Fourth Session, 41st Parliament

(2019) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 221

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Response to cardiac arrest

S. Bond

Purple Day for epilepsy awareness

A. Kang

Cliff Annable

T. Redies

A Kinder Cup and employment of persons with disabilities

M. Dean

Thomas Kwok Hung Wong and Chinese-Canadian veterans

T. Wat

Open house at Al-Salaam mosque in Burnaby

J. Routledge

Personal Statements

Withdrawal of comments made in the House

J. Brar

Oral Questions

Ride-sharing services

A. Wilkinson

Hon. C. Trevena

Ride-sharing services and response to committee recommendations

J. Thornthwaite

Hon. C. Trevena

Panel report and monitoring of water use for natural gas fracking

S. Furstenau

Hon. M. Mungall

Home support and seniors care service changes and workers

N. Letnick

Hon. A. Dix

S. Bond

M. Stilwell

Tabling Documents

Labour Relations Board, annual report, 2018

Strategic plan, 2019-20–2021-22, revised

Reports from Committees

Crown Corporations Committee, Transportation Network

Services: Boundaries, Supply, Fares, and Driver’s Licences , March

B. Ma

S. Cadieux

A. Olsen

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 10 — Income Tax Amendment Act, 2019

Hon. C. James

M. Bernier

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Citizens’ Services

Hon. J. Sims

S. Thomson

B. Stewart

TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 2019

The House met at 10:06 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. A. Dix: Good morning, everyone. All of us joined together earlier this morning

at the Heart and Stroke breakfast and received lots of excellent information

about AEDs and their role in saving lives.

I wanted to introduce some guests that we have in the Legislature for

members on both sides of the House: Irene Chanin, who’s the CEO of the Heart

and Stroke Foundation; Mark Collison, who, unbelievably, is retiring in May

— and, as anyone who’s served in the non-profit sector knows, that means

that he moves from being a paid person to being a volunteer almost instantly

— and we congratulate Mark on all his success in his career; Paola Coronado

Hass, who is a senior development adviser; Mary Stambulic, who is a manager;

Michael Korenberg, who is involved in so many community activities and is on

the provincial advisory board; Dr. Jim Christenson, who I didn’t recognize

outside of his white coat, is the professor and UBC department head of

emergency medicine and an outstanding person; and Keith Switzer, who told

his own personal story about being saved — in part, because of the use of an

AED.

He also told us about routinely defeating the member for Kootenay East

in curling. In fact, that was the longest part of the story. I don’t know….

The member may want to correct the record on that. I think that he said the

record was 32 and 1. I don’t know what happened the one time. But you know,

we recently won an election, so what the heck.

It’s wonderful, I know, and I know that all members of the House will

know the important work of the Heart and Stroke Foundation. I know all of us

would want to bid all of our guests welcome.

N. Letnick: I’d just like to reiterate what the Minister of Health said, other

than the part about them winning the election.

[10:10 a.m.]

We’ll leave this non-partisan introduction to thank all of the people

from the Heart and Stroke Foundation, the delegation that’s here today, the

Heart and Stroke staff: Irene Chanin, CEO Heart and Stroke, B.C. and Yukon;

Mark Collison, director, government relations and health promotion, B.C. and

Yukon; Paola Coronado Hass, senior director, development adviser, B.C. and

Yukon; Mary Stambulic, manager, advocacy and stakeholder relations; Michael

Korenberg, provincial advisory board member; Dr. Jim Christenson, professor

and UBC department head of emergency medicine; and friends Keith Switzer and

Dale Collins.

Many of us in this House have had heart and stroke issues. Some of us

continue to have them and are managing them. Many people who’ve come before

us all over British Columbia continue to struggle with heart and stroke

conditions.

It’s thanks to these good people and people in our community that we

are able to tackle these diseases and make sure that people have an avenue,

information and service so that they can get help for their heart and stroke

conditions. They are here to talk to both sides of the Legislature — also,

the breakfast this morning, and I believe there’s a lunch, as well, for

some.

I would like to ask all members of this House to give a warm welcome

to all the people that we’ve just listed here today.

Hon. L. Beare: Well, it’s a really exciting day here at the Legislature as we welcome

the Webb Ellis Cup to Victoria. It’s on its first stop here in British

Columbia, and we have a great rugby fan base here in British Columbia. Our

Canadian national men’s team, which is Langford-based, will be heading to

Japan for the 2019 Rugby World Cup this fall.

We know how much spirit people have for the sport, as we saw at the

rugby sevens earlier last month at B.C. Place, where 208 athletes

participated. There was even a marriage proposal in the stadium. Now we’re

looking forward to the Women’s Rugby Sevens Series coming to Langford in

May.

Today I would like to celebrate that we’ve been chosen once again to

host the HSBC Canada Sevens at B.C. Place for the next four years. This is

good news.

I want to acknowledge some fantastic people here in the gallery today.

We have Patricia Jelinski, who’s the general manager of B.C. Place Pavilion

Corp. We have Mandy Marchak, who’s one of the all-time greats. In 11 years

for Canada, she played three 15s Rugby World Cups and two for sevens, and

she continues to inspire young players by giving back as a coach right here

in Victoria at the Castaway Wanderers.

Raymond Barkwill is a senior member and inspirational leader of the

Canada national team that beat Kenya, Germany, Hong Kong in November to

secure the Rugby World Cup in Japan. He’s had 57 test matches for Canada.

And Gareth Rees is a World Rugby Hall of Fame inductee, an all-star rugby

icon with a 491 points record, the second most in Canadian

history.

Please join me in welcoming them to the gallery today.

Hon. J. Horgan: I don’t think anyone in this place has said Langford that much other

than me in a long, long time. I, too, want to join the Minister for Sport in

acknowledging the rugby event that’s going to take place on the lawn later

this afternoon.

I want to acknowledge the member for Kelowna-Mission, perhaps the

greatest rugby player ever to take a seat in this place. I’m thinking that

if Gareth is in a charitable mood, he might even let you to catch up to him,

Member.

Gareth also can swing a cricket bat. That’s not something well known,

but he’s not bad at that as well — an all-rounder as they would have said

back in the day.

Also a fan of rugby is a member of the press gallery whose sister was

a member of the national team. Joining him in the gallery today is the

spectacular Bailey, who is going to be sitting watching the proceedings. We

have a juvenile in the press gallery — not the regular juveniles but a real

juvenile.

I want all members to be on their best behaviour over the next 45

minutes.

D. Barnett: Today in the House I have two guests from Williams Lake: Muriel

Garland — she and her husband have five Chev dealerships throughout the

province of British Columbia in rural communities; and Cec Jaeger, who is

here to ensure that Muriel behaves herself while she’s away from her

husband. Would you please welcome Muriel and Cec here today.

[10:15 a.m.]

Hon. C. James: I have the pleasure to introduce a group today visiting from the

Victoria Epilepsy and Parkinson’s Centre. I know we’ll hear a little more

about Purple Day, epilepsy awareness day, today. A group of 16

representatives are in the House this morning, and I know the extraordinary

work they do. I have a family member who lives with epilepsy.

I want to welcome, on all of our behalf, board vice-president Tessa

Hawkins and other attendees Deirdre Syms, Jocelyn Lahaye, Arman Tesoro,

Sophia Tesoro, Steve Hawkins, Lesley Lahaye, Leigh Syms, Shirley Syms,

Jonina Syms, Kelly Grannon, Heidi Hackman, Eliza Woods, Guillaume Dufresne

and the amazing Amanda Arnet. Would the House make them very welcome and

thank them for their extraordinary work.

Hon. H. Bains: I notice in the gallery a good friend of mine and a strong voice for

working people in the province of British Columbia, the president of CUPE

B.C., along with Justin Schmid. Please help me give them a very warm

welcome.

Hon. K. Chen: I’m happy to have the opportunity to also introduce a dear friend of

mine, Laarni de los Reyes, who is joining question period today.

I believe members in this House would agree how important it is,

especially for the work we do here, to have friends who know how to give you

encouragement when we’re facing challenges but also to support us with

constructive advice to make sure we continue to learn, to improve and to

fight for the good cause we believe in. Laarni is a friend like that who has

given me so much support, courage and trust to make me believe that I can

make a real difference for the community we all love.

She’s also quite a community activist and volunteer herself who is

passionate about social justice issues and is someone I’ve learned a lot

from. Without friends like Laarni, I know I could not have made it here

today.

So thank you, Laarni.

I would like to ask the House to please make her feel very

welcome.

Hon. M. Mark: It is my pleasure to introduce my husband, Cassidy Kannemeyer, who is

here today. He’s the men’s basketball coach at Capilano University. He’s a

teacher’s assistant at Britannia Secondary. He’s the love of my life. We got

married last year. Will the House please join me in welcoming

Cassidy.

Hon. H. Bains: I think it will help if I give the name of the person that I

introduced earlier, my good friend and the CUPE B.C. president, Paul Faoro.

Please help me with a warm welcome.

Hon. J. Sims: I have here visiting us today Priya and Ishika Bansal, two young women

who are talented, passionate, focused on giving back to their community,

creative, artistic — really are balanced about doing social justice work and

giving back to the community.

They’re spending their spring break here in Victoria learning about

how this place works. They were actually amazed that this wasn’t just a

visiting place — that work happens in here, and we have offices, and we do

real work. They have been here on many tours before, but when they came on

tours previously, the House was empty. So they thought: “Well, where do you

work? Where’s your office?”

They’re coming to my office. They’ve been volunteers. We often hear

about young people, but when I meet young women like this, I think our

future is in good hands. Please help me welcome them.

D. Routley: My hometown being Duncan, B.C., I have to welcome Gareth Rees, who was

also born in Duncan, and my brother-in-law Jason “Finny” Finlayson, an avid

rugby player. I would be remiss in not mentioning him, although he’s a

Cowichan Piggie and Gareth was an Oak Bay rugby football club

member.

My nephew “Mini Finny,” Dale Finlayson, frequents the rugby club, and

he picks up language really quickly, so that can lead to embarrassing

consequences. He’s learned the Piggie song. But he also has worked out a

compromise with his mom that he asks first if he can use the word from the

rugby club.

Welcome, Gareth, on behalf of Finny and Mini Finny.

Hon. M. Mungall: We have two guests joining us from one of the most beautiful places in

the world, the north end of my riding near Kaslo. Area D director for the

regional district of Central Kootenay, Aimee Watson, is here, and she’s

joined by her son, Finn. May the House please join me in making them very

welcome.

[10:20 a.m.]

Mr. Speaker: Famous rugby player, Kelowna-Mission.

S. Thomson: I just wanted to add my comments as well — lots of talk about the

rugby this morning.

On behalf of our side of the House, I just wanted to pass on my

congratulations, as well, to Rugby Canada for the successful renegotiation

of another four years of hosting the sevens at B.C. Place. Just a great,

great event. I’m very proud of the role we played on this side of the House

in securing the initial bid four years ago and to see the success it has

built.

What wasn’t mentioned was the fact that Canada — and B.C. Place,

Vancouver, as the hosting venue — was voted by the players and the

management of all the teams, the 16 teams from around the world that come

here for that event, as the number one stop on the tour.

Great kudos to all of the organization and everybody involved in it.

It is just really showcasing this wonderful sport that we all played. A big

shout-out to my pals and my friend from CW.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

RESPONSE TO CARDIAC ARREST

S. Bond: Today at the annual Heart and Stroke Foundation MLA breakfast, we

were reminded that cardiac arrest can happen to anyone, anywhere,

anytime. Tens of thousands of cardiac arrests happen each year in

Canada, and survival drops significantly with every minute without CPR

or an AED.

Immediate response by performing hands-only CPR and using an

automated external defibrillator, or an AED, can more than double the

chance of survival. In B.C. over six years, and with funding totalling

$3 million, 830 AEDs were placed through the public access to

defibrillation program.

I know firsthand what it’s like to have a loved one impacted by

cardiac issues. My husband, Bill, had open-heart surgery more than six

years ago. We will be forever grateful for the phenomenal medical team

at St. Paul’s and to Heart and Stroke for their ongoing

efforts.

Today has been proclaimed AED Awareness Day, so that is why I rise

today to remind us about the importance of CPR and using an AED to save

a life. AEDs are simple to use and foolproof. Once you power on the

device, you can follow the step-by-step voice directions. You can’t

accidentally shock a person who does not need it.

These are life-saving devices that have saved the lives of British

Columbians. I encourage everyone in this House and every single British

Columbian to be ready, willing and able to respond to a cardiac

emergency. You don’t have to be an expert; you just have to act. That

can be the difference between life and death.

If you see someone suddenly collapse, there are three critical and

key steps. Phone 911 and shout for an AED. Push hard and fast in the

centre of the chest, and use an AED as soon as it arrives.

Please don’t wait for someone else to step in. Choose to act, and

you are giving that person their best chance of survival.

PURPLE DAY FOR EPILEPSY AWARENESS

A. Kang: Today at the B.C. Legislature we celebrate Purple Day for epilepsy

awareness. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder and affects people

of all ages. Epilepsy causes repeated seizures that happen without

warning and may cause problems with muscle control, movement, speech,

vision or awareness. They may not last very long, but they are life

changing for the individual and family and friends.

Epilepsy affects each person differently. Epilepsy is an invisible

disability. It’s difficult to understand the daily struggle of being in

pain on the inside without any external visible markers of disability.

Purple Day is an important time to help people learn about the condition

and reduce the stigma around epilepsy.

Today I have the honour of reading out B.C.’s proclamation for

Purple Day for epilepsy awareness.

[10:25 a.m.]

“Whereas Purple Day is a global effort dedicated to promoting

epilepsy awareness in countries around the world; and

whereas Purple Day

was founded in 2008 by Cassidy Megan, a nine-year-old girl from Nova

Scotia who wanted people with epilepsy to know they are not alone; and

whereas epilepsy is the most common serious neurological condition; and

whereas epilepsy is estimated to affect more than 50 million people

worldwide, about 300,000 people in Canada and approximately 45,000

people in British Columbia; and

whereas the public is often unable to

recognize common seizure types and to respond with appropriate first

aid, and

whereas Purple Day is celebrated on March 26 annually, during

Epilepsy Awareness Month, to increase knowledge and understanding and to

improve the quality of life for our communities in British Columbia; now

know ye that we do by these presents proclaim and declare that March 26,

2019, shall be known as Purple Day for epilepsy awareness in the

province of British Columbia.”

CLIFF ANNABLE

T. Redies: On Tuesday, March 5, White Rock and South Surrey lost an

incredible man. Cliff Annable, the former executive director of the

White Rock–South Surrey Chamber of Commerce, former White Rock city

councillor and former owner of the Surrey Eagles, was a man synonymous

with the White Rock–South Surrey community.

A big man with a big smile and a big laugh, Cliff was fond of

storytelling. Whether it was the history of our community; his life in

Saskatchewan, where he was born in 1947; or his time with the Royal

Canadian Air Force as an air crew officer, Cliff had many stories to

tell, and then some. In fact, if you bumped into Cliff, chances were

that you were going to be talking with him awhile. Whether you were

inside a store or out in a parking lot, Cliff always had a lot to say.

Cliff had nicknames for many people, and most people called him Cliffy.

I was Kid.

Cliff loved to talk politics and always had useful insight.

Through the course of my campaign and after I was elected, Cliff was

always there to talk to and give me advice. While there was the

occasional “Kid, what were you thinking,” for the most part he gave me

very sound counsel and a lot of support.

There’s no question that Cliff loved his community of White

Rock–South Surrey, and the community loved him. Last summer Cliff was

honoured by the city of White Rock as one of two outstanding Canadians

on the peninsula, an honour well deserved.

The only thing Cliff loved more than his community was his wife,

Maureen, and their two children, Shawn and Janet. Cliff and Maureen were

proud grandparents of two grandchildren, with their beautiful

granddaughter, Lauren, born just a few weeks ago to their daughter,

Janet. It would have been hard to find a prouder granddad. Within hours

of her birth, Cliff had changed his profile picture on Facebook to his

new granddaughter.

Cliff’s celebration of life was held on March 11 and was attended

by hundreds of people whose lives had all been made better for knowing

Cliff. It was full of poignancy and laughter, including the story of

Cliff’s first business venture selling four-leaf clovers with Joni

Mitchell when they were both ten. When pushed, he fessed up that some of

those clovers were manufactured.

Cliff, you’ve left a big hole in our hearts and our community. I

will miss you, Cliffy. Rest in peace, my friend.

A KINDER CUP AND EMPLOYMENT

OF PERSONS WITH

DISABILITIES

M. Dean: Providing opportunity for compassion, contribution and connection

with every morsel we serve. — that is the mission of A Kinder Cup, a new

and unique coffee shop across from my constituency office in View Royal.

A Kinder Cup employs kindness mentors to help guide kindness ambassadors

who are living with disabilities.

About one in five Canadians aged 15 and over are living with a

disability, and they often face higher unemployment and poverty rates.

In B.C., the rate of unemployment for adults with developmental

disability is approximately 75 percent, which means that many of these

individuals live at or below the poverty level.

Kim Dufort, the owner, worked with adults living with disabilities

and discovered how many of the adults she worked with were keen and able

to be employed but couldn’t find any opportunities, so she opened A

Kinder Cup. Husband and co-owner Mark supports her vision of wanting to

make something that is valuable for the community and builds on her

experience.

Greg Hind often visits my constituency office. He has recently

started working at A Kinder Cup, and he loves it. He left his previous

job, which he didn’t enjoy and where he didn’t feel appreciated. In

comparison, he is dedicated to his new position, excited about his

shifts and proud to be part of the amazing team. Indeed, every time I

visit A Kinder Cup, all of the mentors and ambassadors are enjoying

themselves, and their service is excellent.

Thank you to Kim and everyone involved for creating such a

thriving community hub in our neighbourhood. Come down for your own dose

of kindness any day.

[10:30 a.m.]

THOMAS KWOK HUNG WONG

AND CHINESE-CANADIAN

VETERANS

T. Wat: I rise in the House today to celebrate the life of

Chinese-Canadian veteran Thomas Wong, also known as Tommy Wong, who

passed away recently at the age of 101. Tommy is the first ethnic

Chinese to be accepted into the Royal Canadian Air Force.

My colleague yesterday praised Tommy in no small measure, which

speaks to Tommy’s significance in putting Canada ahead of his own life

during World War II, to which we owe our gratitude, lest we

forget.

I have had the honour of attending a number of events with Tommy,

who was one of my constituents, and got to know him. Every time Tommy

was at such events, he was honoured by many who attended, an honour

Tommy Wong well deserved.

What happened, more amazingly, is that Tommy and other Chinese

veterans, with many that sacrificed themselves, fought as Canadian

soldiers in World War II to uphold and enable the Canada we enjoy today,

yet they were denied citizenship and the right to vote, despite their

long existence here.

Chinese have been in Canada since 1788, and some Chinese veterans

were even born then. Why, we ask, did Tommy and others like him seek to

fight and die for Canada while being discriminated against and denied

even the most basic human rights? It was because of brave and selfless

Chinese like Tommy Wong, who sought to prove that given a level playing

ground, could prove themselves just as outstanding and worthy as others

in Canada.

I take my hat off to Tommy Wong and to all Chinese veterans who

fought for their community, fought for Canada’s honour, freedom and a

just world. May Tommy Wong and men and women like him rest in peace, and

their spirit, their valour, their belief in equality and justice and

social justice for all live on and always be with us.

OPEN HOUSE AT

AL-SALAAM MOSQUE IN

BURNABY

J. Routledge: Last month mosques across British Columbia participated in Open

Mosque Day. In the words of one of its organizers, the purpose was to

show the unity Muslims have when it comes to reaching out to the wider

community and bridging that gap and overcoming that stigma associated

with Islam and Muslims.

I attended the open house at the Al-Salaam mosque in Burnaby, as

did other Burnaby MLAs, and it was packed. I was heartened to see so

many familiar faces from my community. Some came because they were

curious. Others came to express solidarity. Others, like me, came to do

both. You could tell the minute you walked through the front door that a

lot of thought and preparation had gone into creating a welcoming and

memorable experience for visitors.

Each of us was greeted and invited into the hall, which was lined

with booths, each one explaining a different aspect of Islam. At one

booth, a volunteer walked me through an introduction to the prophets.

There was another booth where you could try on a hijab. There was lots

of food, and we were, of course, urged to try it all. We were also

invited to witness Islamic prayer.

To tell you the truth, I found it hard to get close enough to

really appreciate most of the displays. The crowds were that thick. I

think it’s a good thing that so many people in my community took the

time out of their busy Saturday of doing errands, of taking their kids

to volleyball practice, to accept the invitation when the local Muslim

community opened their doors, their minds, and their hearts to the rest

of us.

I thank the Al-Salaam mosque for their generosity. But I’m also

reminded that the first time I was there was to mourn with them after a

deadly attack on the mosque in Quebec City, so I also honour them for

their bravery.

Mr. Speaker: Members, before we begin question period, and in response to a

point of order raised by the member for Richmond-Steveston, I would like

to call upon the member for Surrey-Fleetwood and invite his response to

that point.

Personal Statements

WITHDRAWAL OF COMMENTS

MADE IN THE

HOUSE

J. Brar: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I said something which I shouldn’t have

said in this House, so therefore, I withdraw. Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

[10:35 a.m.]

Oral Questions

RIDE-SHARING SERVICES

A. Wilkinson: I think it’s now old news that Vancouver remains the largest urban

centre in North America without proper ride-hailing services.

Consumer-based ride-sharing is available in every other city in North

America, but this government has created a regulatory rat’s nest that

makes it basically impossible for a market-driven, consumer-based

ride-hailing service.

Why is this minister continuing to block consumer-driven,

market-based ride-hailing?

Hon. C. Trevena: I do appreciate the question from the Leader of the Opposition,

who was part of a government that sat on the file for five years and did

absolutely nothing. I think the member is aware that we brought in

legislation last year that was passed by this House. His government was

unable to do that. We brought in legislation. We got it passed. We are

on track. We are expecting the report from the standing committee out

later today.

We’re going to be moving ahead as planned. Applications will be

able to come in later this summer, and ride-hailing will be here in B.C.

by the end of the year. We are very pleased that we’re dealing with what

people need, unlike the opposition that ignored it for five

years.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: We’ve seen the idea of ride-hailing from the NDP with boundary

restrictions, quotas, fixed fares — all designed to obstruct the

development of any kind of market-based or consumer-driven…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Wilkinson: …ride-hailing. No other jurisdiction in the world has imposed

these kinds of rules. This is some kind of NDP construct of how to make

the world a better place by forcing things onto the market that simply

don’t work.

The other day, on my way out to Vancouver Airport, I talked to the

cab driver, and he said that the new NDP proposition is a total failure

in the marketplace. No one is signing up for it…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Wilkinson: …and the costs are simply too high. So instead we see, regularly,

lineups of hundreds of people at Vancouver Airport waiting for taxis,

because the NDP want to continue to rig the market.

Why is this minister continuing to block consumer-driven,

market-based ride hailing?

Hon. C. Trevena: I think that the…. To give the Leader of the Opposition credit, he

may not have really been concentrating on my answer the previous time or

all the answers I’ve given in the past, because we brought in

legislation which sets a time frame for bringing in app-based

ride-hailing.

The Leader of the Opposition may try and capitalize on the fact

that people are frustrated. I know people are frustrated. I hear from

them too. But he had five years to do something about it, and they did

absolutely nothing.

When they tried to hold onto power back in July of 2017 and they

had the clone speech, the opposition at that time said that all parties

in the Legislature publicly stated their support for ride-sharing in the

recent election. “Your government” — still their government — “has heard

the message that legitimate implementation concerns remain.”

We are addressing concerns. We have enabling legislation. We are

working on the regulations. We will be bringing in ride-hail, as

promised, this year.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a second

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: Of course, now we’re seeing the rollout of the NDP dream come true

— centralized control, boundary limitations, restrictions on number of

vehicles, fee caps. None of this has anything to do with the modern

economy’s approach to ride-hailing. It’s all a centralized, rigged

process strictly designed to pave the road for the NDP’s friends. So

what we’ve got is an emerging monopoly of NDP insiders under the rigged

game set up by the Transportation Minister. The question is still out

there. The report comes out this afternoon.

[10:40 a.m.]

Will this NDP government ever accept that there’s a market force

behind ride-hailing, or do they insist on controlling the whole thing

right down to the number of vehicles and where they’re allowed to

go?

Hon. C. Trevena: I will say once again that we have acted in a way that the

opposition, when they were government, did not act. We are absolutely

committed to bringing in ride-hailing. I mean, the opposition…. We have

a number of former Ministers of Transportation in the opposition

benches. They did not bring in ride-hailing, although they had the

opportunity to do it in 2012.

We also await the report from the Standing Committee on Crown

Corporations, which has been looking at app-based ride-hailing. We know

they have recommendations that I eagerly anticipate. We will work with

those recommendations. I’m not going to prejudge what the report says,

but we do not put people to work for no purpose. We’ll look at those

recommendations. We’ll work with those recommendations. And we will stay

with our timetable.

App-based ride-hailing will be in this year — unlike the previous

government, who ignored the demands of people for five years.

RIDE-SHARING SERVICES AND RESPONSE

TO COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATIONS

J. Thornthwaite: The fact is that this whole mess could have been avoided if the

NDP hadn’t voted down our bill last year. Instead, it’s been one NDP

obstruction and delay over and over and over again. Last

November….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, you may wish to lengthen your question or start over

again. I know it’s difficult for you to speak over the noise.

J. Thornthwaite: Do you want to hear the question again?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: You’re certainly welcome to do that.

J. Thornthwaite: Instead, there’s been one NDP obstruction and delay over and over

again. Last November the minister tasked a legislative committee with

regulations.

Will the minister accept the recommendations of this all-party

committee?

Hon. C. Trevena: I look forward to receiving the report from the committee. When I

have read the recommendations, I’ll be able to give the member an

answer.

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

supplemental.

J. Thornthwaite: I don’t know. That sounds kind of like government knows best. But

you don’t. The young woman that is stranded on Granville Street at one

or two o’clock in the morning wants real ride-sharing. Real

market-driven ride-sharing. The minister’s obstruction and excuses just

aren’t good enough.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Thornthwaite: She was the one who asked the committee to make recommendations,

and she should commit to accepting them.

My question is, again, simple. Will the minister accept the

committee’s recommendations?

Hon. C. Trevena: The opposition do seem to forget that they were once government,

that they did have five years to deal with huge public demand for

app-based ride hailing. There is a huge demand. We all acknowledge this.

People want modern options. People want to be able to use their

smartphones to be able to call a vehicle. We know that. We get that.

We’re working on it.

The opposition, for five years, practically twiddled their thumbs

and said: “Oh well, we’re not sure whether we can do this. We’ve got to

make sure that we are….” I’m not sure what their holdup was. I wasn’t

part of their government, thank goodness.

We, as government, got down to this immediately, have brought in

legislation and have tasked the special committee twice to have

recommendations on ride-hailing. But it would be absolutely foolish of

me to say, of course….

I have not seen them. I want to see the recommendations. I look

forward to it. People have worked very hard on this report. People have

committed time to it. I will read the recommendations, and then I will

answer the member’s question.

[10:45 a.m.]

PANEL REPORT AND MONITORING OF

WATER USE FOR NATURAL

GAS FRACKING

S. Furstenau: According to the scientific review of hydraulic fracturing in

British Columbia released last week, there are significant problems with

the monitoring of water related to hydraulic fracturing operations. The

report noted: “From a public perception perspective, the various

activities associated with hydraulic fracturing appear to be

unregulated, and this leads to fear and mistrust of the regulators.” The

panel said current regulations might look robust, but there’s not enough

information to assess compliance and enforcement.

Experts from multiple government ministries, Treaty 8 First

Nations representatives and environmental consultants all raised

concerns about the lack of baseline water quality data. They raised

concerns about stream flow, lake levels, groundwater, surface water and

more.

My question is to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum

Resources. What specific actions is the government going to take to

track the amount of water being used in hydraulic fracturing operations

in British Columbia?

Hon. M. Mungall: I appreciate the member’s question. Of course, British Columbians

all across the province are concerned about how we manage the land base.

Particularly those who rely on natural gas to heat their homes want to

make sure that the way in which we are extracting natural gas from the

ground is done in a responsible way.

That’s exactly why we asked our scientific panel to take a look at

hydraulic fracturing. We know that the majority of our natural gas is

extracted using hydraulic fracturing, and of course, we want to make

sure that our water is protected, the quality as well as the

quantity.

What came back was a very detailed, very technical report with 97

recommendations. We’ve already started to actually take action. I spoke

with the scientific panel shortly before we released the report

publicly. One of the things that they said was that now is an

opportunity to move forward and take action on those recommendations,

and that’s exactly what we’re going to be doing.

We’ve acknowledged that we will be putting forward an action plan.

Short-term actions will be taking place in May, with longer term after

consultation in December.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader, Third Party, on a supplemental.

S. Furstenau: Okay. So no specific action on tracking water yet. Something is

coming, I guess.

During its review, water use was one of the most significant

concerns raised with the scientific panel. The report stated that there

was a lack of climate, hydrometric and groundwater data in northeastern

B.C. and that any data we do have is often outdated. It also noted that

“the capacity for wastewater storage is inadequate to meet the

anticipated increase in production over the coming years,” and also that

“there is no solid understanding of the volume needed and disposal

requirements for growth scenarios.”

We need to recognize that we don’t have the luxury to waste water

in our province. Our climate is changing, and droughts are getting

longer and dryer. Government needs to understand and plan for the

impacts of climate change. We need to know the impacts of fracking on

our environment and on our water resources. We also need to know how or

if it can be cleaned up.

My question is, again, for the Minister of Energy, Mines and

Petroleum Resources. How is the government deciding on the allocation of

water used for fracking when we don’t know how much water is being used,

we don’t know what the impacts are, we don’t know how much industry will

need in the future and we don’t know if or how it can be cleaned

up?

Hon. M. Mungall: Some of the points the member raised in terms of making sure that

we have a good regulatory system and that we have good information are

precisely why we asked the scientific panel to do this work on behalf of

British Columbians. We knew that that information needed to be

addressed.

They’ve identified the gaps that are, obviously, a result of the

previous government. We already knew, actually, about some of those gaps

when we came into government in 2017. We took action very, very shortly

after that. We’ve brought in new legislation to address the orphan well

situation. We started to address the compliance for dams and making sure

that those dams that do exist have the right permits.

[10:50 a.m.]

We’ve been taking action, and we’re going to be taking more action

to address this. After all, all British Columbians want to make sure

that the way in which we’re managing our land and the way in which we’re

managing our water are done properly.

HOME SUPPORT AND SENIORS CARE

SERVICE CHANGES AND

WORKERS

N. Letnick: Just a few weeks ago the Minister of Health stood at an event with

many of us present and congratulated B.C. care providers and their

workers on doing an excellent job in providing for seniors throughout

this province. You can imagine that the B.C. care providers felt they

got stabbed in the back when, just a few days after that, the Minister

of Health stood to announce some changes that would see over 4,000 care

providers being transferred from B.C. care providers in the private

sector over to government control.

They believe he has put their jobs and seniors at risk. Home care

workers have also contacted us, stressed out and anxious over their own

jobs as well as the impact this is having on vulnerable

seniors.

My question to the Minister of Health is: does he believe that he

should take a pause at this point — consult with seniors, consult with

the B.C. care providers — before implementing this decision?

Hon. A. Dix: You know, home support is extremely important to all people in

British Columbia — for people who have returned home from surgery, for

seniors who want to live at home as long as possible. I think we have an

obligation to improve the home support system. Members of the House will

know that in 2012, the Ombudsperson said just that in a report on

seniors at that time.

Unfortunately, in spite of further reports by the seniors advocate

in the interim, very little action was taken. We are changing that. In

cooperation with the federal government, we are improving home support

services in British Columbia. I would say that this process is, I think,

going to make a huge difference in the success of team-based care in

British Columbia.

With respect to home support contracts, the member will know that

100 percent of that work in Northern Health is done in-house right now,

78 percent of that work in IHA is done in-house right now, 47 percent of

that work is done in Island Health right now, 37 percent in Fraser

Health and 26 percent in Vancouver Coastal Health. We believe that by

fully integrating home support into team-based care, we can improve the

situation.

In addition to that, we face significant and serious issues that

have been raised in audits about the expenditure and the contracts

between 2014 and 2017. As a result, we have taken action. For contracts

that were going to expire a year from now, we gave notice in order to

ensure that we can improve home support services in the future. That’s

what we did, and that’s what we’re going to continue to do.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Kelowna–Lake Country on a supplemental.

N. Letnick: Well, we all believe in team-based care. Actually, the whole move

to team-based care started when we were in government just a few years

ago. I’m glad to see that this minister — and this government — is

continuing those efforts. But this is about vulnerable seniors, seniors

who…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

N. Letnick: …believe that they were not consulted in this process.

My father, who passed away about ten years ago — God bless his

soul — was in a seniors home. My mother, who passed away a few months

ago, as the members here know, was also in a seniors home before she

passed away. The discussions I had with my mom were key, about those

people that took care of her. Those are some of the biggest discussions

that she ever had.

I know that members in this House also had moms and dads, or do

have moms and dads, that are in seniors care homes and have the same

discussions. So I understand there’s empathy amongst all members

here.

It’s not about team-based care, and it’s not about anything else

other than what I’m asking the Minister of Health to do: to take a

pause, have an opportunity to talk to these seniors so that they’re not

feeling frustrated and not feeling left out and that they can be part of

this discussion, and to be sure that the policies and the actions this

government is taking are in the best interest of them — the seniors of

British Columbia.

[10:55 a.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: Well, the member and I have spoken about this. I understand the

seriousness with which he takes the issue. He spoke about long-term

care. Ninety-one percent of care beds in this province, publicly funded,

did not meet staffing standards when I became Minister of Health — 91

percent.

You know who was the worst off? It was public beds funded in

non-profit and for-profit beds. Those public beds were dramatically

underfunded in comparison to ones that were funded by the health

authorities — in other words, the very members represented by the B.C.

Care Providers.

We provided, in our first year to raise those standards up, $48

million, and $46 million of that has gone to for-profit and non-profit

providers. In other words, the very people represented by the B.C. Care

Providers have benefited the most from this government’s

action.

We are going to act in favour of seniors regardless of the

circumstances. We are in home support, and we are in long-term

care.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

S. Bond: Well, to be clear, to the minister, there are over 4,000 private

and non-profit community health jobs that are being expropriated and

converted to government jobs. This is the largest ever — and the

minister can add that to his record — expansion of the public service,

and it is being done with zero consultation.

This isn’t a government, we all know, that is shy about

consulting. In fact, at our last count, they were up to 92

consultations. In fact, as we just heard, that’s apparently all they do

about ride-sharing, but I digress. There was zero consultation on a

matter that impacts seniors and that every member of this House cares

about.

Can the minister stand up and explain…? The question, Minister, is

about consultation. This minister sandbagged 4,000 workers.

Why?

and retweeting about possible job losses. Well, I just want to read you

that Bob Boulter with Beacon Community Services — who, of course, we’ve

been consulting with for months — confirmed that there will be no job

losses — a member of the B.C. Care Providers. “Our home support workers

and managers, as well as any other staff whose positions are affected by

this change, will transition to Island Health, regardless of whether

they’re union or non-union employees.”

You know why? Because we’re increasing home support. We found the

levels of home support inadequate over the last number of years. We’re

taking action to improve services.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Prince George–Valemount on a

supplemental.

S. Bond: Well, the minister may then want to respond to the workers,

hundreds of them, who are concerned about their futures and their jobs.

Let’s be clear. We have been hearing from those workers.

The winners from this massive increase in government employees

appear to be NDP friends, who we know have long opposed the involvement

of non-government agencies. This government will consult endlessly on

issues, and the minister here apparently sees no need for consultation

when acting on behalf of their friends. A straightforward question: why

did the minister ambush non-government care providers with what is

basically a hostile takeover?

Hon. A. Dix: It’s, I guess, the opposition circle: fearmonger, then complain

that people are upset about fearmongering.

[11:00 a.m.]

Every time contracts come up — in this case, a contract coming up

after ten years, in several cases — we gave significant notice, as per

the contract. The alternative, by the way, is what happened ten years

ago, when some existing contractors lost their contracts, and there were

issues. That is the contracting process if we had gone to tender in that

case.

We decided, because we’re committed to team-based care…. We’re

committed to improving home support. We don’t think that in Fraser

Health, 37 percent in the public system and 63 percent provided by four

contractors is the right model. Surely no one over there thinks that’s

the case. No one in the member’s constituency, not a single person,

would argue for contracting out the home support services….

Interjections.

Hon. A. Dix: We are taking action to improve home support services. We’re

taking action in response to audits that took place of problems that

occurred between 2014 and ’17. Yes, when you have contractual

arrangements, you deal with the contractors and not the industry

association. Surely everybody in this House understands that.

M. Stilwell: For 19 years, Trudy has been a home care provider. But the

caregiver relationships that she has with her clients, relationships

that have taken years to develop, don’t seem to matter to this minister.

The minister doesn’t seem to care about the interests of seniors, only

the interests of his NDP union friends. He’s dismissing the concerns

that he is hearing from the people, that we are hearing from the

people.

When will this minister end his attack on non-government care

agencies?

Hon. A. Dix: I have to say that in 2012, and long before that…. You can talk to

anybody who receives home support services. The people who work in home

support services, many of whom I know very well, know that the system

that has been developed up to now was not working effectively for them.

There were contracting issues for them.

The actions that we’re taking are to improve home support

services. I think that’s desperately needed in B.C. I do not understand

why the opposition would be opposed to that. In addition, we’re taking

steps, consistent with a contract — in many cases, there were ten-year

contracts — to give notice under the contracts and make a transition to

bring those contracts in house.

A couple of years ago, B.C. Hydro, which had wrongly contracted

out work, brought a whole bunch of work back into B.C. Hydro. I don’t

recall anybody calling the minister at the time an expropriator or a

socialist or favouring his union friends. That minister was Bill

Bennett. I don’t even think he was a Liberal.

What they did is what we’re doing — doing the right thing for

seniors, doing the right thing for home support workers, and increasing

and improving home support services everywhere in British

Columbia.

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

M. Stilwell: What this minister and this government are doing is what’s right

for NDP unions, not for seniors. Caregivers have been told….

Interjections.

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

M. Stilwell: Caregivers have told us that seniors are refusing to take showers

unless it’s done with the assistance of a caregiver or a familiar home

care worker who they trust. But the minister can’t even be bothered to

consult with these seniors.

Does making sweeping changes that are in the best interests of the

NDP unions…?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, it’s difficult to hear the question.

M. Stilwell: The minister hasn’t even taken the time to consult with the

seniors that are going to be impacted by the sweeping change that he is

making in favour of his NDP unions.

At what point will this minister, at the very least, consult with

the most vulnerable seniors who are impacted by the decisions his

government is making?

Hon. A. Dix: When we’re talking about care for seniors, and we’re talking about

the treatment of people who provide care for seniors, I think it’s fair

to say that the previous decades were not a time of light in British

Columbia.

[11:05 a.m.]

We are treating, I think, everybody with respect. How do you treat

them with respect? By improving services. How do you treat them with

respect? By ensuring continuity of care. How do you treat them with

respect? By ensuring home support is fully integrated into team-based

care. How do you treat them with respect? You treat them with respect by

ensuring they have the services they need, when they need them. That is

precisely what we are doing.

This effort…. It really is, I think, shameful to demonize people.

When we wanted to support seniors living in care, we supported

principally by providing resources to private and non-profit providers.

In this case, all of these workers were unionized before, and all of

them will be unionized afterwards.

This effort to demonize the workers, from the opposition, is

shameful. We’re about improving services and home support, and you bet

we’re going to continue to do it, regardless of what they

say.

[End of question period.]

Point of Order

Hon. J. Sims: I rise on a point of privilege, because the member for

Richmond-Queensborough used unparliamentary language yesterday. In this

people’s House, we all come here with different perspectives, and we are

going to disagree on issues. But it behooves each and every one of us to use

language that is appropriate and contextual and that is parliamentary and

acceptable within these four walls.

I found the language that was used yesterday inflammatory, insulting

and totally unacceptable. I’m urging you, Mr. Speaker, to ask the member to

withdraw the words he used yesterday and to apologize.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Richmond-Queensborough, may I ask you to

respond.

J. Johal: Mr. Speaker, my comments are withdrawn.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

Tabling Documents

Hon. D. Eby: I have the honour to present the annual report of the Labour Relations

Board for the year ending December 31, 2018.

Hon. C. James: I rise to table a revised strategic plan.

Reports from Committees

CROWN CORPORATIONS COMMITTEE

B. Ma: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations for the fourth session of the

41st parliament, titled Transportation Network Services: Boundaries,

Supply, Fares, and Driver’s Licences .

I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

B. Ma: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the

report.

Leave granted.

B. Ma: In moving adoption of the report, I would like to make some brief

comments.

Transportation network services, or TNS, are a type of app-based

ride-hailing service and include services provided by companies such as

TappCar, Lyft, Uber and more.

The committee focused closely on the four areas identified in the

terms of reference and made recommendations on regulations for

boundaries, supply, price and fare regimes, and drivers’ licences. The

11 recommendations propose regulations that would ensure all British

Columbians benefit from TNS by moving forward without operational

pick-up boundaries or caps on transportation network companies’ fleet

size, supporting public transit and promoting equitable access to TNS

across the province. The committee also produced a recommendation on the

question of drivers’ licences.

[11:10 a.m.]

I would like to thank the Deputy Chair, the member for Surrey

South, for her hard work on this report and all committee members for

the detailed and thought-provoking discussions throughout our

deliberations, a rich

summary of which is captured within the body of

the report.

Committee members approached each of these areas from a variety of

experiences and perspectives, and I’m grateful for the diversity of

experience and opinions that we were able to canvass from expert

witnesses during the work. Municipalities, disability associations, taxi

associations, transportation network companies and experts took time out

of their days to provide the committee with their valuable input. Their

contributions allowed committee members to engage in a rich dialogue

about pros, cons, opportunities and concerns around various approaches

to regulating transportation network services in B.C.

I hope the recommendations in this report will help government

make balanced and informed decisions when implementing a made-in-B.C.

plan for ride-hailing that works for British Columbians.

S. Cadieux: Firstly, in adding my comments to the introduction of the report,

I’d like to thank the committee staff for their support. It was a great

amount of work that was required to assist in the creation of this

report in a condensed time frame, and they certainly deserve full marks

for their work.

I’d like to thank the Chair and the other members of the committee

as well. I believe we worked well together in coming to agreement in

presenting the recommendations that we have presented in the report. I’m

pleased that the committee, once again, has provided a consensus report

on a number of the recommendations on the four issues we were tasked to

provide input on.

I do hope that now government will see fit to heed the

recommendations and get real ride-hailing in place and on the road in

British Columbia.

A. Olsen: I would also like to add just a few brief comments and also my

thanks to the staff. As a member of this Select Standing Committee on

Crown Corporations, it was an honour to be a part of this process. I

think that it highlights the usefulness of the committee process to be

able to work through some of the more difficult challenges that happen

in this place — to be able to work through it, get evidence, get

feedback from people and be able to then develop a report that can help

better inform the decisions that are made with the ministry.

I know that when this report comes forward, the minister will have

the opportunity to take a look at what the experts have delivered to us.

On balance, I think that they’ve been able to provide us good

information to be able to make an informed decision that then will bring

ride-hailing into this province — finally, after a very, very, very long

time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to this

report.

Mr. Speaker: The question is the adoption of the report.

Motion approved.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading of Bill 10, Income Tax Amendment Act, 2019. In

Section A, I call the estimates of the Ministry of Citizens’

Services.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 10 — INCOME TAX

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. C. James: I move that Bill 10 be read a second time now.

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

Bill 10 implements some of the final fiscal elements needed to

support a historic made-in-B.C. LNG investment, which will be the

largest private sector investment in B.C. and Canada’s history. This is

an investment that is going to deliver long-term benefits and thousands

of well-paying jobs. Just a context around the jobs, for people who are

listening, there are currently 600 workers that were employed in Kitimat

in December alone.

[11:15 a.m.]

I think it’s also important to take a look at some of the work

that LNG Canada has done around local jobs. LNG Canada has in place a

local B.C.-first policy. They’ve invested, already, $1.5 million in a

trades training fund that has already supported 1,000 individuals. The

1,000th person just graduated from the trades training program, which

again will provide a very necessary and critical investment here in

British Columbia. And 10,000 construction jobs and 950 permanent

jobs.

I think it’s important to put in context the kinds of benefits to

jobs and to employment in British Columbia. Certainly, as a government,

we recognize the critical nature of having a strong, diverse economy,

particularly in British Columbia — a small, open economy. We know how

critical it is to make sure that there are good jobs available in every

corner of our province.

As a government, we also recognize the need to balance our

environmental, social and reconciliation priorities, which is why this

bill is one element of the framework to a responsible LNG investment in

British Columbia. Just as, when we provide the budget to British

Columbians, we talk about being balanced socially, being balanced in its

approach and being balanced in strong protections for the environment,

as well as balanced fiscally, it’s the same kind of approach we’re

taking to an LNG investment.

We want to ensure that it generates a positive return for British

Columbians. We want to ensure that it will support true economic

partnerships and opportunities with First Nations and that it certainly

will operate within strong environmental protections.

As the Premier said when LNG Canada announced their final

investment decision, LNG in B.C. is not something new. This has been

years and years in the making. Previous governments going back to the

1980s have worked to develop it and to look at how to access our

resources and how to ensure those resources get to market. Bill 10 helps

to put natural gas development on a level playing field with other

industrial sectors while supporting a new fiscal framework for the

largest private sector investment. The framework is designed to ensure

that British Columbians’ interests are met.

Throughout the election, as people may remember, and certainly as

we moved into government, the Premier outlined four fundamental

conditions that had to be met by LNG for any kind of investment in

British Columbia. Those were that it must guarantee a fair return for

B.C.’s natural resources; guarantee jobs and training opportunities for

British Columbians; respect and partner, true partnerships, with First

Nations; and meet the province’s climate commitments.

So we worked hard. We worked hard with LNG Canada to ensure those

four conditions were met. This legislation represents one of the last

pieces in facilitating this historic investment, one that, as I said

earlier, will ensure that we’re looking at well-paying jobs, that we’re

protecting our environment and that we will see a broad and diverse

economy in our province.

This project will produce one of the cleanest LNG facilities in

the world. B.C. has committed to meeting legislative targets for carbon

levels of 40 percent below 2007 levels by 2030, 60 percent by 2040 and

80 percent by 2050. Our CleanBC program is the strongest climate action

plan in North America.

Is that plan ambitious? Yes, it is. Are we committed to its

implementation? Yes, we are. In fact, in the ’19-20 budget, you saw over

$900 million committed to ensure that we move ahead with CleanBC. That’s

going to require all of us to work together. All sectors are going to

need to reduce their overall emissions if B.C. is going to achieve our

carbon pollution reduction targets. We are committed to that, and we

will be held accountable to that.

The province’s long-term strategy includes measures to encourage

clean industrial growth in British Columbia. That includes a portion of

the carbon tax revenue paid by large industry, which will fund a new

clean growth incentive program to encourage the use of the greenest

technology available.

That’s not limited to the natural gas sector. In fact, that’s

broad to all sectors in British Columbia — to look at how we reduce our

emissions and how we encourage jobs and economic growth. Some of that

revenue will go into a technology fund, which is going to help spur new

investment in all sectors to make sure, again, that they fit within

B.C.’s climate action plan.

[11:20 a.m.]

This provides huge opportunities to further build our green

economy. When you take a look at CleanBC, I think we have a true chance

to be a leader when it comes to North America when it comes to

developing technology, when it comes to innovation in the green sector.

Putting together our energy-intensive emissions plan through CleanBC

will provide us with that opportunity to have resources committed to be

able to look at how we expand those opportunities right here in our

province for economic growth.

We’ll also be investing in electrification of upstream oil and gas

production. That’ll allow extraction and processing to be powered by

electricity, instead of burning fossil fuels. We’re working with

industry to reduce fugitive emissions to match the federal government’s

target of a 45 percent reduction by 2025.

The province’s greenhouse gas reduction targets in CleanBC are

firm, as I was saying. LNG Canada must ensure that its development and

operations live up to its environmental responsibilities to British

Columbians. That means protection for our clean air, land and water for

generations to come, while generating funds for critical services and

meeting responsibilities to partner with First Nations.

The fiscal framework we’re supporting today comes after months of

hard work and discussion between government, communities, Indigenous

peoples and the LNG industry. We have already put in place a PST

performance payment agreement for LNG Canada. We’re developing criteria

for this program so that other large manufacturing investors, to ensure

B.C. is competitive, may also look at taking advantage of the

opportunity for new investments. And we’re also providing industrial

electricity rates on par with other industrial users in British

Columbia.

As part of the final pieces of the framework — built-in moves to

repeal the Liquefied Natural Gas Income Tax Act to remove barriers to

LNG development in British Columbia and to protect the interests of B.C.

Effective for taxation years that begin on or after January 1, 2020, the

natural gas credit will be available to qualifying corporations that

carry on business in B.C. in the oil and gas activities or own natural

gas as it enters the LNG facility.

This credit is limited to a maximum amount that can be claimed

each taxation year and can be used to reduce the effective British

Columbia corporate income tax rate from 12 percent to 9 percent if the

company pays corporate income tax in British Columbia.

Qualifying corporations are generally those with a permanent

establishment in British Columbia and in the business of oil and gas

activities, such as natural gas extraction and the liquification of

natural gas, and — I think this is a very important point — that pay

their corporate income tax here in our province.

Requiring a permanent establishment in B.C. is important for

income tax purposes because it triggers the requirement that qualifying

corporations be subject to income tax in British Columbia. If a company

doesn’t pay corporate income tax in our province, they’re not eligible

for the natural gas tax credit.

So these final pieces that we’re putting in place help guarantee a

fair return to British Columbians.

This bill also repeals the Liquefied Natural Gas Project

Agreements Act. That act came into effect on July 21, 2015. It outlined

certain key elements of an LNG project agreement and also provided the

Minister of Finance with the authority to enter into LNG project

agreements.

However, that approach, using the agreements act, locked in

certain tax and regulatory provisions and also provided indemnities to

projects if a future government changed those provisions. Under that

previous legislation that we are proposing to remove, any indemnities

paid under such agreements were borne by future British

Columbians.

Our government’s new LNG framework does not provide for

indemnities. That is stated very clearly in the agreement that’s signed.

As a result, that act is no longer needed, and the act will be

repealed.

This bill ensures that all British Columbians benefit from our

resources. LNG Canada has met our four fundamental conditions: a fair

return for B.C.’s natural resources, jobs and training opportunities for

British Columbians, respect and true partnerships with First Nations,

and a requirement to meet our province’s climate commitments.

In doing so, it ensures that British Columbia remains a

competitive place for new investments, new businesses and new

opportunities, while protecting our air, land and water for this

generation and generations to come.

[11:25 a.m.]

M. Bernier: I appreciate the members and government asked me to be the

designated speaker. I’m going to continue on, first of all, with my

comments.

Obviously, on this side of the House, after doing all of the heavy

lifting and all of the work to bring recognition and to bring LNG to

British Columbia, this is something that we’re pleased about. We’re

pleased that we’re at a point where LNG is continuing on in the province

— that we’re proceeding.

My hope, though, is that this is a good deal — that it is

something that’s going to benefit the people of British Columbia, that

it’s going to benefit families, that it’s going to benefit companies

and, obviously, people all around the province and, of course, my region

— which is ground zero in so many ways, in the Peace region — where the

gas, hopefully, hopefully, will be coming from. Our job, obviously, now

is to assess what government has put in front of us here — the nature of

the agreement. Of course, we’ll get into some of those details in

committee stage.

This project, as government has been toting, is a large investment

— obviously, one that we’ve been working on for many, many years and

which could be great for the province of British Columbia. But the

people of British Columbia, this House, opposition — I think everybody —

deserve to have a fully transparent project in front of us, to

understand where government gets their numbers from so that when the

minister stands up and actually talks about the jobs, the revenue, the

opportunities for B.C., they can point at and show where those numbers

come from. Unfortunately, all that this government has put forward is a

taxation regime for the company but has not really discussed where these

numbers come from.

Now, if you think about what was done under the last government,

when we were in government, we actually took the time to call a special

sitting of the House to bring in the taxation legislation. We also took

the time to bring in the Liquefied Natural Gas Project Agreements Act

because we committed to being fully transparent. We committed to

ensuring that the opposition, now government, had the opportunity to

completely dissect and digest what we were proposing here in the

province of British Columbia so they could support, criticize. But as we

know, as I see the smirks across from me, they voted against everything.

They actually.…

Interjection.

M. Bernier: I’m sorry. It’s a smile, not a smirk.

They voted against everything that was brought forward. They

actually talked about the fact that LNG would never happen in the

province and criticized the numbers and criticized very specifically

that there was not hard, fast information within the

agreement.

So of course, our job now is to make sure, when we listen to all

of the comments that the now government said, that they are living up to

that. What they said in the House — is that what they’ve brought forward

now for the public, for this province? The problem is that they have not

done what I think should have been their due diligence, which is to have

brought forward a project development agreement to this House for full

debate, for full disclosure and, more importantly, full transparency for

the public.

Now, of course, when you look at some of the comments that the now

government made…. We remember some of these comments quite well. You

look at the Minister of Energy and Mines saying LNG wasn’t going to

happen and that what we were doing was just a huge sellout to the people

of British Columbia. And the now Premier went on and on at length saying

that this was not a good deal for the people of British Columbia to have

LNG coming forward without very specific details of how it’s going to

benefit B.C.

Well, this government hasn’t been able to do that. So I want to

see…. We’re going to ask in committee stage some of those exact

questions, making sure that they are willing to be transparent and bring

forward specific answers that not only this House but the people of

British Columbia deserve to know.

[11:30 a.m.]

Of course, when you look at the principles of bringing forward

what this government is trying to embark on, those disclosures are

important. The public deserves the opportunity to scrutinize, in its

entirety, what is being presented. This is not a leap of faith. This is

something that is going to be important for years and years to come. The

minister even mentioned how…. Even though they criticized…. When we were

in government, the Minister of Finance said things change over 20, 25

years. You should never lock in a contract for that length. Well, here

they are doing the exact same thing that we were embarking on and now

trying to take credit for it.

Some of us in opposition received an initial briefing on the

legislation, and what we learned is that there are significant aspects

being left out that government is unwilling, unable to answer. They are

important technical details on the benefits that this, hopefully, will

be bringing for the people of British Columbia. So I have to ask: why is

that? What are they hiding? Why are they not willing to bring that

forward to this House?

Of course, the minister will have opportunities in committee stage

again to, hopefully, disclose some of these very specific details that

will impact not only the company now — LNG Canada — but future companies

that we’re hoping to see come to British Columbia. And what impact does

it also have on the families and small businesses in the province of

British Columbia?

When you look at some of the actual information that’s put forward

already, they’re telling this company: “Of course, we’ll lock you in at

$30 a tonne for carbon tax.” Well, we all know, and government is

touting the fact, that they’re raising it to $40 on April 1, in just a

few days. So I’m sure this company, LNG Canada, is very excited about

the fact that everybody in British Columbia will be paying more for

carbon tax, but they won’t have to.

When you look in the agreement, there’s nowhere in the agreement,

contrary to what government said when they were in opposition, that will

mandate local hire, local procurement or jobs for First Nations or

people who live across the corridor or anywhere in British Columbia.

There’s nothing in this agreement that we can find or that they’re

willing to admit that contractually obligates this company to actually

hire anybody in B.C.

Now, of course, the company is going to probably do the best they

can. I trust they will do that, but there’s nothing in here that says

they have to. Of course, in opposition, the now government railed on the

fact that that is something that should be contractually binding for the

company, that they have to do.

There’s also nothing in the agreements that we can find that says

these companies even have to buy B.C. resources. Now, the minister just

touted the fact that they’re lowering the rates to 9 percent for this

company. Well, Alberta has just announced that if the UCP party win,

they might lower it to 8 percent. What is obligating this company now to

purchase the gas, hire the people or book any revenue or anything in

British Columbia? If it’s 8 percent, why would they not just do

everything out of Alberta now?

I’m hoping the minister has some good answers to these kinds of

questions that we’re going to ask, to ensure that the people of British

Columbia and our resources are protected.

Again, on this side of the House, of course we want to see LNG

come to fruition. We want to see the local jobs. We want to see

opportunities for First Nations and First Nations communities. We want

to see opportunities for small business and companies in the province of

British Columbia. We also want to see other companies — mining,

forestry, others — continue to prosper and make sure there’s a

competitiveness across all the resource sectors, not just

one.

Of course, there are a couple of tests that we have to ensure that

this government is meeting. Are the people of British Columbia being

protected by what this government has put forward? Again, it’s not only

this bill but the project agreement that this government has reached.

Does it meet the test of all of the things that they committed to doing

when they were in opposition, the things they said when they were in

opposition, the things the now Premier said, the now

ministers?

I know many of the comments that they made when they were on this

side of the House…. My hope is that now they’re in government, they were

around the cabinet table making sure that their comments, their wishes,

their asks, what they committed to are actually in this.

[11:35 a.m.]

Now, of course, we don’t know all that detail. We’ll have to ask

for it later, because the government has not agreed to bring forward the

actual project agreement for this House to scrutinize or to debate like

we did. They also, unfortunately…. I’m sure the members of the Green

Party will talk about this too. They put within this taxation act that

they brought forward a clause at the very, very end to actually reverse

and eliminate the actual agreement that we had that binds government to

bring that information forward.

Obviously, that’s a question that I think everybody in this House

should be asking. If we’re all, most of the people in this House, proud

of LNG coming forward, why would government not be willing to put that

information on the table for us to not only discuss and scrutinize but,

more importantly, for the people of B.C., again, to see?

This is a contract that’s going to bind this House and this

government and the people of B.C. for years to come. More importantly,

it’s also setting the stage. It’s setting the bar now for other

companies to come to B.C. Now, some would say — maybe three members of

the House wouldn’t — that this will be a good thing. It brings a little

bit of certainty to what these companies might be able to see if they

come to British Columbia as well.

I do know that there are other ministers, I’m sure, in government

and critics on this side of the House that will say: what does that mean

for competitiveness now in other resource sectors? What is government

going to do to ensure that other industries are treated the

same?

When we look at the royalty projections that this government has

brought forward in this act…. Obviously, some of the questions we need

to have answered are: where do they get these projections from? What

revenues are they booking in, what projections do they have, and where

did they arrive at these numbers?

The people of B.C. and in this House deserve to know. We need to

be able to scrutinize and say: are those accurate? Are they banking on

the fact that all of the jobs and all of the gas and all of the

booked-in revenues will be from British Columbia? If they have, they

might have made some flawed assumptions. These are the things we need to

be able to talk to this government and, hopefully, get answers about. So

far, they have not been able to release any of that

information.

Now, of course, we hope the government is right. I’ve worked for

years, as well as colleagues on this side of the House, with LNG Canada

and other proponents to get them to look at British Columbia instead of

other parts of the world, to get them to come here and set up and hire

people. As we know, LNG Canada has been in the process for many, many

years, and they’ve already spent billions of dollars doing the

groundwork to bring LNG to fruition in B.C. Now we just need to make

sure that everybody is living up to their promises to make sure that

this helps the people of British Columbia.

In committee stage, we’ll ask the minister, obviously, for some

details. As an MLA from the Peace region, where right now a lot of the

gas is being extracted…. Of course, we have an abundance of gas, which

is why LNG has opportunities here in Canada. But we need to be able to

reconcile some of the comments that the ministers and the now Premier

said when they were on this side of the House, again to ensure that the

people in my area are protected, that our resources in B.C. are being

utilized to their fullest potential to help the people here.

Of course, when I look at the opportunities for the Peace region….

I know the member for Peace River North will probably speak to this as

well. We don’t recognize a border in the Peace region. The companies and

the jobs and the families flow back and forth in this

industry.

[11:40 a.m.]

One of the challenges that we have faced for quite a few years is

the influx of people from Alberta who have come into British Columbia to

work in our sector as things were slowing down in Alberta. The last

thing that we would want to see — and I can’t find anywhere in the

agreement that protects this — is resources now, because it might be

cheaper, actually going into Alberta, in the same play, and extracting

natural gas there. Now we’re going to have lost jobs, lost families,

people moving to Alberta.

Of course, we hope that doesn’t happen, and this isn’t me saying

it might happen. This is just saying that the government has not done

their due diligence to protect it from not happening — and protecting

the people of British Columbia.

When I was in government, I spent about a year and a half on the

LNG–Buy B.C. portfolio, travelling around the province, making sure that

jobs were ready, that people were ready, that companies were ready and

recognizing the opportunities that were here. One of the things that we

were committing to, and working with the companies on, was to ensure

that British Columbians were thought of first and foremost when it came

to LNG.

Of course, we’re going to ask the minister again, in committee

stage, about this, because I see nothing in this that protects that,

contrary to what they said. I see nothing that formulates anything

within the agreement that requires the companies to procure, hire

British Columbians. So I’m looking forward to the minister correcting me

and saying: “No, there it is, right there in the agreement. There it is

that actually mandates the company from doing that.”

Interjection.

M. Bernier: I’m sure the leader of the Green Party, who is speaking right now,

will have some comments on this. I mean, I’ve yet to hear whether he

supports LNG — the jobs, the opportunities — or not. I’m sure he’ll have

a moment to actually put his opinions forward. I’m sure he has a few on

this issue. The things we need to make sure of are that…. Are the people

of British Columbia getting the best bang they can by having LNG in

British Columbia? That’s what we need to ensure.

We need to ensure that these companies…. That’s what we worked on.

I know my colleague to my right here, the former minister of LNG and

natural gas, spent years on this file, working diligently, travelling

around the world, making sure these companies chose British Columbia and

nowhere else. We wouldn’t have LNG if it wasn’t for B.C. being put on

the map years ago and the companies starting down the road around the

recognition and the understanding that B.C. was the best place for them

to invest.

Of course, we brought forward to this House — again, for full

disclosure and full debates — what we were thinking was the best deal

for the people of British Columbia. All we’re asking is that this

government has the courage to do the same — not just stand up and tout

the fact that we have LNG but to actually say: “We have it. Here are the

prescriptive benefits. Here’s where the numbers came from. Here’s how

the people of B.C. are going to benefit for years to come.”

When you see over half a billion dollars in, basically, tax

credits being given to the company and them being told that they can pay

them back 19 or 20 years from now, the question has to be: “Where’s the

benefit of that in the short term to the people of B.C.?” I’m sure the

minister will be able to — hopefully, in detail — explain how those

financial agreements came to be, how that not only benefits the

companies to make a decision but how it benefits the people of British

Columbia so we can actually have the revenue and the resources coming in

that we knew that we would have with LNG but, I fear, may not be

completely there anymore.

A big part of what we were trying to accomplish with LNG,

obviously, was not only the local procurement and hire but to encourage

companies to set up shop and actually be here in British Columbia. This

is all about making sure the benefits are here. And again, for the

government not to be willing to stand up and defend the actual parts

within the agreement, to actually try to hide behind some of the

numbers…. Again, that’s our job now, to say: “Where did this come from?

Where did these numbers come from?”

You can’t just say: “We have a project. We have an agreement, and

there’s going to be a bunch of money coming in — maybe. A bunch of money

coming in 20 years from now.” People need to know what this is going to

mean for the people of British Columbia.

[11:45 a.m.]

I look again, right now, at the thousands and thousands of people

that are working in the natural gas sector in British Columbia. We need

to be standing up and looking out for them. We know that in the Montney

play, we have one of the best natural gas resource finds in the entire

world. This is something that we’ve been working on and touting for

years to come.

One of the things that I’ve always talked about — even though our

unemployment rate in northeast B.C. is a little high right now — is

about 81 percent of the people working in my region are full-time

people, full-time, good-paying jobs. It’s the highest in the province. A

lot of that has to do with the resource sector. It has to do with them

being competitive, making sure that government is always looking out for

the B.C. resources first.

Of course, we look at our GDP growth, which is fairly high right

now but projected to go down by almost 2 percent over the next five

years. That leads us to other concerns, because we need to be looking at

competitiveness across all sectors. This isn’t just for industry; this

is for families. When we look at all the taxation that this government

is bringing forward, it is completely taking away from competitiveness,

from putting money into people’s pockets, from making life more

affordable.

Back to my earlier comment that I started with: the people of B.C.

are going to want to know why a large multinational company, which is

coming to British Columbia with a project like this, is now going to get

tax breaks that the average person won’t get.

When I go fill up my gas on April 1, I have to pay another 10

cents per tonne for carbon tax, but of course, this company won’t have

to. Are mining companies going to be exempted on April 1, or are they

going to have to go up now? Are forestry companies? Are they going to be

exempt, or are they going up? Is it just going to be this one company

staying the same and everybody else going up?

These are the questions that, of course, not only this House and

the people need to know, but these other companies are going to be

asking the same questions. Is this now the bar in British

Columbia?

Government says that we’re raising carbon tax. We’re raising

everybody’s employer health tax. We’re raising all these taxes to

everybody else, except this one company. Is that what they’re going to

stand up and say, or are they going to say: “No, we’re actually

back-pedalling. We’re changing, and we’re not going to be following

through, because we’re going to make sure it’s an even, fair playing

field for all.”

We need to know where government comes up with these numbers. We

need to know and be able to scrutinize that they’re accurate. There’s

been no transparency on this, and this House and the people deserve to

have that.

Can they commit that all the gas will be taken out of British

Columbia? Can this government commit that every job and every person

hired will be from British Columbia — which they said on this side of

the House, when they were in opposition, had to formulate and be in

writing, contractually, in a deal?

That’s what they said when they were over here, so I am going to

assume that the hon. members are going to be able to stand in the House,

when they are in committee stage, and actually agree with everything

that I said, that they will be able to point to the agreements and say:

“Here it is, right here in the agreement. Yes, every person has to be

hired from British Columbia, because that’s what we said would happen

when we were in opposition.” They’re going to be able to point to the

agreement and say: “Here is where all the jobs will be. Here’s where all

the money is coming from, as we promised.”

Now, I’m hoping they’ll do that. Again, after doing all of the

heavy lifting, after doing all of the work to bring LNG, of course we

are excited to see this project moving forward in the province. It’s a

benefit to many. That’s something that we recognized years ago, which is

why we had such a strong focus for so many years around LNG, contrary to

the members opposite basically criticizing, every single time we

discussed LNG, that it would never happen in the province, that it’s not

something that they would support, that it’s something that they would

not encourage.

In fact, I’m happy that this government has continued on with what

we were doing. I just want to make sure that the things that they have

promised are actually in there.

[11:50 a.m.]

Will I be able to go back to my riding and say: “Don’t worry. This

government has committed that all of the jobs will be here for people in

B.C., like they said when they were opposition. They have committed that

all of these revenues are going to be coming from British Columbia, and

it’s going to benefit the people of B.C.”?

I mean, I won’t spend time reading back quotes to them, because

I’m sure the member from the Green Party, the leader, who obviously will

have a few things to say about this, will do that for me.

Interjection.

M. Bernier: Yeah, generational sellout, obviously, was one that they mentioned

all the time. But it’s great that they’ve had an epiphany and they

realize how important LNG is for the jobs and the people. It’s just our

job now to make sure that we’re holding government to account and

scrutinizing to ensure that.

I know the House Leader is just pointing to the clock, but I do

realize I that have a bit more time. In fact, I could even go maybe

after lunch, which I’m not sure if he wants me to do.

I think the point is — and we’re going to have other people get up

here — is the fact that we’re proud of the work that we did when we were

in government to set the stage for LNG to be here. I’m proud of the fact

that we have this agreement in front of us, that this government

continued on with what we were doing.

My main crux of the points here is that we need to ensure that the

benefits are coming to British Columbia — that there are going to be the

jobs, that the resources are coming from British Columbia, that the

companies will have the opportunities to bid. I know the members

opposite railed to ensure, when we were in government, that not a

temporary foreign worker would be hired if they were with LNG, if they

were supporting it. So I’m assuming they’re going to stand up and

guarantee somewhere in the project that that’s not the case. Not sure if

they’ll be able to do that.

It’s unfortunate that government has not brought forward the

project development agreement. We will hopefully be able to raise some

of those questions during committee stage. We assume and hope that the

Minister of Finance, who brought the taxation bill forward, will

actually answer those questions, because the people of British Columbia

and this House deserve answers too. It’s our job as opposition to

scrutinize. It’s our job as opposition to ask these questions on behalf

of the people of B.C. It’s government’s job to answer those

questions.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

It’s government’s job to ensure that they can show and highlight

and prove that the things that they said while they were in opposition,

if they brought LNG forward, are actually in this bill, are in the

agreement, and that everything that they’ve said is going to be able to

stand the test so that this House can vote in favour and support

something, in good conscience, that we know is actually going to be

delivering for the people of British Columbia.

M. Bernier moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved on division.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

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 11:54 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

CITIZENS’ SERVICES

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A);

S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

The committee met at 11:17 a.m.

On Vote 20: ministry operations, $551,640,000.

The Chair: Minister, did you have an opening statement?

Hon. J. Sims: I do.

Good morning, everyone. I’m pleased to be here today to speak to

the estimates for the Ministry of Citizens’ Services. First I want to

acknowledge the territory of the Lekwungen people, including the

Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations.

Now I’d like to introduce my senior ministry staff who have joined

me this morning. Please welcome Deputy Minister Jill Kot; Associate

Deputy Minister and Government Chief Information Officer CJ Ritchie; and

our ADMs Sunny Dhaliwal, Joel Fairbairn, Bobbi Sadler, Bev Dicks, Dean

Skinner, Ian Donaldson; Susan Stanford; and many others. Thank you all

for being here today.

For the first time in 40 years, I’m proud to say our government

has eliminated the operating debt, and our fiscal picture is strong. We

have the highest GDP and lowest unemployment rate in the country. This

is good news for British Columbians. It means we have additional

resources to support people in our province.

Our government is tackling the hard problems so we can build a

strong economy and a more secure future. Budget 2019 is about creating

opportunities and helping all British Columbians prosper. We’re taking

action to make life more affordable, deliver the services people need

and build a strong, sustainable economy.

Every day, our government delivers the services British Columbians

rely on, and the engine powering this is the Ministry of Citizens’

Services. My ministry is both the face and backbone of this government.

From front-end representatives at our 65 Service B.C. centres to our

back-end cybersecurity engineers to our procurement specialists, we are

at the centre of where service excellence, transformation and innovation

are happening within government. Citizens’ Services is also the gateway

to government procurement for businesses that employ so many people

throughout the province.

[11:20 a.m.]

Core government spends nearly $7 million each year on goods and

services on behalf of British Columbians, which provides us with

tremendous opportunities. That is why we’re making a big change to help

more people benefit when we spend their money. We’re removing barriers

for small and medium-sized businesses. We’re simplifying the way

procurement works, making it easier for companies to work with

government while also finding the best value.

All of this work is guided by our new procurement strategy, which

we launched last June, and I’m extremely proud of the progress we’ve

made so far. In January, we announced the new procurement concierge

program, which matches vendors and government buyers. Vendors bring

forward innovative solutions to government business challenges. All this

takes place before the bidding process, making it simpler, faster and

less costly for companies to work with us. This dynamic process also

ensures that government can take advantage of new technologies and

innovation on behalf of all British Columbians.

In addition to being more collaborative and solution-oriented,

we’re also improving the tools we use. B.C. Bid is the virtual face of

government procurement, but the system is over 20 years old and needs a

serious overhaul. It’s like trying to do business with a Commodore 64

and trying to interface with today’s technologies. The limitations of

B.C. Bid are the number one thing I hear from businesses about the

challenges of working with government. That’s why we’re taking action to

fix this. Work is now underway to replace this ageing system, and we

expect the new B.C. Bid to be ready in 2020.

Now, in order to deliver these new and exciting systems, we need —

wait for it — connectivity. Working to connect all British Columbians to

affordable high-speed Internet, regardless of where they live, is a

priority for me and my ministry. We work with our federal, local and

private sector partners to ensure that British Columbians in rural and

Indigenous communities have access to this essential service. Broadband

gives people more opportunities to learn, to do business, to access

services and stay connected.

We want people in rural and Indigenous communities to have the

same access as those in urban centres. As I often say, we have to make

sure that the new digital railroad reaches every corner of our province

so that every corner of the province has the opportunity to participate

in the new digital economies.

Along with improving Internet connectivity, we are also

responsible for the IT services that are essential to government

operations. Our property division manages the province’s real estate

portfolio and provides everything needed to design, set up and manage

government workplaces. We are responsible for overseeing corporate

information management, access to information, privacy protection and

training in these areas.

Our Service B.C. centres help people access over 600 government

programs and services, including renewing their B.C. Services Card,

organ donor registration, accessing child care subsidies, starting a

business or applying for a liquor licence. The Service B.C. contact

centre helps British Columbians by phone, email and text, and can

provide service in more than 100 languages.

My ministry is committed to putting people first while making

effective use of our financial resources. I’d like to now provide an

overview on our budget. My ministry has been allocated $50 million in

additional funding within government’s 2018-19 fiscal plan to further

expand high-speed Internet services.

[11:25 a.m.]

This investment will benefit approximately 200 rural and

Indigenous communities and acknowledges the critical role that broadband

service plays for people in rural communities. It means they will have

better access to opportunities to learn, to do business, to plan for

emergencies and to stay connected with friends and family. These funds

will ensure people in B.C.’s smaller communities have internet speeds of

a minimum of 50 megabytes per second, which is the current CRTC

standard.

This investment is also an important step in achieving our

government’s commitment to true, lasting reconciliation with Indigenous

peoples. It will help Indigenous communities have the technologies they

need to participate in the digital economy and better access health

services and education, which are so important for people to

prosper.

My ministry’s operating budget for 2019-2020 is $552 million,

compared to a restated 2018-19 budget of $533 million. This is an

increase of almost $19 million or 3.6 percent. Almost $5 million will

support energy-smart projects for provincially owned properties and help

us do our part to achieve the targets outlined in our awesome CleanBC

plan. We’ll do this by using new smart building technologies and

expanding vehicle charging stations at provincial facilities. These

projects will save energy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and cut

operating costs.

An increase in our operating budget will also allow us to hire

more facilities and IT staff so we can continue to support ministries in

delivering the services people count on. Budget 2019 also includes an

increase of almost $3.8 million to support operating and maintenance

costs for new buildings such as the Abbotsford courthouse and the new

youth mental health and addiction centre at Valleyview, which is slated

to open this spring.

Modernizing the way we deliver services is also a key focus of my

ministry. There is almost $3.5 million allocated for the continued

expansion of the B.C. Services Card program. We’re working hard to

increase the amount of government services people can access using their

secure card, saving them time, energy and frustration and helping them

take full advantage of government programs and services.

My ministry’s capital budget for 2019-2020 is increased by $104

million, or 33 percent, when compared to the 2018-19 restated budget.

This increase means we can continue our efforts to modernize government

work environments and improve IT services and supports for staff;

acquire property to support and improve delivery of government services

for people, children and families; and retrofit and upgrade government

buildings to be more environmentally friendly. These are only a sample

of the many, many vital projects, programs and services that my ministry

provides on behalf of government and the people of British

Columbia.

As the demand for services expands across government, so does the

work of my ministry. Budget 2019 provides the funding we need to better

support British Columbians. We are working hard on our mandate

commitments, which are: (1) institute a cap on the value and the length

of government IT contracts, save money, increase innovation and improve

competition to help our technology sector grow; (2) ensure government IT

and software development procurement works better for companies that

hire locally and have a local supply chain; (3) improve

access-to-information rules to provide greater public accountability;

and (4) to improve response and processing times for

freedom-of-information requests.

[11:30 a.m.]

While these are ambitious goals, I can say we are making progress.

For example, our FOI response times have improved from 80 percent on

time to 90 percent. We’re continuing our work to make the FOI system

better for British Columbians. Our new procurement strategy is making it

easier for companies to work with government and ensure British

Columbians benefit when we spend public money. With all of this, we take

great care to make sure we are working hard for people.

I’d also like to take this opportunity to recognize the committed,

dedicated public servants that work at the Ministry of Citizens’

Services. The executives, managers and front-line staff are a dynamic

team that take their role providing services for government and British

Columbians very, very seriously. I am continually impressed and in awe

of their efforts to innovate and improve how government does business. I

look forward to meeting even more of the staff in the coming year. Now I

am happy to take your questions.

S. Thomson: Thank you to the minister for the opening comments.

Just to let the minister know, our first few questions this

morning will be budget-related. You’ve provided some of the information,

but I think we want to go through, in a little bit more detail, the core

business areas and the capital areas in the core budget. This afternoon,

we’ll move into many of the areas that are under the minister’s

responsibility — procurement, freedom of information, security and

connectivity in those areas — but for the first short period we have

this morning, more specifically on the budget items.

I firstly also want to acknowledge and thank your staff for the

briefing they provided to us, the opportunity to go through the budget.

That was very helpful, and we appreciate that information.

Maybe I’ll jump right into it, then, in terms of the core budget

operating areas. I wonder if we can just go down through the specific

operating areas and have the minister explain and put on the record in

maybe a little more detail, by operating area, the changes or the

additions to the budget — and, in one case, a reduction — in the major

operating areas. So maybe, in the first part, the minister could just

restate or provide the detail around the increase in the operating

category around citizens’ services from approximately $28 million up to

$32 million — the difference there.

Hon. J. Sims: The budget increase that you are seeing in services to citizens

and businesses — the $3.451 million there — is for the B.C. Services

Card that used to sit in contingency. Now it’s being put into the

budget.

The salaries and the rest of it is made up with the salaries and

benefits to support the sustainable services mandate. It’s a reflection

of the changes in the benefit rates.

S. Thomson: Just a follow-up to that, then, in terms of that amount in

supporting the services card.

[11:35 a.m.]

Those dollars or those additional resources — is that primarily

additional staffing and support for the card, or is it additional

services that are going to be on-boarded and added to the services card?

Where specifically is that additional funding to be allocated? Is it

primarily more people and resources, or is it in services and systems

that support the service card?

Hon. J. Sims: I thank my colleague for that question. As I had said previously,

this is money that was originally sitting in contingency and was being

used from contingency. It’s now just being made part of the permanent

funding. It is primarily for staffing for that program, but no

additional staffing is being added. It’s just a matter of from

contingency now into permanent staffing.

S. Thomson: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Then let’s look at the

procurement and supply services under the major operating areas, an

increase of approximately $950,000 there. Can she explain the additional

funding that’s in that operating category?

Hon. J. Sims: This budget increase, once again, is for salaries and benefits to

support the sustainable services mandate and the economic stability

mandate and dividend and changes in the benefit rate. It’s just a lift

to cover that.

S. Thomson: Through to the real property category under the operating

expenses, an increase there of approximately $10 million in that

category. Can the minister clarify what’s included in that

category?

Hon. J. Sims: As my colleague across the way has said, this does see an increase

of $10.092 million, and $4.75 million is to support the energy-smart

strategy, which aligns with government’s CleanBC strategy.

The funding will enhance energy efficiency and promote clean

growth in government buildings, including energy retrofit studies and

implementation of the non-capital requirements in both owned and leased

facilities. This will be $3.25 million. The capital budget includes an

additional $8.5 million for energy retrofits.

It includes recommissioning of buildings to reduce energy costs,

$500,000; smart building technology proof of concepts, $230,000; climate

risk assessments, $170,000; clean energy building technology, $500,000;

support for enabling activities for procurement and staffing resources,

$100,000.

A $3.604 million increase is to address cost escalations related

to maintaining government’s facility infrastructure, leasing taxes,

hydro rates, minimum wage.

[11:40 a.m.]

An increase of $3.609 million is primarily for operating and

maintenance costs associated with the Valleyview Maples Treatment

Centre, for amortization, taxes, etc., and some costs for Abbotsford

courthouse, for property tax and land rent. RPDs placeholder allocation

for ten of the 20. Citizens FTE budget increase related to government

expansion, $1.019 million.

Offsetting budget decrease for decreasing lease cost associated

with the Capital Park project is $3.277 million. Ministry clients were

moved from other buildings into the first building in Capital Park, and

2019-2020 will be the first year to reflect a full year of reduced lease

costs from vacated spaces following lease expiry.

S. Thomson: Just a quick question here. Maybe not a quick question. A

significant portion of that increase is around the retrofit energy-smart

program within buildings. Can the minister give a bit of an explanation

of how the process for prioritizing and ranking that expenditure would

take place when looking at the utilization of that?

Obviously, that is resources, but it doesn’t do the whole job and

everything. What is the process, and how are the priorities determined

into where that takes place? Is it through the initial studies? Is there

an identified list of priority buildings and facilities that are working

through as you utilize those resources? Is that list already developed?

Do you know where and in which buildings those resources are going to be

spent?

Hon. J. Sims: Just so you know, the minister hasn’t sat in a room and made a

list of how it’s going to be done. We’ve had our professional public

service staff, and they have been doing an assessment. What was done was

an energy audit of the 20 biggest emitters. From that, a list was made,

so buildings have been identified. They did use 144 milestones that

they’re trying to address, but our aim is to go after the biggest

emitters where we can get the biggest bang for the buck

first.

S. Thomson: Just a quick follow-up question, and then my colleague will have a

question around this as well. I’m not expecting an answer right now, but

I wonder if…. The minister said that list and the priorities being

developed…. Is that information that could be provided in a follow-up to

a follow-up question so that we can see where and to what buildings

those resources are going to be allocated?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. J. Sims: Yes, we will release the list to you.

B. Stewart: Further on that same topic — and thank you to the minister for her

opening remarks — I want to go back to the whole issue about energy

savings and reducing our CO 2 footprint. I want to seek some

clarification between what she just talked about under the real property

increase, the expenditures of $10 million on making buildings more

energy-efficient, doing this energy audit and the plan that we’re going

to get later this afternoon.

I want to go back to her opening comments a little bit, about the

electric-vehicle-charging stations, and where that is in terms of as a

cost. I realize that it’s a capital item. At least I would assume that,

being that it’s an addition of leasehold improvements or whatever, the

way that it’s capitalized. What’s the plan for rolling that out across

government offices — the 60 Service B.C. offices — or where the ministry

plans to place that focus?

Hon. J. Sims: I just want to give a little bit of an overview, and I hope that

will help to elucidate. We have already spent $250,000 and put in

electric-vehicle-charging stations. Other than that, you will see it in

the budget line, under the capital funding. Under energy

efficiency–related facility projects, CleanBC: $8.5 million is allocated

there. But as my colleagues across the way know, we work with other

ministries.

[11:50 a.m.]

For example, the park board — we’re working with them. When they

put in their electric-vehicle-charging stations, we will build them.

They will actually have the money for those projects in their own

ministries. As you know, our ministry does support the work of other

ministries.

We also bill back for work we do. So for doing the government

buildings that are under our jurisdiction, the moneys sit under CleanBC,

the energy efficiency–related facility, and that is in the capital

budget. It’s $8.5 million, in total. But not all of it, and we all

understand that, is for vehicle charging.

Noting the hour, I move that the committee rise and report

progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:51 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2019: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada