Second Session, 41st Parliament

(2017) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 37

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Speaker’s Statement

Great British Columbia ShakeOut

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M203 — Rideshare Enabling and Increased Taxi Occupancy Act,

A. Weaver

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Interventional radiology

M. Stilwell

Ladysmith Health Care Auxiliary

D. Routley

Wine industry and community events in Oliver area

L. Larson

Dixon Transition Society and domestic violence awareness

J. Routledge

Me Too campaign and role of women in society

S. Furstenau

Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas

R. Singh

Oral Questions

Regulation of ride-sharing industry

J. Thornthwaite

Hon. C. Trevena

J. Johal

A. Weaver

Attendance of Agriculture Minister at aquaculture event

P. Milobar

Hon. L. Popham

Letter from Agriculture Minister to fish farm operator

M. Stilwell

Hon. J. Horgan

Tree fruit replant program funding

D. Ashton

Hon. L. Popham

Freedom-of-information requests for wildfire loss cases

C. Oakes

Hon. J. Sims

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2017

The House met at 10:01 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Speaker’s Statement

GREAT BRITISH COLUMBIA SHAKEOUT

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, this morning the Legislative Assembly will be

participating in an international earthquake drill. The House will now

recess and reconvene upon the ringing of the division bells.

This House stands in recess till 11 a.m.

The House recessed from 10:02 a.m. to 11 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. C. James: I have two constituents who are visiting in the gallery today, Bill

and Marsha Birney. They have with them today a visitor from the United

States who is coming to see the Legislature and tour Victoria. Welcome,

Monica Spaulding, to British Columbia, and welcome to the guests. Would the

House please make them very welcome.

Hon. A. Dix: This morning members of the Legislature met with representatives of

the Canadian Men’s Health Foundation, including the founding president,

Wayne Hartrick; Adam Kreek, who is their champion and who members of the

House will know is an Olympic gold medallist from 2008; Sam Omidi, who is

the VP of digital; and Kalinka Davis, who is in charge of business

administration for the foundation. They do extraordinary work. They were

inspired here in British Columbia, and they’ve become a national movement.

We’re very proud to have met with them today.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL M203 — RIDESHARE ENABLING AND

INCREASED TAXI

OCCUPANCY ACT, 2017

A. Weaver presented a bill intituled Rideshare Enabling and Increased

Taxi Occupancy Act, 2017.

A. Weaver: I move that a bill intituled the Rideshare Enabling and Increased

Taxi Occupancy Act, 2017, of which notice has been given, be introduced

and read a first time now.

I am pleased to introduce a bill intituled Rideshare Enabling and

Increased Taxi Occupancy Act for the third time. This bill introduces a

regulatory framework that would allow ride-sharing to come to British

Columbia.

Our economy is changing, and ride-sharing is but one example of

that change. As legislators, we cannot bury our heads in the sand and

ignore this change. We must embrace it and ensure that it leads to the

best outcomes possible for British Columbians. Introducing ride-sharing

into British Columbia is something that all three parties committed to

do during the last election campaign. It’s time we fulfilled that

promise collectively.

In introducing this bill, I’m offering a way forward, one that

lets us grapple with the questions that this industry presents us

with.

Mr. Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

A. Weaver: I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for

second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M203, Rideshare Enabling and Increased Taxi Occupancy Act, 2017,

introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day

for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY

M. Stilwell: When we find ourselves in need of health care, we want, of course,

the latest technology and the best doctors. In British Columbia, we’re

fortunate to have some of the best in Canada. Today I speak specifically

of interventional radiology and radiologists.

Interventional radiology, known as IR, is a medical subspecialty

of radiology, utilizing minimally invasive, image-guided procedures to

diagnose and treat diseases in nearly every organ system by harnessing

the power of advanced imaging such as ultrasound, X-rays, CAT scans and

MRIs.

Interventional radiologists use imaging to treat complex and

sometimes life-threatening conditions. Through a tiny incision in the

skin, they deliver precise, targeted treatments. IR procedures are less

invasive, provide reduced risk, less pain, shorter recovery times and,

often, better outcomes.

Many in this House know that for several days this summer, I

relied on the skills of this dedicated group of doctors from Vancouver

General Hospital. They’re not only saving lives through revolutionary

techniques; they are expanding our health care delivery by finding

efficiencies and cutting costs in our health care system.

[11:05 a.m.]

A friend of many in this House, Jordan Bateman, from ICBA, was

treated by the same radiologist group for blood clots in his leg this

September. They saved his leg but, more importantly, his

life.

These incredible individuals work around the clock, on weekends,

in the middle of the night, on days they should be off to improve the

lives of others while rarely getting the recognition they

deserve.

Today I extend my gratitude and praise to all the staff, but

especially Dr. Raju Heran, who sets the bar high for standard of care

with his knowledge, his experience and, especially, his compassion. I’m

not sure how he did it, but he always made me feel like I was his only

patient. Thanks to him, I avoided major surgery, and I feel normal again

— whatever normal is.

LADYSMITH HEALTH CARE AUXILIARY

D. Routley: I rise in the House today to bring congratulations to a wonderful

group of people in Ladysmith. They are the Ladysmith Health Care

Auxiliary. They’ve been nominated and are finalists for the Outstanding

Philanthropic Service Club Award of the Association of Fundraising

Professionals, Vancouver Island chapter.

Founded in 1909, the Ladysmith Health Care Auxiliary began as a

small group of local women determined to support their community by

donating their services to perform various tasks at the local hospital.

The Auxiliary evolved over years from in-hospital help and small

fundraising events to a complex and vibrant community entity operating a

range of health care–associated programs.

The bake sales and bazaars have given way to one of the best

thrift stores on the Island as well as a well-stocked gift shop. They

operate Meals on Wheels, they coordinate youth volunteers in the local

assisted-living facility, they coordinate knitters and crafters who

produce goods for patients and the thrift store, they operate and

maintain a memorial garden behind the health care facility, they have

bursaries every year for high school students headed towards health care

professions, and they offer patient comforts and transportation and

Lifeline for shut-in patients.

This is a wonderful group that has, in the past year, donated

$260,000 worth of medical equipment and support for health-related,

non-profit organizations. Their fundraising efforts have not gone

unnoticed by everyone in our community, and we have all

benefited.

Congratulations to president Pam Fraser, vice-president Jennifer

Forest, treasurer Elsie Vernon, assistant treasurer Lil Kroll,

corresponding secretary Deb Henderson, recording secretary Rosemary Leo,

director of membership Deanna Noonan, director of public relations

Bonnie Weiss and past-president Irene Telford. Thank you so much for all

that you do for our community.

WINE INDUSTRY AND COMMUNITY

EVENTS IN OLIVER

AREA

L. Larson: The wine industry in B.C., and specifically the Okanagan Valley,

has created its own growing economy and attracts tourists from all over

the world. That growth and energy in the Oliver area has also presented

opportunities for several unique and novel events to flourish, like

Uncork the Sun and the Pig Out, but I’d like to expand on two of the

larger events.

Started in 2010 by local Jack Wessell and the Oliver-Osoyoos

wineries, the Half-Corked Marathon was created as a fun run/jog/walk

through vineyards, dirt roads and trails connecting wineries.

Participants can stop and enjoy wine tasting and delicious foods along

the way. There are prizes for costumes and special participant dinners

before and after the race. In 2010, there were 200 participants; in

2017, over 1,000. The event has become so popular across Canada that

tickets to participate are allocated through a lottery

system.

The single largest wine event in the Okanagan is the Festival of

the Grape in Oliver. From its humble beginnings in 1996 with a handful

of wineries and 400 visitors, it has grown to more than 50 wineries and

4,500 guests.

In addition to wine tasting, there is grape stomping. More than a

dozen teams and some rather interesting costumes give grape stomping a

valiant effort. Teams of three do their best to produce the largest

volume of juice in a timed event. The result is messy, but the local

volunteer fire department kindly helps with the cleanup by hosing

everyone down. Festival of the Grape is a family event with special

licensing that allows children on site with their parents and provides

lots of kid-friendly activities.

[11:10 a.m.]

As always, small communities like Oliver rely on volunteers.

Volunteers are the heart of any event like this. I want to give a

shout-out to Marie and George Boychuk. They have volunteered every year

since the first festival 21 years ago. We are incredibly blessed to have

volunteers like the Boychuks. Thank you to all of the volunteers who

make these great events possible.

DIXON TRANSITION SOCIETY AND

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

AWARENESS

J. Routledge: There’s an organization in my community that provides a vital

service. In fact, it’s so vital that its exact location is a secret. I’m

talking about Dixon Transition Society.

Dixon Transition Society is a refuge for women and children

fleeing domestic violence, and the service they provide changes lives.

They offer emergency shelter and counselling, as well as the emotional

and practical support women need to transition to

independence.

I had the opportunity to visit them a couple of weeks ago, and I

was particularly impressed by what they do and how well they are

organized, because I worked as a volunteer at a transition home 35 years

ago in Ontario. We’ve come a long way since then. Remember when male

federal MPs laughed at Margaret Mitchell in parliament when she asked

government to do more to stop violence against women?

Today transition houses are government-funded. The police are

trained to take women seriously when they’re called to intervene in

domestic disputes. Women are less likely to be stigmatized when they

leave violent relationships, and girls are more equipped to someday

support themselves economically.

Yes, we’ve come a long way since the 1980s, but we still have a

long way to go. Dixon Transition Society alone serves more than 550

women and children every year, but they turn away more than 1,100 every

year for lack of space.

While the exact location of transition houses must remain secret,

it is equally important that we turn a bright light on the many ways

that women experience violence and vulnerability in our society

today.

ME TOO CAMPAIGN AND

ROLE OF WOMEN IN

SOCIETY

S. Furstenau: I rise today to say: me too.

Women have been sharing their stories and shining a light on the

shocking prevalence of sexual harassment and violence in our society.

The stories have been heart-wrenching and painful, the storytellers

brave and heroic.

Yesterday we commemorated Persons Day in this House, remembering

that 88 years ago women were recognized as persons under the law in

Canada and given the right to be appointed to the Senate. But law and

reality can be divorced. Yes, we as women can and do hold public office

in this country, but that does not mean we are not subject to sexism,

harassment or bullying in our workplaces, our homes, our

communities.

What Me Too shows us is that the work is far from over. Equality

is not achieved just through legal decisions or legislation. Equality is

not achieved by women feeling empowered and safe enough to speak

out.

Equality will be achieved when we all recognize our shared

responsibility to create a world where these stories are not the norm —

when all members of our society, especially those who do not have a Me

Too story, understand that if we do nothing, we are complicit in a

culture that has made these horrific stories all too common.

To do so will take more than the usual responses to sexual

violence. We must look deeply at how our society has permitted this

situation that so many women face, where they are not treated as persons

but as objects. And we must not be afraid to make the changes so that we

can build a better world where Me Too is not the norm.

[Applause.]

DIWALI AND BANDI CHHOR DIVAS

R. Singh: I want to take a moment to wish the members of this House and the

residents of B.C. a very happy Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas. Both these

festivals are celebrated every year across the world with enthusiasm by

Hindus and Sikhs.

[11:15 a.m.]

Canada, being a diverse nation, has also embraced these festivals,

and today both these occasions are being observed from coast to coast by

Canadians. While Diwali is the festival of lights and symbolizes the

victory of good over evil and enlightenment over darkness, it also marks

the return of Lord Rama after years in exile.

Bandi Chhor Divas marks the anniversary of the return of the sixth

guru of the Sikhs, Guru Hargobind, from the Gwalior jail, where he was

imprisoned for standing up against oppression. Upon his release, he

asked for the freedom of 52 kings who were also detained

there.

In today’s world, when intolerance is on the rise, the message

behind these festivals is even more significant. As we celebrate and

exchange greetings and sweets, we must also resolve to continue our

struggle for an enlightened and just society.

Oral Questions

REGULATION OF RIDE-SHARING INDUSTRY

J. Thornthwaite: Yesterday the Minister of Transportation proudly told us that she

finally read the report from her high-priced consultant. Better late

than never. Now we know the minister has problems with timelines, and

her own consultant confirms this. Dan Hara tells the CBC: “Presumably,

there will be, especially if something is to go forward, more formal

public hearings and processes.”

Let that sink in: “If something is to go forward.” Even the NDP’s

high-priced help doesn’t know if the minister will ever introduce

ride-sharing.

To the minister: you’ve missed 2017 for introducing ride-sharing.

Can you give my constituents a date, a timeline, anything, when we will

see ride-sharing in British Columbia?

Hon. C. Trevena: Well, we can understand why that side of the House, when they were

in government, realized that they couldn’t get it done by the end of the

year, as they said in their throne speech of June 2017. They did say, in

June 2017: “Your government” — of the time — “has heard the message that

legitimate implementation concerns remain. Any proposed legislation will

be referred to an all-party committee for extensive consultation with

the public and stakeholders — in particular, regarding boundaries and

insurance.”

That side of the House finally saw the light, realized it was a

complex problem and acknowledged it will take a little longer. We are

doing the prudent thing. We have hired a consultant who is looking at

the taxi industry. We are engaged with the ride-share companies. We will

make change.

Mr. Speaker: The member for North Vancouver–Seymour on a

supplemental.

J. Thornthwaite: The minister has completely bungled this file. She doesn’t have a

grasp on this file and will not give a straight answer to when, or even

if, ride-sharing will be introduced. She’s rehired the same guy who did

a taxi report last year, and he admits that the minister may never

introduce anything. It would be comical if it wasn’t so

pathetic.

All I’m asking for today is clarity. Could the Minister of

Transportation tell this House when ride-sharing will come to B.C.? Is

it going to be 2018, 2019, 2020 or — gosh forbid — never?

Hon. C. Trevena: What is comical is the level of passion from that side of the

House, who were in government since before 2012, when Uber first came to

B.C. and said: “We want to introduce ride-sharing.” What have we seen?

Nothing.

Our government is going to act. We are going to bring in

ride-share. We are engaged with the ride-hailing companies, we’re

engaged with the taxi industry, and we will make change.

Mr. Speaker: The member for North Vancouver–Seymour on a second

supplemental.

[11:20 a.m.]

J. Thornthwaite: What the minister forgets is that when British Columbians voted

this spring, they were promised, by all three parties, ride-sharing by

the end of this year. Instead, the minister has strung along my

constituents, including Zak from Deep Cove. Zak has written to me about

how deeply disappointed he is that “the NDP is going back on their

promise.” Zak says we don’t need any more studies. He just wants to know

when the minister is going to actually get on with it.

Will the minister tell Zak and the rest of my constituents and

this House when she will introduce ride-sharing like she promised, and

if not, why not?

Hon. C. Trevena: It’s my recollection that that member of the House— along with, I

think, all the members of that side of the House — voted in favour of a

throne speech in June which said there would be delays in bringing in

ride-sharing.

J. Johal: Clearly, there won’t be ride-sharing in B.C. this year — another

broken NDP promise. Instead, the government is getting a report on taxi

modernization from a high-paid Ottawa expert on taxis — not on

ride-sharing, not on innovation, but on taxis.

Given this government’s love of reports and consultations, there

will be another report after this one, and then another one, followed by

consultations. We’re in the midst of consultation paralysis, thanks to

the Minister of Transportation and her government. Just yesterday in

question period, the minister said she was going to see what comes from

the review.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, we shall hear the question.

J. Johal: Then she said they would be talking to ride-sharing

companies.

To the minister of taxis: when asked how much a taxi modernization

report cost, you told Jon McComb on CKNW that within this current

budget, there was $165,000 available. How many future budgets does she

imagine will be needed?

Hon. C. Trevena: I’m not quite sure how often I have to tell the opposition that we

are committed to bringing ride-share to this province.

The opposition is obviously very confused about this. I mean, one

of the people who wants to be the Leader of the Opposition, who’s going

to lead the opposition for many, many years to come when he takes over,

has said: “It is my belief our party rushed too quickly to welcome Uber

to British Columbia. We need to develop a road map to get this improved

service for consumers that maintains passenger safety, treats everyone

fairly and creates a level playing field for the

competition.”

That’s exactly what we will be doing as government.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Richmond-Queensborough on a

supplemental.

J. Johal: I remind the member that we’re talking about your election

promises, your government. You have to answer to the people of British

Columbia. I want to add the report…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please. We shall hear the question.

J. Johal: …on taxi modernization comes from an author who has donated to the

NDP. The report terms of reference could have been written by the taxi

lobby from Vancouver. Coincidentally, they donated a big chunk of change

to the provincial NDP.

In the three months leading up to the election, taxi companies and

associations donated over $50,000 to the NDP. The taxi lobby also

donated significantly to Vision Vancouver, who was kind enough, of

course, to provide the Premier with his chief of staff and other senior

staffers.

[11:25 a.m.]

Given all of the above, how can the citizens of British Columbia

trust the minister to bring in a truly fair set of rules for

ride-sharing — and how many consultations and how many more

delays?

Hon. C. Trevena: And how many more times do I have to tell the House and the

members opposite that we are bringing in ride-share, that we are doing

consultations and that we will be bringing in legislation for

ride-share?

A. Weaver: The righteous indignation emanating from members opposite on this

file is truly something to behold. Two years ago the member for

Kamloops–South Thompson, the then Minister of Transportation, said that

this former government was going to bring in ride-sharing, but he got

soundly smacked down by somebody, and we don’t have it.

Twice before, I brought in a bill.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head has the

floor.

A. Weaver: On Monday, the government provided British Columbians with a road

map for how introduction of ride-sharing will happen in our

province.

One could be forgiven for finding the announcement somewhat

underwhelming. Gone was the end-of-year timeline — or any firm timeline

at all, for that matter. Instead, we’re now going to embark on a review

of the taxi industry without engaging ride-share companies and without

considering the impact that they might have. In essence, we’ll waste

time and money to establish a new status quo.

To the Minister of Transportation, why are we making an effort to

update legislation for the taxi industry without even engaging

ride-sharing companies and considering the changes they may force on

this industry?

Hon. C. Trevena: We are engaging with the ride-share companies.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head on a supplemental.

A. Weaver: Well, I actually had not heard an answer to that question

previously, so I would disagree with the minister.

Obviously, the minister has said historically, and I agree, that

legislation needs to be updated on an ongoing basis. The minister has

told local media: “We’ve got six pieces of legislation that we have to

potentially modernize, one going back to 1924. Things were very

different in 1924 than they are in 2017.”

The act being referred to here is the Motor Vehicle Act, which was

first introduced in 1924. It’s a year known for the introduction of the

classic Chrysler model B-70, a lovely automobile of its day, and the

Oakland 6-54A, another amazing vehicle of its day.

Interjections.

A. Weaver: I’m going to go on eBay to see if I can buy one, and I’ll give it

as a gift to the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast.

The impression that was left by this comment is misleading. The

Motor Vehicle Act was actually substantively updated in 1996 by the NDP

government and has been amended numerous times since then. The same goes

for the Commercial Transport Act. First introduced in 1959, it also

referred to acts that need to be….

To the minister: why can we not work simultaneously to regulate

ride-sharing while updating legislation that pertains to the taxi

industry?

Hon. C. Trevena: The member is quite right. It is a complex issue, and this is why

we want to take some time to look at it. This is why we have engaged an

expert. This is why we are talking to ride-share companies. This is why

we’re looking at these six pieces of legislation the member cited, some

of which have been updated but some of which will need to be changed

substantially if we are introducing a whole new mode of ride-hailing to

the province, which we are intending to do.

[11:30 a.m.]

We are also dealing, obviously, with our public insurer, which

we’re very proud…. The opposition, clearly, has not got the same sense

of reverence and concern about the public insurance company, by the way

it’s been left. So we have that to deal with.

We also have the Passenger Transportation Board, which makes B.C.

a unique place for introducing ride-share to the norm. It is not a

simple approach. We are approaching this so that we have — as Dr. Hara

actually said, in an interview — a win-win-win situation; so that we can

have something that will ensure that those people who want to use

ride-hailing on an app, or however they are using ride-hailing, can do

that; so that the taxi industry, where there are people who have been

working for many years, can continue working; and that we have the

knowledge of passenger safety and driver safety all covered. That’s why

it’s complex, and that’s why we’re taking this approach.

ATTENDANCE OF AGRICULTURE

MINISTER AT AQUACULTURE

EVENT

P. Milobar: Yesterday the Minister of Agriculture said how important

consultation with industry, First Nations and the federal government

was, and she said that the intimidation letter was part of “our

communications back and forth.” So you can imagine my surprise when I

discovered the minister was scheduled to speak at Seafood West, here in

Victoria. She could talk to industry. She could talk to the federal

minister who attended. She could have talked to the Norwegian ambassador

who was here and, yes, she could have even talked to the First Nations

that were here.

But the minister, who wants constant communication, no-showed and

passed up on her speaking opportunity, even though she was part of the

program that was listed on line.

Can you tell us why you passed up this chance to talk to

stakeholders?

Hon. L. Popham: I’m happy to answer that question.

I was scheduled to speak, but I had to cancel my speaking

opportunity because I flew to Vancouver to engage with the Minister of

Fisheries and Oceans at the federal level. That conversation was

critically important to our engagement on this issue.

Mr. Speaker: The Member for Kamloops–North Thompson on a

supplemental.

P. Milobar: Just to make sure that we have this scheduling conflict correct,

as far as I can tell, the minister and the Premier visited the north

Island on October 10. October 11, when the minister was scheduled to

speak here in Victoria, you spurned the chance to actually communicate

with stakeholders.

Instead, you spoke at the orca conference. Yes, the federal

minister was there and speaking at that orca conference. However, I

would note the federal minister also came to Victoria and spoke at the

same conference that you decided not to speak at on the same

day.

Two days later a letter of unprecedented intimidation is sent out

by the minister. In fact, the Georgia Strait Alliance has even posted on

Twitter that the minister penned an eviction notice–like letter to fish

farms.

Minister, businesses doing lawful business want to know: are you

coming for them next?

Hon. L. Popham: If the member is concerned about my schedule, I’d be happy to give

him a copy of my

schedule that day.

You know what is not good for business? The fearmongering from

that side of the chamber.

As the member knows…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, we shall hear the response. Thank

you.

Hon. L. Popham: …these tenures aren’t being cancelled. They are coming up on a

review of a renewal process that’s part of normal business

practice.

[11:35 a.m.]

We have committed to making sure the health of our wild salmon is

at utmost importance. The Premier, myself and my colleagues travelled to

Alert Bay, where we were invited by First Nations to sit in the big

house. It was a really big honour and an important meeting. We took this

very seriously, to hear from First Nations.

We sat and listened, and we heard stories of the dwindling wild

stocks. We heard that their freezers are bare. That is very important to

this side of the House, and we will do everything that we can to protect

the health of wild salmon.

LETTER FROM AGRICULTURE MINISTER

TO FISH FARM

OPERATOR

M. Stilwell: Minister, let’s be clear. Let’s talk about this fearmongering. You

wrote the letter designed to intimidate the people who want to create

jobs. The minister penned a letter that the Georgia Strait Alliance

calls an eviction notice, and she did it after she declined an

opportunity to talk directly to the workers who were under threat —

directly to the First Nations — and declined an opportunity to meet with

the federal minister, who managed to work it into his

schedule to make

it there.

If you’re a guide outfitter, a miner, a rancher or any other

employer that relies on government keeping its word, you can only

imagine the fear that they are feeling today.

Can the minister confirm that her colleague, the Minister of

Transportation, is correct, and you plan to remove all fish

farms?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member for her question, but I’m wondering how the

amnesia struck the other side. Not three months ago they were the

government. Not three months ago they understood that tenures didn’t

last forever unless you’re picking up B.C. Rail for 999 years. That’s

the only time.

Tenures are up for review regularly, and I appreciate that

correspondence between a minister and a company seems to be egregious,

but here I have a press release sent out by the government of British

Columbia, 2015 edition. It says the following, and I hope the members

will listen carefully. They might have missed it at the time. “As

indicated in my Minister of Agriculture mandate letter, the government

will examine the rules and restrictions that guide the application and

allow the process to ensure that aquaculture operations are socially and

ecologically sustainable and can co-exist.”

Interjections.

Hon. J. Horgan: Please, no, it gets a whole lot better. We implemented the Cohen

condition. Unbelievable. Okay.

So we’re going to examine the protocol that we received from the

stewardship council to ensure that farms are appropriately sited. While

these actions are being undertaken, the province will not consider any

further other approvals.

The new salmon farm tenures. “The government remains committed to

science-based….” And so it goes.

What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander. After 16

years of not protecting wild salmon, we now have a government that

will.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Parksville-Qualicum, on a supplemental.

M. Stilwell: The Premier can get up and defend this minister all he wants, but

it doesn’t change the facts. This is about a letter that the minister

penned that was intimidating. She wrote the letter. She doesn’t seem

capable of defending the letter, and you’re coming to her rescue. To

give the minister credit, there’s no ambiguity.

[11:40 a.m.]

You are coming for employees and jobs that you just don’t like.

Site C, Kinder Morgan and the George Massey replacement, and now the

letter — shades of NDP Minister Dave Zirnhelt saying that “government

can do anything.”

Well, Minister, government can’t do everything. So here’s one more

chance: will the minister tell British Columbians that she was wrong and

she doesn’t actually plan to shut down employers simply because she

feels like it?

Hon. J. Horgan: I guess the members on the other side forgot. In that this press

release, it cites two separate reviews that were going to be undertaken

— afraid to make decisions on the other side. Instead, they pushed it

off to review.

There is some irony that we’re awaiting one of those reviews that

was into the very question we’re talking about here, which is the siting

of fish farms and the existence of tenures in that sector. Now, I find

it interesting….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, I’m concerned that visitors in the gallery

aren’t able to hear the response and, likewise, the question. So if we

may.

Premier.

Hon. J. Horgan: For no other reason, I agree. We would want to let those watching

hear what we have to say.

It’s interesting that the only member that doesn’t seem concerned

about aquaculture is the former minister — the very individual who put

in place the reviews to ensure that the siting of farms and the tenures

for fish farms were ecologically sustainable and had social

licence.

So my advice to those on the other side: get comfortable, enjoy

your time in opposition, but don’t fearmonger. No licences are being

revoked. No tenures are being lifted. Tenures are being reviewed, as

they should be, as the government of British Columbia protects the

interest of all British Columbians, not just those that give you

cheques.

TREE FRUIT REPLANT PROGRAM FUNDING

D. Ashton: Prior to the last election, the B.C. tree fruit growers received a

government commitment for an additional $5 million for the very

successful B.C. tree fruit replant program. This program helps B.C. tree

fruit growers replace existing low-value fruit trees with high-value,

high-quality varieties like the Aurora Golden Gala, which many sampled

this past week here, so that growers can take advantage of the local

and, especially, international market opportunities.

In estimates, the minister was asked if the additional $5 million

would be provided to the B.C. fruit industry. The minister wouldn’t

answer directly and instead would only would say we’re evaluating

things. Well, I need to emphasize to everyone is that this is a

critically important program to all fruit growers.

I would like to ask the minister again: will the government follow

through on their commitment for the $5 million replant

program?

Hon. L. Popham: I would like to start by thanking the member for the box of apples

that he delivered to our government. Thank you.

The member brings up a very important program by the government of

British Columbia, and that is supporting our fruit tree growers with the

replant program. We believe in that program. We are right now evaluating

the commitments that we need to make.

I can tell you one thing about the fruit tree growers. We have a

great relationship with them, and they are super excited about our

mandate, which is to grow B.C., feed B.C. and buy B.C. They’re looking

forward to the opportunities that that’s going to bring for them to add

value-added to their industry.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Penticton on a supplemental.

D. Ashton: While we’re re-evaluating, the fruit growers really need this

increased funding. It’s unfortunate for the fruit growers that this

seems to be a pattern at this point in time by the government — taking

money away from an existing program or a project and sending it to

review and refusing to answer directly. It might be hard for the

minister to admit, but it really does sound like another cancelled

program. But the fruit growers really deserve a straight

answer.

I would just ask the minister: again, is there an opportunity for

this full increase in funding? Just a simple yes or no, Minister, would

suffice.

Hon. L. Popham: I do appreciate the question, because there’s nothing I like

talking about more than our agriculture producers in British

Columbia.

[11:45 a.m.]

We are just entering into our budget process right now, and I will

be able to give the member a answer at a later date.

The fruit tree growers do know that we are committed to them. I am

committed to them as the Minister of Agriculture, and we have an open

line of communication. As soon as I have news, I will inform the

member.

FREEDOM-OF-INFORMATION REQUESTS

FOR WILDFIRE LOSS

CASES

C. Oakes: I’ve raised the case of the McNab family in the House on September

18 and again earlier this week. The McNabs’s mill and five other

buildings were lost on August 12 in the Plateau fire. They are seeking

documents that they require to rebuild their life.

Earlier this week the Minister of Citizens’ Services said that if

there is an investigation in these cases, they “are not able to release

that information” — quite a change from the earlier assurances that she

made in response to the constituents of Pressy Lake. I’m starting to

suspect why. You see, the McNabs have received a phone call, a call

informing them that there is officially no help or compensation from the

government and that their only avenue may be to take the government to

court.

My question to the Minister of Citizens’ Services, has she seen

the information that’s being withheld from the McNabs, and is a reason

why she’s not expediting anything for them because the information is

damaging to the government?

Hon. J. Sims: This wildfire season was unprecedented in British Columbia’s

history, and many people have lost property and are seeking answers. I

can feel the real concern that the member across the way has for her

constituents. Each and every one of us in this House, no matter where we

sit, cannot know, actually, what families are facing right around this

province.

We appreciate people wanting to know what happened in their

communities. We’re making every effort to be transparent regarding

wildfire services and are proud of the heroic work done, not only by

wildfire crews but the amazing togetherness and support that other

British Columbians have shown as well.

We have worked with opposition members, those affected by the

wildfires, and the Wildfire Service to proactively get as much

information out to the public as quickly as possible. The RCMP has

released some of the information requested, which we have already shared

proactively with the residents.

We expect that more will be available soon, and as soon as that

information becomes available, we proactively release, except for items

that pertain to personal information and protection of privacy. Our

staff is working diligently and professionally to make sure that people

get the information they need as expeditiously as possible. But we are

limited by the….

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

Hon. J. Sims: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: Noting the hour, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:49 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2017: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada