repair shop. On about a — what was it? — Wednesday on Facebook, all of a sudden

there was this announcement that on Friday, he was closing his shop. Well, I’ve

been going there for eight years. This was his baby. He had looked forward to

having his own business.

I asked him: “What’s the problem? What’s happening? Why are you

changing?” He says: “I can’t get automotive technicians.” We used to call them

mechanics, but now they’re called automotive technicians because, of course,

they’re dealing with all kinds of different things underneath the hood. But he

couldn’t get them.

When we had the automotive retailers here, they were telling us how

business was doing. I would ask them the question: how were they doing with

automotive technologists? They would roll their eyes and say: “They are the

hardest thing to get.”

Before, in high school, we used to have mechanics. We used to have the

guys who would go out and tear apart the old cars, the 327s, rebuild motors and

all this sort of thing.

I was talking to one of the automotive guys. People who are in

upholstery, upholsterers, are putting in their pockets $82 an hour.

Electricians. You charge those guys out at 75 or 80 bucks an hour. That’s what

these guys are putting in their pocket because they’re in such demand — those

who are skill-oriented, those who are in fact working and learning with their

hands.

I think, as we look at equal opportunity — a member even referred to it

within his prayer this morning — this is a place and a land of equal

opportunity. I think that within our educational system, we also need to be

focusing, as we are on this theme, which is the high-tech side of things…. We

also have to be looking at those who are skills-oriented. How are getting the

opportunity to be able to develop their skills and abilities so that they can

have productive jobs?

J. Brar: Thanks to the member for Surrey-Cloverdale for his thoughtful response

to my private member’s statement with regard to our fast-changing education

system. It was about the education system, with a special focus on the newly

emerging system known as the STEAM approach.

Clearly, the member has a different approach. I think the member is more

focused on only the construction industry, which is an important one. I don’t

disagree with that. But the economy is way bigger than that, Member. I think we

are in the 21st century, and the member wants to still live in the last

century. That’s his choice. We all make choices about that.

The member spoke passionately about trades and training programs and how

we can help tradespeople. But I want to say this to the member. During the last

16 years, there was absolutely nothing the government that he represented did

to improve the trade situation in the province of British Columbia.

On the housing market, they introduced one thing. If you want to build

your own house, you need to have a licence. You are building your own house,

and you have to have a licence. When you are going to hire tradespeople, and

then the city is going to come and inspect at every stage, they introduce an

additional step for them to do that.

Coming back to the real topic. The STEAM system is the new system. It is

being adopted by countries across the globe, whether it’s the U.S.A. or England

or Finland or also Canada. It’s a system where science, technology,

engineering, art and mathematics work together. Basically, they work as a team,

and that’s where the communication the member is talking about is most

important.

The only difference is, if you go back 40 years — the time the member is

talking about — that was the time when it was kind of a requirement, or the

focus of education, that you first master the skills of your own discipline.

Then, maybe, through life experience, you learn other disciplines. So by the

time you’re close to retirement, you become a more holistic professional. What

we are saying here is that that is actually the beginning of your professional

career right now, and we need to give those skills to the students in order to

make them capable to compete in the global community at the very

beginning.

[10:20 a.m.]

That’s the difference between my remarks and the remarks of the member

on the other side. What we are doing, the government of British Columbia, is we

are actually looking into that situation. We are actually accepting that

reality and moving forward by making investments in that area.

FIRST NATIONS PARTICIPATION

IN THE RESOURCE

ECONOMY

E. Ross: When I became the Haisla’s first full-time, elected councillor in 2003,

it took me awhile to figure out what I wanted to achieve, mostly by learning on

the job. There was no guidebook in those days as to what my job actually was.

My learning came from reading, listening and then trying to make sense of what

was really going on.

In 2003, my council was just starting to get out of the deficit that was

limiting the progress of our people. When a band is preoccupied with paying the

bills or caught up with the processes of the Indian Act funding agreements,

there is very little time to deal with unemployment or future prosperity

dreams. The positions I was appointed to quickly fell well below my

expectations. I learned that these processes did next to nothing to resolve our

band members’ issue at the time, which was unemployment, especially for our

younger people, so I quit Indian Act–related portfolios as quickly as I

could.

As soon as I became elected chief councillor in 2011, I changed the

council’s structure to focus less on Indian Act programs and more on

initiatives that promised employment for our people. I also took our band out

of B.C. treaty negotiations so we could concentrate fully on initiatives that

could put our people in a position where we could deal with our own issues on

our own terms. There have been many statements and books published on this

idea, like the book entitled Beggars in Our Own House . My late uncle

Heber, who was also a leader of the Haisla, said: “All we want is a share and a

say.”

Over the years, not only did I read about Aboriginal issues in Canada, I

experienced them. This is what motivates me to at least try and help

Aboriginals across Canada. There are thousands of Aboriginals across Canada who

are in the same situation as I was, as well as my band. Helping out First

Nations, our province and our country is a commitment I take very seriously. It

is hard to describe the joy of witnessing ordinary people receive meaningful

employment or watching an individual turn their life around, seeing despair

melt away as someone takes control of their own future. To this day, this still

gives me the greatest satisfaction.

To be clear, I don’t denounce Indian Act funding agreements or treaty

negotiations. It’s just that when a wide range of decisions and issues are in

front of me, I always want to make sure to look out for any opportunity for

individuals to secure a better future. Sometimes this is my primary goal,

depending on the situation. I do prioritize and distinguish between real and/or

hypothetical situations and opportunities. If make-work projects lead to real,

sustainable work, then I’m all for them.

This is mainly why I support the idea of impact-benefit agreements that

have been in place in our territories since 2004 — impact-benefit agreements

that provide real work with real wages. In many ways, IBAs have transformed the

way our people think about their futures. With the revenue our council

received, programs were initiated without consulting outside organizations. Our

elders program, youth programs, sports fund, job-coach program and even our

bereavement program are all self-funded, with no authorization from any level

of outside government.

There was a time in the past when these types of programs were only

possible if our council begged for money from Ottawa. As a matter of fact,

early in my career on council I did a trip to Ottawa to ask for additional

money. I felt so demoralized from the experience that I refused to do it

again.

Once we began to implement impact-benefit agreements, we began to see a

future. For example, we had the forest and range agreement signed with the B.C.

government over ten years ago. It guaranteed revenues and timber to

harvest.

These types of things point toward a future. LNG is another possibility

— something that will change lives and make a better future for everyone, not

just Aboriginals.

N. Simons: I really appreciate the words of the member for Skeena. I think he is a

tireless advocate not just for his people but for his region. I think what he

said today reflects the views of many of us in this House.

[10:25 a.m.]

In fact, anyone who has given some thought and some time to this issue

recognizes the interconnectedness of people but also of the resources that we

now, in this day and age, are sharing. We need to continue to work on making

sure that everyone gets the benefits of our natural resources and that we

steward them in a way that reflects the value that they have to us as a

society, as communities.

I know that, having worked in a First Nations…. I’m not an expert on

this area. I’m not claiming to have any sort of knowledge beyond that of my

friends and colleagues on both sides, but I do recognize that things have

changed. We see a sea change occurring in our relationships. As those

relationships develop and become based on fairness and on an effort to

reconcile past injustices, I think we need to be conscious of the fact that the

revenue and the benefits of our resources need to be shared — not only shared

but stewarded in a collective way, in a way that meets not just the needs of

our generations now but for future generations.

I’m concerned about contemporary discussions around resource extraction

and how the debate is often turned into the politics of division. I don’t hear

that in the member across the way, but I do hear it in the public discourse —

about how certain groups support certain resource development and other groups

are opposed. I think what we need to focus on more as a collective, as a group

of people representing the people of British Columbia, is to find where we

agree and to recognize that opposing views do not mean full disagreement on all

issues but a difference in emphasis and a difference, possibly, in the

priorities.

When I think of the natural resources of our province, I think of the

water that we need to protect. I think of the air, and I think of the land.

Those are resources that we cherish, I believe. Those are the natural resources

in our forests and in our seas, which, I think, have been used and cherished

since time immemorial and now are in need of our protection and our

stewardship. The resource economy is not simply one of extraction and wealth

creation. It’s one of resource protection and conservation as well.

When we talk about one perspective versus another, I think it does a

disservice to the debate. For that reason, I think it’s equally important to

talk about how this is not a new situation, that resource-sharing has evolved.

We continue to allow it to evolve, obviously, and push for its evolution,

because fairness has not been a part of the agreements, as the member

mentioned, with the Indian Act and with other forms of agreements.

Benefit agreements are important, and they will continue to be important

as we find another way to find a place of reconciliation and an ability for all

our communities to focus on future cooperation, future friendship and future

partnership.

E. Ross: I’d like to thank the hon. member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast for

his comments.

Just before I conclude my own comments…. I made mention of LNG. When it

comes to natural resource development, many First Nations leaders are subject

to threats and intimidation. I’m glad that the member brought up division,

because communities — Aboriginal communities — are in the middle of

controversy, misinformation and politics that lead to division within the

communities and keep the status quo of unemployment and poverty for many

Aboriginal communities across B.C. and Canada.

This is unacceptable, because First Nation leaders are elected to make a

better future for their people. I’m not talking about the differences of

opinion within their own community. I’m talking about well-funded, highly

organized groups who want to impose their own vision without any regard for the

future they are denying Aboriginal people.

It’s very hard to imagine what it feels like to finally see some light

at the end of the tunnel, only to have some organization from hundreds or even

thousands of kilometres away say no because those other organizations know

better than the elected leaders.

[10:30 a.m.]

An example. On January 24, Caitlyn Vernon, campaign director for the

Sierra Club, wrote an editorial in the Times Colonist . She criticized

the Premier’s trip to Asia and the fact that he met KOGAS, Mitsubishi and

PetroChina — members of the LNG Canada consortium that wants to build an LNG

export facility in Kitimat.

The editorial went on to say that LNG development is not compatible with

tourism. In other words: “We know better than you do.” Forget about the

prospect of lifting a people out of generational poverty. Forget about the fact

that just one facility like LNG Canada could easily replace 30 or 40 coal-fired

power plants in China.

There are many Aboriginal leaders who are not afraid to speak up against

organizations like the Sierra Club. In response, Crystal Smith, chief

councillor with the Haisla First Nation, had this to say: “Your editorial

neglects to address any of the issues faced by First Nations in northern

British Columbia, where unemployment is rampant and the tourism industry offers

very little promise of that changing anytime soon.”

Chief Crystal Smith even invited the Sierra Club to her territory to

spend time with First Nations who support LNG. Chief Crystal Smith concluded by

saying: “We know exactly what we need — the ability to govern ourselves, take

care of our families and ensure our young people have the kinds of

opportunities that allow them to remain in our community and become

self-supporting. What we need are well-paying jobs and economic development

opportunities so we can dramatically reduce unemployment.”

In conclusion, First Nations will no longer be bullied, intimidated or

threatened by outside groups who think they know best. It’s our future at

stake, and we’re going to stand up for ourselves as well as British

Columbians.

THE NEW ECONOMY

R. Glumac: In the last few decades, the world has experienced a technological

revolution. High-tech products and services that you could only dream of or

read about in science fiction novels before are now becoming part of our daily

lives. These products are coming on the market and evolving at an accelerating

pace, and this is what drives the new economy.

When you consider that the personal computer took almost 20 years since

inception to being adopted by 25 percent of the U.S. population but smartphones

only took five years, you can see how much of an impact new technology has.

Consider now smart speakers like Amazon Alexa. It just took two years to get to

25 percent adoption. This is how quickly new technology can propagate through

our society and change the way we do things.

All that change represents economic opportunity. Here in B.C., our tech

sector contributes almost $14.6 billion to the province’s GDP and employs over

106,000 people. That’s more than mining, oil and gas, and forestry combined,

even if you include all the manufacturing activities related to those

industries. The wages are almost 85 percent higher than the average wage in

B.C. There has been steady growth in revenues in this sector in the last ten

years and a 9.2 percent jump in revenue in 2016, to nearly $29

billion.

This new economy exists throughout our province. Let’s start in the

Lower Mainland, which is home to head offices for Telus, Maxar Technologies and

Sierra Wireless, just to name a few. Many other companies have established

themselves here as well, including Boeing and Intel, Electronic Arts, Sony,

Imageworks, Disney, Salesforce.com and Tableau. There are many homegrown

industries and success stories here as well, like Zymeworks and Hootsuite and

Global Relay.

Motorola recently acquired B.C.-based Avigilon technologies for $1

billion. Mitsubishi is investing $4 million in one of B.C.’s top clean-tech

companies, MineSense. Fortinet is expanding and adding 1,000 new jobs in

digital security.

[10:35 a.m.]

Microsoft is adding 50 new mixed-reality jobs. Not only that, they’re

expanding their technology, education and literacy in schools program to teach

computer science to B.C. high school students and also partnering with BCIT to

expand tech training.

Amazon is adding 1,000 new software engineering and related jobs in the

next two years. A number of high-tech clusters have developed in greater

Vancouver in areas like alternative energy, digital media, virtual reality,

biotechnology and wireless.

High tech is growing in all areas of the province. Vancouver Island is

home to more than 1,500 high-tech companies, and Victoria has head offices for

some of the largest, including broadband hardware manufacturer Vecima Networks

and solar power systems manufacturer Carmanah Technologies.

Nanaimo also has a strong information technology sector and has a large

number of engineering and environmental technology firms. The Thompson-Okanagan

has over 800 high-tech companies, where Kelowna is the hub of the high-tech

sector and has been called Silicon Vineyard.

There are almost another thousand high-tech companies throughout the

province. The Crown corporation Innovate B.C., formerly BCIC, funds start-up

accelerators across the province in many of these areas, including Kamloops and

Prince George. Government investments in broadband internet will allow many

rural communities to participate in this new economy. So the future looks

bright. Vancouver has been ranked the number one start-up ecosystem in

Canada.

B.C. is also home to internationally recognized educational institutions

and some of North America’s leading research programs, including UBC’s Data

Science Institute, UVic’s institute for data science, SFU’s cybersecurity

centre and UBC’s Quantum Matter Institute. Our R-and-D infrastructure also

includes the Centre for Drug Research and Development, Genome B.C., TRIUMF, and

BCIT’s Centre for Energy Systems Applications.

We also have the unique distinction of being in a time zone where our

business day conveniently overlaps with afternoon working hours in Europe and

morning schedules in Asia. And we are in the exact same time zone as the

biggest tech hub in the world, in Silicon Valley.

Despite all the successes, there is room for growth. B.C. ranks third in

the country in high-tech GDP, behind Ontario and Quebec, and far behind many

U.S. states. Washington, Oregon and California all have around 20 percent of

their GDP contributed by the high-tech sector.

The tech sector is a very important part of our diverse economy. Quite

often, it doesn’t get the attention that it deserves. While the previous

government focused all of its energy on LNG, the tech sector grew. With a new

government in place that recognizes the importance of this sector, it will

continue to thrive and become a strong foundation of economic prosperity for

all British Columbians.

T. Stone: It’s a pleasure to rise today to speak to this particular item that was

brought forward by the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam, and I thank him for

that.

First off, what exactly is the new economy? It’s often used to describe

new high-growth industries on the cutting edge of technology, a technology

that’s often a force of tremendous economic change and economic growth. Many

suggest that the new economy started with the advent of powerful computing, and

I think that is certainly the fact.

It’s now reflected in exciting subsectors of technology: the streaming

economy, the gig economy, the cloud computing economy, big data, artificial

intelligence, virtual reality. On and on the list goes. All of this new economy

is truly changing our communities. It’s changing how we work. It’s changing how

we live. We see innovation everywhere, in communities large and

small.

Now, I am a former tech CEO. This is the world that I come from. When I

started my tech company back in the late 1990s, there were four tech companies

in Kamloops. Today there are over 160 companies, employing over 1,400

Kamloopsians and doing incredible innovation. Companies like iTel or Lightship

or Streamline or Hummingbird Drones. Kamloops is now home to data centres,

hardware and software providers.

[10:40 a.m.]

The same goes for Kelowna, Victoria, Vancouver, Prince George and

communities all over this province of ours. It’s one of the beauties of this

new economy. You can go to 100 Mile House, Sicamous or Cumberland, and you will

come across incredibly innovative companies building services and products as

part of the new economy.

This sector is certainly booming in British Columbia: over 106,000

direct jobs with projections to grow, to see growth in this sector, to 120,000

by 2020. There are over 10,000 companies, again, in every community, large and

small. The jobs do pay 75 percent higher than the average wage in British

Columbia, and as the former member mentioned — he’s absolutely correct — there

are more tech jobs than mining, forestry and oil and gas combined.

It’s very important to understand what those keys to success are to

continue to enable this sector to grow. One of the most important strategies is

to keep the cost of doing business competitive. Raising taxes is not a good way

to spur continued growth in this particular sector.

I’m really proud to have been part of a former government that worked

really hard to develop the tech sector and to ensure continued growth. You

know, we took sector employment in a four-year period from about 80,000 tech

jobs to over 100,000. We provided an additional $87 million towards the B.C.

tech strategy.

Our actions were organized into three broad categories. First, access to

capital — a $100 million venture capital fund we created, a very, very

important source of early-round financing. We enhanced tax credits, like the

small business venture capital tax credit and the digital animation or visual

effects credit. We also pursued federal funding under the clusters

initiative.

The second key category is talent — better capitalizing on ideas

generated in British Columbia to support commercialization. That starts by

first focusing on developing talent here in British Columbia. I’m proud that we

did that by introducing coding in schools, grades six to nine, creating more

seats in our tech programs at our universities and colleges across the

province, more co-op placements and so forth.

The third key strategy is on the market side of the equation. That,

again, starts by making it easier for B.C. companies to do business here in

British Columbia with government. We implemented a simplified RFP process,

which did exactly that. It also involves fostering better market access across

the world. We did that through growing the export navigator pilot program and

expanding U.S. trade and investment offices in Seattle and the Silicon

Valley.

The new economy in B.C. is very exciting. It’s growing fast. British

Columbia is now a leader in biotech, virtual reality, artificial intelligence,

clean tech, digital animation and special effects. This industrial revolution

is all about bringing the physical, biological and digital worlds closer

together.

Yes, it will cause some disruption, as new technology and automation

challenge the status quo in some industries. Government will need to continue

to anticipate and prepare British Columbians to adapt to this very exciting

disruption. If we do this right, if we embrace this change, we can seize these

massive opportunities inherent within this change.

R. Glumac: A great deal of time is spent talking about the economy in this House.

The tech sector needs to be recognized and championed, because it is part of

the new economy that is driving economic growth. It is pervasive, and it

crosses into many traditional industries.

In this House, we’ve had question period taken over for several weeks by

questions related to a single pipeline project. Perhaps we need to step back

and cast our eyes to the future in order to get some context. The oil industry,

while still an important part of the Canadian economy, will decline in the

future, as countries around the world are banning internal combustion engines

in new vehicles and are embracing renewable energy, which is becoming cheaper

and cheaper. At some point, it’ll become impossible to ignore climate change,

and the use of fossil fuels will decline further.

What will not decline is the new economy. The tech sector and all

industries that it supports will continue to grow at an accelerating rate. B.C.

is well positioned to be a global leader in the new economy.

[10:45 a.m.]

That is why we are investing in education, K to 12 as well as

post-secondary — so that our children will have the tools to thrive in the

economy of the future. That is why we’ve hired B.C.’s first innovation

commissioner to champion the innovation and tech sector and to strengthen

national and cross-border relationships. That is why we are forming the

emerging economy task force to develop made-in-B.C. solutions in the new

economy.

The future is bright, and I’m proud to be part of a government that

recognizes the opportunities we have and that is positioning B.C. to be a world

leader in the new economy.

FUELLING BRITISH COLUMBIA

J. Yap: Today I want to talk about fuelling British Columbia, both literally and

figuratively. Like most members of this House, I own a car. Richmond-Steveston

isn’t the biggest riding in British Columbia, but it’s still too big to walk

across in a reasonable amount of time. This is also true for millions of

British Columbians. They walk, take transit or ride their bikes when they can,

but quite often it’s necessary to get around by car. How are these cars

fuelled?

The previous B.C. Liberal government made great strides in investing in

electric-vehicle-charging stations. Since introducing the clean energy vehicle

program in 2011, British Columbia has added more than 1,300 charging stations.

These are positive steps, and it’s my hope that the current government

continues to build on this success. But this transition cannot happen

overnight.

The fact is that the overwhelming majority of commercial and private

vehicles still run on gas or diesel. Where does this fuel come from? In greater

Vancouver, more than half of the petroleum products we depend on are refined in

Alberta and then shipped to the coast through the Trans Mountain

pipeline.

Constructed in 1953, the pipeline, which connects Edmonton to Burnaby,

is currently able to move 300,000 barrels a day. This fulfils about 50 to 60

percent of the Vancouver market needs. Twinning will allow for up to 890,000

barrels a day. Meanwhile, Kinder Morgan’s Puget Sound pipeline spurs off near

Abbotsford and connects to Washington state. This allows Trans Mountain to

supply refineries in Anacortes, Cherry Point and Ferndale,

Washington.

There are other sources. CP and CN Rail lines carry oil into B.C.’s

northern and southern regions, where there’s a rail line between Burnaby and

the United States. But it’s not enough.

A supply shortage on the Prairies — or if Alberta follows through on its

threats to restrict the flow of oil here — would create significant hardship

for ordinary British Columbians. I should note that these folks are also

contending with an increase to the carbon tax. This price hike will impact

motorists and commercial truck drivers at the pump. It may discourage tourists

thinking about taking a road trip through our great province.

In addition, representing a riding in Richmond where agriculture is a

key industry, I know many farmers are worried about it as well. They use heavy

machinery to get the job done on their farms each day and the trucks to

transport their goods. They’re very concerned about how the increase to the

carbon tax, among other factors, will hurt their bottom line.

They’re not alone. Many people across British Columbia are nervous. All

the members in the House, I’m sure, are hearing from them. The threats made by

Alberta may or may not be constitutional. But as we have learned, just because

something is unconstitutional, it doesn’t mean it cannot happen anyway, even if

just temporarily.

It’s not just cars. My community, our community, also includes Vancouver

International Airport, YVR, which is the gateway for millions of tourists and

visitors to our province. One of the files I worked on in government — with Rob

Howard, the former member for Richmond Centre — was air access. I’m sure all

members of this House use YVR. It’s a huge economic generator for our province

as well as the major employer in our community, the city of

Richmond.

[10:50 a.m.]

With B.C. being an open economy so very dependent on trade, YVR is a

gateway for our province and all of Canada. From tourism to agriculture and

aquaculture to business, there is hardly any sector of our economy that does

not benefit from a successful YVR.

YVR also plays a crucial role in B.C.’s ties to the economies across the

Pacific. Our former B.C. Liberal government put a lot of hard work and energy

into developing these Asia-Pacific relationships, opening up new markets for

B.C. goods. All that economic activity creates jobs, drives growth, brings

investments, builds communities and makes a positive difference in people’s

lives. It also takes a lot of fuel.

Each additional flight to Asia increases jet fuel demand by 800 tanker

truckloads per year. The new pipeline, marine terminal and receiving facility

being constructed is good news for YVR to secure fuel supply and eliminate the

need for daily tanker truck deliveries. But again, YVR is vulnerable. If

Alberta cuts or restricts the flow of oil, there is a risk of fuel shortages at

YVR.

Set aside the economic impacts, even though they would be considerable;

the reputational impact might be even worse. As I mentioned, under our previous

B.C. Liberal government we made great strides in economic growth and trade ties

and in diversifying our economy. While we also took steps to expand our network

of electric vehicle charging stations, all that economic growth and activity

needs fuel.

In a very real sense, B.C. runs on oil. As our relations with Ottawa and

Alberta continue to be strained and potentially descend into hostility, I hope

the government will consider the real impacts of a sudden rise in fuel costs or

even a shortage. They are impacts that will be felt provincewide by our

citizens who seek greater affordability, by various industries and our business

community and, ultimately, by our economy, which fuels the social services

which we all rely on.

I’ll leave it there for now, and I look forward to the response from the

members opposite.

R. Kahlon: Thank you to the member for Richmond-Steveston for bringing this motion

forward: the importance of fuelling British Columbia. Before I get into my

remarks, I just want to talk on a couple of quick things.

I’m going to be talking about electric vehicles. I know that the

previous government started some initiatives on this. I think all governments

in North America and the world are starting to see the transition from oil and

gas to electric vehicles, and so as a province we need to do that as

well.

The member mentioned the challenges around carbon tax. I just wanted to

remind the member that in fact it was his government that actually introduced

the carbon tax. We and other jurisdictions around the world now are seeing the

benefits of that.

One of the things that I want to touch on is a commitment that our

government has made. Our government is in the process of creating a road map

for the future of our province’s energy needs. This new plan will drive

innovation, will drive energy efficiency, partner with conservation programs

and generate new energy responsibly and sustainably, creating good jobs across

the province.

We must do this to ensure we both provide the energy required to power

B.C. but also to meet our climate targets and, along with this initiative, also

creating good jobs throughout the province. There’s a supply and demand piece

there.

On the supply side, I’d said that we’re actually extremely fortunate

here in B.C. Our electricity is one of the greenest in the world and one of the

lowest costs anywhere in the world. We’re blessed to have the biggest tools

available in the carbon reduction box, so to speak. Using B.C. clean energy,

with our abundance of existing hydro dams, wind, solar and biomass, gives us a

phenomenal competitive advantage by helping us to create some of the lowest

carbon product services in the international market. Dramatically cheaper

renewable energy technologies are already making us competitive, and the trend

is only going to continue.

First Nations are not just joining the movement; they’re actually

leading in this movement. Just locally, we’re talking about the T’Sou-ke First

Nation. They were proclaimed Canada’s first Aboriginal solar community. To

think that ten years ago they took the initiative to put solar panels

throughout their community, in the middle of a rainforest, is quite

remarkable.

[10:55 a.m.]

Now they’re selling power back to the grid as well as providing power to

their entire community, although, along the way, also employing 15 band

members.

The Upper Nicola Band just recently has announced plans to build B.C.’s

largest solar panel farm. It will provide energy for 5,000 homes and deliver

about $4 million in annual revenues to their community. This is the future of

energy in this province.

Electrifying the grid. We have lots of opportunities to electrify our

grid as well as help us ensure that we meet our climate change targets. I know

there have been reports written for many, many years about the importance of

the Montney basin and work that can be done to electrify that. We could avoid

up to four million tonnes of emissions per year, minimizing the greenhouse gas

footprint in our province’s busiest resource area.

The member mentioned electrical cars, and I think that there’s been some

good work started in that direction, and it’s only going to expand. Every

jurisdiction is moving at a very fast pace at bringing on more electric

vehicles and building more capacity for electric vehicles. I know that just

recently the new-car dealers were here, and the amount of new electrical cars

that are coming on the market is astounding. Starting next year, I think every

company will have at least five or six cars on the market. That’s something for

us to be proud of.

There’s certainly a transition happening, and it’s only going to get

faster and faster. So when we talk about fuelling B.C., I think we should be

talking about it in the future. I think our constituents and all of our ridings

want us to be thinking about, “What is it going to look like in ten years?” and

not: “What does it look like today?” I think there’s been good work done by the

previous government. We’re only looking to expand that work by ensuring that

more people have access to electric vehicles, that even our commercial vehicles

start looking in that direction.

With that, I thank the member for Richmond-Steveston for bringing

forward this motion and look forward to hearing his follow-up

thoughts.

J. Yap: Thanks to the member opposite for his remarks. It’s clear that we and

the members opposite don’t agree on everything, but there are many things we

agree on. I appreciate his comment about the good work that was started by our

previous government, and the new government is working on continuing a number

of those initiatives.

All sides of this House believe that we should do more to increase

affordability in the province, particularly in centres like the Lower Mainland

and greater Victoria. I believe all members in this House can also agree that a

dramatic rise in fuel prices would hurt ordinary British Columbians.

It’s not just the price that we would pay at the pumps; it’s the cost of

heating their homes with natural gas, a home heating oil. It’s the spillover

effect, including the rising prices on everything from groceries and household

goods to the cost of busing kids to school. Beyond rising prices, an actual

fuel shortage would cause havoc. We need to think about what a major

interruption would do to our economy.

As I’ve outlined, our previous B.C. Liberal government did all we could

to grow the economy, and many of the opportunities we created to build that

success rely on fuel. From tourists arriving by planes through YVR, Vancouver

International Airport, to the goods being exported out of that airport to

overseas markets — and let’s not forget the commercial trucks getting goods to

YVR — these are just some of the ways that fuel plays a big

part in our economy

and in our lives. I could go on and on.

The health of our economy is so important. When our economy is

functioning well, we have the funds to pay for the services that we all need.

Most of us jump into our cars and go about our business each day without a

thought as to where our fuel comes from. I hope today’s discussion of this

matter is illuminating on that point.

With all of this in mind, I hope that we avoid the threats and the risks

that loom over that important supply of fuel. Our interprovincial relationships

are so important, especially with our next-door neighbour, Alberta, which

provides us with so much of the fuel that we use. Let’s maintain and work to

maintain and improve those partnerships, rather than the alternative which

would do so much damage to our provincial economy and hit British Columbians

hard in the pocketbook as well.

Hon. B. Ralston: I call debate on private member’s Motion 19.

[11:00 a.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 19

without disturbing the priority of the motions preceding it on the order

paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 19 — AGRICULTURAL LAND

AND

FARMING

R. Leonard: I’m delighted to put forward my first motion in the House on the matter

of a most basic human need.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member, you need to move the motion.

R. Leonard: Yes.

[Be it resolved that this House recognizes the importance of protecting

agricultural land and encouraging farming.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Without sustenance, we would all perish, and without arable land or

farmers, we could not grow the food we need. In our vast and varied province,

our limited fertile ground is found where land uses other than agricultural

aggressively compete for housing, commerce, industry, resource extraction,

roads — you name it. In 1973, food production was prioritized on about 4.7

million hectares of highly sought-after, fertile real estate, protecting 5

percent of the land base within a single agricultural land reserve to be

overseen by an independent provincial commission.

The Comox Valley is an agricultural community with $34 million in gross

farm receipts and growing. But today, only 23 percent of the more than 23,000

hectares of ALR is actively farmed, and 62 percent of the remaining land is in

its natural state and available for production. That’s three times as much land

that could be farmed but isn’t. That’s a lot of potential. It’s important to

protect that potential and encourage more farming, since Vancouver Island gets

more than 90 percent of its food from off Island, and there is only enough

supply here for a few days.

We witnessed how important food security can be with the wildfires in

B.C. last year, when some communities were cut off and only local food was

available. Resiliency to withstand disaster is where we need to be in every

community.

So how do we encourage farming and grow local supply? The Comox Valley

has some encouraging trends to reflect on. Although the average age of Comox

Valley farmers is 59 years old — older than the Canadian average — unlike most

of Canada, there’s been a surge in agri-investments there, seeing more land

going into production and higher gross farm receipts, according to our local

economic development office.

While the older generation is still farming, many young agrarians are

cropping up. There have been the development of niche markets with a number of

grape and fruit wineries, Natural Pastures’ award-winning cheeses, Tree

Island’s yogurt and McClintock’s Farms’ water buffalo yogurt, as well as the

renowned shellfish aquaculture of Baynes Sound.

Beef farms are expanding herds and buying up farms and growing a

grass-fed, organic, natural, specialty meats sector. Its necessary forage

production has the potential in the Comox Valley to grow up to five times what

it is today. On the other end of the spectrum, organic produce on small farms

with young agrarians has seen an uptick, but accessing land is an issue. There

are about ten big dairy farms and over 400 small farms, 75 percent being

organic.

Diligent support and a comprehensive plan is needed to turn trends into

long-term change, and our new government is doing just that. Grow B.C. will

help young farmers access that land and support expansion of local food

production. Feed B.C. will help grow consistent markets for B.C.–grown and

–processed food, and Buy B.C. will expand marketing and expand market

access.

Agricultural land in B.C. is under threat after the previous government

brought forward Bill 24 in 2014 with virtually no consultation. Continuous

improvement is a good concept, but it can’t be achieved without regard for

those who practise farming or who are in the food industry. The uproar that

followed the creation of two zones — that’s two kinds of ALR — with attached

legislative measures that will allow losses of up to 90 percent of good

farmland indicates that Bill 24 has not been considered an

improvement.

[11:05 a.m.]

That’s why I am encouraged by today’s Minister of Agriculture’s interest

in hearing from British Columbians about what we can do to strengthen our

farming and ranching industry. The new ALR revitalization commission has an

impressive diversity of agricultural interests, and the different geographical

areas of B.C. are well represented. It has heard from over 1,500 British

Columbians. Their work and our renewed focus on B.C. agriculture should put us

on the right track to better protect our agricultural land and encourage

farming.

I. Paton: I rise in the House today to speak on the subject of protecting

agricultural land and encouraging farming in British Columbia. It’s a subject

I’m well versed in, having grown up on a dairy farm and becoming a third

generation dairy farmer.

My grandfather was a dairy farmer, as was my father. My father, by the

same name, was also chairman of the Agricultural Land Commission in British

Columbia in the late ’80s and early ’90s, so my family knows quite a bit about

encouraging farming and protecting farmland in British Columbia. My older

brother is also a veterinarian of large animals — horses and dairy

cattle.

Not only did I develop a love for farming from my family, I also got it

from my involvement in B.C.’s 4-H program. I got involved with this

organization when I was about eight or nine years old, and the skills I learned

over the years carried on into my adult years. 4-H is a wonderful program. It

gives young people the opportunity to learn how to become productive,

self-assured adults through a variety of programs and experiences.

Personally, I chose to take

part in the 4-H dairy and beef clubs, but

it’s not just about animals. 4-H, over the years, has evolved into other many

interests, such as bees, small engines, photography, poultry, sewing, crafts

and gardening. 4-H also provides young people with a long list of skill sets,

such as livestock husbandry, nutrition, showing and judging their animals and

animal health, not to mention public speaking, project reports, farm safety and

many, many fun times at the local fairs.

Interestingly, adults in the early 1900s did not readily accept new

agricultural discoveries, but educators found that youth would experiment with

new ideas and then share their experience and successes with the adults. In

this way, youth have led in the introduction of new technology in the farming

industry.

In addition to learning new skills as a 4-H member, I also learned the

4-H pledge, which I’m proud to share with the House today. It describes the

significance of the 4-H’s: “I pledge my head to clearer thinking, my heart to

greater loyalty, my hands to larger service and my health to better living for

my club, my community and my country.”

That last point is so important. 4-H doesn’t just improve the skills of

young people in the present. It empowers them to become good citizens in the

future who give back to their community and their country. In fact, many people

I know from my time in 4-H have risen to leadership roles in their communities.

I count myself among them, serving as, first, a city councillor and then an

MLA, working with diverse community groups, even getting up and speaking in

this House. 4-H is one of the early experiences in my life that gave me the

skills and confidence to pursue this type of work.

I’m proud to say that I continue to stay involved with activities

relating to 4-H. Through our family farm auction business, my late father and I

have been involved in the annual 4-H auction at the PNE for over 50 years. The

auction is such as an important event to the 4-H community. It’s the

culmination of participants’ hard work to raise their animals and learn the

business lessons needed to sell those animals, hopefully, for a profit. The

event also is a celebration of the many individuals and business people who

support these future farmers.

I also would like to mention that I’m proud to say that the Ian Paton

Sr. Memorial Scholarship at the PNE is a $2,000 scholarship that’s awarded each

year in memory of my late father for his contribution to the 4-H program in

British Columbia.

Those of us who were born and raised on a farm or who live in rural

areas treasure the lifestyle and experience that come with it. We also know

that agriculture is hugely important to our provincial economy. We need to see

this industry continue to grow and thrive. Luckily, the 4-H program is there to

support not only our youth but the future of our agriculture

commodities.

M. Dean: I rise with pleasure to speak to this motion: “Be it resolved that this

House recognizes the importance of protecting agricultural land and encouraging

farming.” This is an important issue in my constituency. It is being addressed

by our government — a priority since the ALR was weakened by Bill

[11:10 a.m.]

For example, the Minister of Agriculture is expected to make substantive

progress on revitalizing the agricultural land reserve and the Agricultural

Land Commission and establishing Grow B.C. to help young farmers access land

and support fruit and nut growers and processors to expand local food

production.

This is particularly important locally, because a 2012 study by the

Capital Region Food and Agricultural Initiatives Roundtable found that nearly

50 percent of CRD farmland sits idle. In addition, more than half the farmers

in the region are more than 55 years old and likely to retire in the next 20

years.

It was identified that non-farm use of farmland — including for

residential, transportation and recreation — is reducing the availability of

arable land and drives up the cost. Not surprisingly, it was established that

high land prices represent a significant barrier to the next generation of

farmers to take over a family farm and for new farmers to establish farms.

Development pressure and speculation are driving up land prices.

Now, in spite of these issues, there are some pockets of our community

where farming is thriving and is very well supported, such as in the beautiful

and rural district of Metchosin. A substantial land base in Metchosin is

devoted to agriculture, with 1,070 hectares of land protected by the ALR and 82

properties being farmed in Metchosin’s ALR. Metchosin farmers grow a diverse

range of products, from vegetables, fruits and root crops to poultry for eggs

and meat, sheep, cattle and pigs, and flowers, shrubs and trees for landscaping

purposes.

The district council has long prioritized its commitment to maintaining

and expanding local and environmentally sound agriculture as an important

component of the strategy to enhance Metchosin’s ability to respond to the

threat of a changing climate and dependence on off-Island food sources. This

illustrates a convergence of local and provincial values and offers

partnerships for future actions.

The actions that Metchosin already commits to in order to help protect

the district’s agricultural potential are directed at their aims to support and

enhance the Agricultural Land Commission’s mandate to preserve agricultural

lands for agriculture; maintain and, where possible, strengthen the protection

of agricultural land; support efforts to improve public awareness of local

agriculture and farmer access to local markets; support programs providing

educational and extension services to new farmers; support programs providing

affordable access to land for new farmers; support edge planning around

individual farms and around the ALR; and encourage and support organic farming

practices and ecological stewardship.

There are many areas of support offered by Metchosin that provide

leadership within the region and reinforce the intent and benefits of the ALR,

including the vibrant and successful farmers market.

Another wonderful farmers market is that in Esquimalt. They support

local growers and producers and people who engage in environmentally sound

farming practices. To thank them for growing local food, this market charges

farmers half-price for their stalls. Recently Esquimalt Farmers Market was

named the 2017 B.C. Farmers Market of the Year, and their ED, Katrina Dwulit,

was awarded Market Manager of the Year. As she says of their work: “Farmer

first, always.”

S. Gibson: Good to be here today in this House to speak to the motion: “Be it

resolved that this House recognizes the importance of protecting agricultural

land and encouraging farming.” I’m grateful for the opportunity to speak today

on behalf of my constituents of the intensely agricultural Abbotsford-Mission

riding.

Agriculture is incredibly important to the Fraser Valley. Our valley is

made up of six municipalities — many electoral areas spanning eight electoral

ridings — and the valley is one of the most intensely farmed in Canada. Home to

a diverse range of farms, the valley occupies a relatively small geographic

area, but our economic footprint is significant. In fact, the Fraser Valley

regional district, which encompasses the entire area, generates the largest

annual farm receipts of any regional district in the province.

[11:15 a.m.]

The agricultural community of the valley is not only important to the

local area but invaluable to the province and the economy as a whole.

Agriculture in our Fraser Valley is particularly successful due to a long

growing season, great quality soil — a lot of class 1 and 2 soils — ample

precipitation, moderate climate and easy access to markets. The growing season,

of course, is very significant when you compare it with northern parts of our

province.

Currently B.C. farmers produce 45 percent of all foods consumed in B.C.

As our population continues to grow, the importance of farming will also grow

as well.

In 2016, B.C. agrifood and seafood reached $14 billion in sales and a

record $3.8 billion in exports, accounting for 2 percent of B.C.’s total GDP.

In the Fraser Valley alone, agriculture is responsible for $3.1 billion in

annual economic activity — 18,000 full-time jobs.

Now, the agricultural community in the Fraser Valley expands far beyond

the dairy farms. Traditionally, when we think of the Fraser Valley, we think of

the bucolic dairy farms that continue on today on both sides of the river in my

riding in the Mission area and, indeed, in the Abbotsford area. You might say

dairy farms are nostalgic, and in a way they are, but they still contribute

significantly to the economy of the Fraser Valley and, indeed, the entire

province.

There’s also a lot more farming that we could talk about in the Fraser

Valley region. There’s a myriad of berries — blueberries, raspberries,

strawberries, even some cranberries — eggs, pork producers, chickens, turkeys.

Quite amazing, the variety. Our blueberries are indeed world famous. In fact,

currently we are shipping to Europe, China, India, the U.S.A. and

Japan.

The importance of agriculture in the Fraser Valley and, indeed, in our

province can’t be understated. For this reason, I take a particular interest in

agriculture. In 2014, our former government took action to modernize the ALR.

Adopting a two-tier system, we took important steps to protect our farmland

while reflecting the diversity and economic realities of our province. Across

B.C., we see different growing seasons, agricultural practices, unique

crops.

In my home of the Fraser Valley, we boast remarkable agricultural

diversity. But beyond the Fraser Valley, we have ranchers in the Cariboo and

Kootenays, fruit growers in the Okanagan and fish farmers on the coast and

Vancouver Island. These are just a few examples.

I believe a simple approach doesn’t reflect these regional differences

to the ALR. It doesn’t allow local understanding of decision-making and the

application of local guides to determine what’s best for those regions. I would

therefore want to raise a note of caution today. I know the government is

involved in consultations regarding the ALR. I don’t want to prejudge the

outcomes. However, I’m concerned that the minister seems to have alluded that

there’s the consideration of changing back to the one zone.

Thank you so much for allowing me to speak to this today. I appreciate

that.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the motion moved by my colleague,

the member for Courtenay-Comox: “Be it resolved that this House recognizes the

importance of protecting agricultural land and encouraging farming.”

I’m certainly in support of that motion. I know all members of the House

are. I just want to put the context for us. We are talking about the

Agricultural Land Commission, which was brought into force by the first B.C.

NDP government, under Premier Dave Barrett, responding to the erosion of the

agricultural land base by creating the Agricultural Land Commission — that was

in 1973 — to protect agricultural land. At the time, and currently today,

that’s approximately 5 percent of the province.

[11:20 a.m.]

Certainly, when we talk about the importance of agriculture in B.C., we

recognize the importance of food security — having reliable access to

sufficient quantity and quality of affordable, nutritious food. In addition,

the concept of food sovereignty, which is the right of people to healthy and

culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable

methods.

I want to recognize the work of the Vancouver Urban Farming Society. You

think Vancouver, and you don’t necessarily think farming. But certainly, there

are very passionate folks — very committed to these issues around agriculture.

They are an organization that strengthens the growth and promotes urban farming

through education, advocacy, networking and business support — doing very

important work.

We know that the issue of agriculture in Vancouver is very popular.

There’s an increasing awareness around food literacy and very popular farming

markets that we have in Vancouver and throughout Metro Vancouver. We don’t have

a lot of farming, actually, that takes place in Vancouver or Metro Vancouver.

On the one hand, we represent over 50 percent of the population, but our total

farmland area is just 1.5 percent. We see the number of farms declining by

hectarage, number of farms and, also, folks involved in farming. Certainly,

it’s putting on that pressure in terms of growing local food here in British

Columbia, particularly in Vancouver and when we look at Metro

Vancouver.

I want to address as well: what are the challenges that are facing

agriculture? We know 16 years of the last government, the old government…. My

colleague from Abbotsford-Mission mentioned that there was

an act in 2014 to

modernize and protect farmland. But we heard…. That was Bill 24, and the impact

actually was that it removed about 90 percent of land from the ALR, from that

specific protection, with the creation of the two-zone system. It was opposed

by the B.C. Agricultural Council, which represents 14,000 farm

families.

Our government is committed to recognizing and strengthening the

Agricultural Land Commission. We have undertaken a consultation and a

commission. It’s a consultation to go out and engage British Columbians in a

process around their ideas and suggestions, to actually talk to farmers and get

their input, in terms of how we build and strengthen agriculture in

B.C.

As well, we know that the last government…. Besides undermining the

Agricultural Land Commission and the agricultural land reserve, we know that

the steps taken by the last government made farming unsustainable by allowing

speculation on farmland and really driving up the price of land. This has

fundamentally undermined agriculture in our province, and our government is

committed to ensuring that we support agriculture and support

farmers.

In the mandate letter for the Minister of Agriculture, our government is

committed not only to revitalizing the agricultural land reserve and

Agricultural Land Commission, but we have also taken steps to promote buying

B.C. products, growing B.C. products and also encouraging the use of

B.C.-grown-and-processed foods for local hospitals, schools and other

facilities so that we can promote and support our local producers here in

British Columbia.

We’ve taken a significant step to develop a B.C. Food Innovation Centre

to innovate in the processing, packaging and marketing of B.C. food products.

We’re also making a commitment to look at addressing the speculation which has

driven up costs. Our government is committed to agriculture in B.C.

L. Larson: I’m pleased to rise to speak to the motion this morning. I know we are

all aware that good farmland in some areas of the Lower Mainland is under

threat from development, and there is much ALR land that is considered marginal

or more difficult to farm. But continuing innovation and research is helping to

make farming more profitable and, therefore, a more attractive career

choice.

[11:25 a.m.]

One of the most important ways we can encourage farming in B.C. is by

supporting groups and organizations like the Young Farmers of British Columbia.

The B.C. Young Farmers Association has 250 registered young farmers. They are

involved in small and large farm operations promoting and working in categories

such as beef, berries, vegetables, flowers, grain, poultry, bees and all areas

of specialty organic commodities, just to name a few.

The B.C. Young Farmers Association assists with information, education

and supports to ensure that they become successful farmers. They are typically

between the ages of 19 and 40, and there is no cost to join. The B.C. Young

Farmers are a committee under the B.C. Agriculture Council and was started in

2008. There is a board of directors that meets ten times a year and that

consists of young farmers and some industry representatives.

Their most important goal is education, making sure that all information

that is relevant to the industry is readily available to the membership and

also to recognize, every year, young farmers who have excelled in their

particular field. That recognition, I believe, is extremely important in

encouraging young farmers to continue in the farming industry. The motion

before us, to encourage farming, starts with young farmers. I would like to

mention some of those who have received recognition in the past

years.

In B.C. this year, 2018, the winner is Prime Cuts at Cutter Ranch in

Fort Steele. Tyler McNaughton and Sacha Bentall produce pasture-raised lamb,

pork and beef on their 160-acre ranch. Rather than use conventional barns,

Cutter’s animals are housed in greenhouses when not in the pastures. They

streamlined their hog production by phasing out farrowing and using purchased

weaner pigs.

In 2017, the sales of their pasture-raised pork increased 219 percent,

and it’s already up 30 percent so far this year. They tour hundreds of kids

through the farm during lambing season in the spring each year and conduct

regular sheepdog demonstrations — positive ways to introduce youth to farming —

and they market through the very modern use of the web.

Gary and Marie Baars, from Chilliwack, were the 2017 recipients. Gary

started out offering relief milking, then selling hay, and then he and his wife

eventually bought a dairy. They’ve continued with hay sales and have added

cattle to the mix.

The 2016 recipients were also from Chilliwack — Brian and Jewel Pauls.

In the 36 years the award has been made, this was the first time that there was

a second-generation winner. Although he owns only one farm himself, consisting

of 17,000 broilers and 55,000 white and free-range poultry, they also manage

the family’s multiple egg, broiler and turkey farms in B.C. and Saskatchewan.

The holdings include Canada’s first certified humane turkey farm.

The 2015 recipients were Kerry and Anita Froese. Kerry, who was born

into an Abbotsford farm family, has dedicated his life to the sustainability of

agriculture in Canada. He founded the B.C. Young Farmers in 2008 and, in 2010,

was elected to and served as president of the Canadian Young Farmers’

Forum.

My area of the Similkameen and South Okanagan has also produced some

amazing young farmers. The 2013 winners were Troy and Sara Harker. Troy is a

fifth-generation farmer in Cawston. Everything grown on the farm is started

from seed in the 1,200-square foot greenhouse. Harker’s Organics is made up of

five separate entities — a farm-to-fork delivery to restaurants in the Lower

Mainland, Rustic Roots Winery, a wholesale packing business for 15 organic

producers, a retail outlet and the farm itself.

Gene and Shelly Covert, of Oliver, won the provincial award in 2010, and

the recipients in 2011, Annamarie and Kevin Klippenstein, are also from Cawston

and went on to be recognized as the Canadian young farmers of the year in

The national winners last year were from a grain operation in

Saskatchewan and a vegetable farm in Quebec. The Axtens, of Minton,

Saskatchewan, researched the biology of the soils on their farm, developing a

process called intercrop.

B. D’Eith: I’m very happy to rise to speak to this motion today. Just in terms of

context, it was really in the late ’60s and early ’70s that nearly 6,000

hectares of prime agricultural land were being lost each year to urban

development. In was in fact Dave Barrett’s NDP government that responded to

this erosion of the agricultural land base by introducing the Land Commission

Act in 1973. This commission established the agricultural land reserve to

protect B.C.’s agricultural land.

[11:30 a.m.]

This was driven by a desire for food security in the future. In fact,

this ALR system was the first of its kind in Canada. But in 2011, the Ministry

of Agriculture review of farming in Metro Vancouver exposed the fact that only

50 percent of farming land in the Metro region is actually being farmed.

There’s so much pressure now being put because of urban development. Clearly,

we need to support and enhance the Agricultural Land Commission’s mandate. Our

government is working towards that with our consultation with stakeholders and

also the Grow B.C., Feed B.C. and Buy B.C. programs.

It’s particularly relevant in my communities of Maple Ridge and Mission.

Maple Ridge is actually cited at only farming 26 percent of the ALR lands, and

according to the Maple Ridge agricultural plan, one-quarter of that is used for

growing hay for horses. The Maple Ridge agricultural plan further cites that

the majority of farmers are now part time, with 70 percent earning less than

$25,000. So it’s a challenging business, and farmers are also getting older,

and less young people are taking up the work.

Having said that, Maple Ridge boasts some of the richest agricultural

land in Canada, and it’s actually generating substantial revenues from

blueberries, dairy, nurseries and greenhouse farms. Agriculture has actually

been an economic driver in Maple Ridge for decades, and Maple Ridge ranks high

among B.C.’s municipalities in terms of agriculture production value. The total

land area in the agricultural land reserve is 3,782 hectares, or approximately

15 percent of Maple Ridge’s total area.

Maple Ridge is home to some of the largest blueberry and cranberry farms

in the province and also produces very high-quality raspberries, strawberries

and blackberries. I can attest to that, seeing as we keep doing battle with our

blackberries in the backyard every day.

Maple Ridge also has many opportunities, from small, start-up farms to

larger operations, and the city is committed to maintaining its agricultural

roots by growing agriculture food opportunities. There are a lot of notable

contributors to the agriculture diversity in Maple Ridge. One is Golden Ears

Cheesecrafters. There’s also vegetable and herb nurseries, manure and topsoil

farms. We have Christmas tree farms and an 18-acre pumpkin patch.

Another really important thing that’s happening, and something for the

future, is agritourism. That’s actually playing a big role in our community,

and it’s producing revenues.

As far as Mission and the ALR…. Mission has over 200 parcels of land in

the ALR totalling 1,064 hectares. In fact, retaining and protecting agriculture

in Mission is very important to the community as it relates to food security,

and many of my constituents are very interested in having access to safe,

locally grown food in our district. In the district, we have very, very active

farmers markets, both in Maple Ridge and Mission. The district of Mission has

been working cooperatively with the Agricultural Land Commission for many, many

years to keep farming integrity.

However, of the ALR land in Mission, a majority of the parcels are not

farmed and have little or no improvements, and less than 3 percent of the

labour force is employed in the agriculture industry. There are only one or two

large working farms in the community, with the rest being smaller farm

operations; hobby farms; and nurseries producing fruits, berries vegetables,

forage crops for beef operations and others within the community.

As for the future, the role of agriculture is obviously changing in our

communities. Rather than simply being an industry conducted separately from

residences, agriculture is actually becoming, as we see in Maple Ridge and

Mission, integrated within the urban and suburban communities throughout many

of our areas. Citizens are actually also increasingly interested in producing

their own food for reasons that include climate change; food security;

homegrown, organic foods; social connections; and also preserving traditional

ways of life.

Let’s hope that the future generations will embrace agriculture and take

advantage of our amazing agricultural land reserve in order to maintain B.C.’s

food security. I’m confident that our Grow B.C., Feed B.C. and Buy B.C. program

will help to grow our agrifood sector and enhance the work that the

Agricultural Land Commission is doing.

D. Barnett: I’m glad to hear the member’s concerns and thoughts. I absolutely agree

that protecting agricultural land and encouraging farming is of utmost

importance for all of us.

I am delighted to hear of all our commonalities and would like to tell

the House a little bit about the riding of Cariboo-Chilcotin. I have stood in

this House countless times in praise of and advocacy for our province’s farms

and cattle herds.

[11:35 a.m.]

In fact, there is a Thompson Rivers University in Williams Lake with a

ranching stability program there. I believe this is one of two programs of its

kind in Canada, and I lobbied and worked hard with our past Minister of

Advanced Education for it three years ago — a great success.

My riding is the proud home of some of B.C.’s most abundant and

productive farms as well as the largest cattle herds. As such, I would like to

tell the House today about the importance of grasslands to the cattle herds

provincially.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with the cattle industry, the

rotation of pastures is a key part of the health of the industry. Without the

rotation of crops, the grazing of cattle can be detrimental to the land. For

example, the overgrazing of land often leads to the erosion of the fields. And

although it may seem intuitive — after all, cattle would naturally want fresh

and abundant grass — many don’t realize the frequency of rotation needed.

Grasslands are, after all, hugely multipurpose and complex systems.

Many don’t often realize that overgrazed fields have a decline in the

diversity and density of vegetation and can lead to the increased presence of

invasive species. Some of these species can make cattle ill.

You have heard me say before, and will hear again, that the riding of

Cariboo-Chilcotin suffered tremendously during the last fire season. Much of

the damage in my riding affected land that had been previously used for

agriculture. The B.C. Cattlemen’s Association have reported that as many as

30,000 cattle were affected by this previous fire season. Herds were

traumatized by evacuation. Fences were burned, and fields were

charred.

The proper rotation of pastures can prevent the buildup of old growth,

which can alleviate some potential for wildfires. The Cariboo is one of the

last intact temperate grasslands in the world, so we must treat it with caution

so that it may be inherited. We need to continue our pursuit of visionary and

creative agriculture innovations not only to adapt to present and future

challenges but also to challenge and entice the next generation of farmers to

this exciting field.

We are beginning to see Farm School projects cropping up all over the

Lower Mainland. I know I speak for all of us when I commend those involved for

facilitating such wonderful projects. We have heard for some time now that the

average age of farmers is increasing — that young people do not want to take

the land in the same way as their parents or grandparents. But those

participating in Farm School programs show this to be untrue and that programs

such as these are critical in inspiring and encouraging farming for those that

may not otherwise consider it.

Field rotation is

an act of caring for those who come next. It is caring

about the next season, the next herd and the next generation. They require time

to recover so that they can continue to flourish and be sustained for years to

come.

A. Kang: “Be it resolved that this House recognizes the importance of protecting

agricultural land and encouraging farming.” Spring is in the air, and everyone

is excited to see this new year’s crop sprouts spring out. At home and in our

communities, we see the awakened excitement of backyard gardening, community

gardening, large-scale farming or, simply, small pots of patio farming. In

schools, we see students with dirt on their knees and under their nails.

They’re excited about gardening.

People of all ages enjoy gardening, and many have already begun — but in

different stages and in different scales. According to the 2016 census of

agriculture, the total farm area in Metro Vancouver was approximately 38,000

hectares, which is the lowest number in 20 years.

There has already been a steady decline in number of farms at the

regional and municipal levels. Regionwide, there were approximately 2,400

farms, a 14 percent drop from five years ago, but, interestingly, the ages of

farmers, on average, are younger than before, which I interpret as there is a

renewed interest in growing local, eating local and supporting local. Perhaps

it is due to the increase in urban farmers.

[11:40 a.m.]

What is an urban farm? Urban farms help big cities or an urban area with

a relatively small amount of designated protected agricultural land, like the

trend of declining farms and dwindling farmland that has taken hold across the

region and the country.

Most urban farms are small-scale, so producing large amounts of food

like traditional farmers is not necessarily their goal. But they are still

equally important. Urban farms provide excellent opportunities for new farmers

to get involved and for educating the public. This season, my kids and I have

prepared a small area in our backyard to grow our favourite vegetables. They

have chosen small-vine tomatoes, zucchinis, carrots and beans, which are great

for kids and beginning farmers like us. I can’t wait to see and taste our new

harvest.

Here’s another interesting fact. Did you know that in B.C. during the

1960s and the early ’70s, we lost 6,000 acres of farmland every year to

subdivision and other non-farm activities? In 1973, the new government of that

time created the agricultural land reserve, the ALR, to protect land capable of

producing food.

As a proud Burnaby MLA, I like to talk about Burnaby’s continual

creation and ongoing protection of 234 hectares of land in the ALR within the

Big Bend district of south Burnaby — approximately 117 hectares today, in

comparison to only 42 in 1982. These highly productive lands are in

agricultural production, with minor support of commercial retail and

residential uses. In the Riverside neighbourhood, we see an additional 15

hectares of Burnaby land, which is an increase from the 12 hectares under

production in 1982.

Approximately 43 farms are in operation in Burnaby. Most of them grow

field vegetables and greenhouse products. As well, did you know that

cranberries are one of Burnaby’s best-known crops? Cranberries. Burnaby’s

largest farm is operated by Mayberry Farms Ltd., which has 70 hectares of

cranberries in production.

Building a strong agricultural community involves a partnership of

multi-level government, and our government is taking this step.

I am a devoted patron of Burnaby’s farmers market. The market offers a

lively and fun atmosphere with colourful displays of locally grown produce and

many other delicious items. While I look forward to buying my stalks of organic

kale, turnips and tomatoes on a vine, my kids look forward to multi-coloured

baby carrots, locally grown berries and much more. Other farmers markets in

Burnaby include the SFU Pocket Farmers Market and BCIT farmers

market.

The two-tier system introduced in the legislation by the previous

government provoked many negative reactions throughout the province. The ALR

revitalization commission, initiated by the Minister of Agriculture, is

currently conducting consultations until April 30. As the minister has

previously said, the ALR and the ALC are incredibly important to the health and

economic well-being of our province’s future. Making it easier and more

efficient for the commission to fulfil its mandate of protecting farmland and

encouraging farming is a commitment the B.C. government is delivering

on.

I support an enhanced Buy B.C. marketing program to help local producers

market their products. This is why I want to encourage everyone in this

province who eats food or produces food to support and defend the agricultural

land reserve.

B. Stewart: It gives me great pleasure today to speak on a topic that I know a

little bit about — this motion, in recognizing the importance of protecting

agricultural land and encouraging farming.

As someone who has grown up on a farm, served as Minister of Agriculture

and continues to farm extensively today, I understand the value of agricultural

land — not just the incredible value it has in the hundreds of farming

communities across this province but also to the provincial economy as a

whole.

In 2014, our B.C. Liberal government took measures to modernize the ALR.

In March of that year, we announced changes to the Agricultural Land Commission

stemming from our core review of the ALC. The changes included the creation of

two Agricultural Land Commission–administered zones, zone 1 and zone 2, that we

implemented in order to better recognize the province’s regional

differences.

British Columbia is a diverse province with varying agricultural

practices, differing populations and development pressures and different social

and cultural realities in our diverse regions. A one-size-fits-all approach to

regulating farmland simply does not reflect this reality.

[11:45 a.m.]

Zone 1 exists where my farm is, where land is in greater demand and

there are development and population pressures. The Agricultural Land

Commission decisions would continue to be made on the basis of the original

principle of preserving agricultural land.

Zone 2 exists in many other areas of the province — of the four million

hectares that is in the agricultural land reserve — where shorter growing

seasons and lower-value crops are grown. The ALC decisions would be made in

addition to the original principle but to include additional considerations to

provide farmers with more flexibility to support their farming

operations.

Having been in the Peace River and seen neighbouring farms from the

neighbouring province, where there are no restrictions on agricultural land

operations, it certainly puts our farming operations in the Peace River at

considerable disadvantage. These changes that we instigated have helped farmers

and farming families get ahead by recognizing the regional differences,

strengthening regional decision-making and enhancing the ALC’s service to the

public.

Unfortunately, we now have a Minister of Agriculture who’s more

interested in farmers markets than the actual farming. She has consistently

demonstrated a bias against the current ALR framework and has made public

statements about envisioning B.C. moving back to a single zone. She said: “I

can see that we will be moving back to one zone, but I would like to preface by

saying that I have to consult in a meaningful way. But that is a change that I

can see coming.”

She’s clearly trying to obfuscate her position on rolling back the

progressive changes we made of the ALR by claiming it will only happen as a

result of consultation but not her own ideology. However, in stacking the

committee with members who agree with her, such as Arzeena Hamir and Lenore

Newman, she has effectively ensured that her position will be the one that’s

put forth as a recommendation from the committee.

This is not a time for reverting to the old ways of doing things. We

need to be focused on value-added agriculture. We need to be focused on the

macro, not the micro. Let’s look at how we unlock greater potential for

agricultural lands. British Columbia is a province of opportunity.

Instead of asking how we can return to the good old days, we need to be

asking about how we can modernize and embrace the future. How can we increase

the capability of agricultural or ALR land in the north? How can we intensify

agricultural production in the Okanagan? Expand the agricultural opportunities

in the often-overlooked Kootenays? How can we scale up agrifood operations? How

can B.C. continue to move forward on the path towards a more and more

value-added agriculture?

I’ve seen firsthand how innovation and modernization can improve our

agricultural output, not only benefiting our economy but also benefiting

consumers and farm workers.

We need to be looking to the future. As some of my colleagues have

mentioned here this morning, there is a new generation of young farmers

beginning to make their mark on the agricultural industry. We have to welcome

this and embrace this. There’s always room for old-fashioned practice when it

comes to farming, but archaic regulatory frameworks should remain a thing of

the past.

D. Routley: It gives me some pleasure to be able to stand to speak to this motion on

protecting the ALR. I would say that that comes as a no-brainer for most

British Columbians. Most British Columbians see the high value of protecting

farmland and how functional, beneficial and productive the ALR has been over

the years. But what they have seen — what’s been defended here as a

progression, as progressive adaptation of the ALR — in fact, Mr. Speaker, was

no improvement at all — unless, of course, you are a developer.

If you’re a developer or you want to see farm prices escalate, they did

a great job in separating into two zones. But what they did do, in fact, was

undermine the effectiveness of the ALR.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

By no means should we not encourage flexibility on the part of our

farmers. I come from Vancouver Island where we don’t have massive farms. We

have postage stamp–sized farms that have to do many different vertical

marketing of their goods and their produce — from farm-gate sales to the

farmers markets that the previous member disparaged, to local restaurants,

local grocery stores.

[11:50 a.m.]

These people have to be true entrepreneurs who promote their products on

every possible level, and they have to be part of the tourism business

landscape. For the member previous to disparage the type of entrepreneurial

effort that farmers put into supporting their businesses is quite unfortunate,

particularly coming from a former government that bragged about its support for

business. To hear a member disparage something as organic and as beneficial to

communities, as beneficial to the economy, both tourism and the farm and

agriculture community, as farmers markets is really quite sad.

I think British Columbians have different values. I think British

Columbians, by and large, see that the ALR is important to them, whether they

consider it for food or environmental protection or whether they consider it

for the pastoral backdrop of the place that they live in or the beautiful

attraction that our province presents to tourists.

All of these things must be true at the same time for agriculture to

survive. But it’s not just about the ALR. It’s not just about the land. It’s

also about the infrastructure. The previous government did nothing — in fact,

quite a bit less than nothing — to support the infrastructure of food

processing, to support the infrastructure of meat processing on this Island,

for example, when they introduced the abattoir legislation. I think the member

may have been in office at the time. It was roundly condemned as the worst

legislation ever drafted in this parliament, and it forced many businesses,

many small agricultural businesses, to give up at least a portion of their

business, if not all.

Those are the things that the new minister is paying attention to —

supporting the marketing of B.C. products, supporting the notion that public

purchases of food ought to include B.C. farmers and B.C. farm products. Those

are revolutionary in comparison to the backdrop of the 16 years of neglect that

we saw from the previous government. They may seem revolutionary from that

perspective, but they’re basic. They’re no-brainers to most British

Columbians.

We need to support the infrastructure of our agriculture industry. We

have to promote our products. We have to consume our products locally. We have

to support farmers markets that the member previous disparaged. We have to

support the entrepreneurial energy and drive of farmers, particularly young

farmers.

The member did bring up young farmers. Part of the transition, the

difficulty of transitioning from existing farms to young farmers…. I had a

farmer in my office on Friday, from Gabriola Island — a 300-acre farm, the only

farm on Gabriola Island. He’s 86 years old. He’s still mending fences. He’s

still delivering product. His daughter is trying to help. But successorship is

a very big problem in the agricultural community, particularly for those who

aren’t born into the wealth of their farms but instead have to buy their way

into agriculture — after the members opposite saw massive inflation in the

value of agricultural land because of the speculation that they

encouraged.

We need to do better. We are on this side.

D. Routley moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. B. Ralston moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:54 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2018: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada