Fourth Session, 41st Parliament

(2019) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 197

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

Tributes

Gerry Furney

Hon. C. Trevena

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Kathryn Gibbons

S. Chandra Herbert

Paul Lazenby

D. Routley

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 2 — Protection of Public Participation Act

Hon. D. Eby

Bill 3 — Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act, 2019

Hon. S. Robinson

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Real Acts of Caring Week

R. Glumac

Lunar new year celebrations

T. Wat

Art Kube

J. Routledge

Canadian Pacific Holiday Train and food bank fundraiser

L. Throness

Moose Hide anti-violence campaign

B. D’Eith

Jordyn Huitema

J. Martin

Oral Questions

Ride-sharing services

A. Wilkinson

Hon. J. Horgan

J. Thornthwaite

Hon. C. Trevena

Response to Speaker’s report and Clerk meetings with MLAs

A. Weaver

Hon. M. Farnworth

Hon. J. Horgan

Ride-sharing services

J. Johal

Hon. C. Trevena

Ride-sharing regulations and conflict-of-interest concerns

L. Throness

Hon. C. Trevena

S. Bond

G. Kyllo

P. Milobar

M. Polak

Tabling Documents

Labour Relations Board, annual report, 2017

Orders of the Day

Throne Speech Debate

R. Singh

R. Leonard

P. Milobar

A. Weaver

S. Thomson

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2019

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Mr. Speaker: Members, in beginning introductions, if I may make the first

introduction, and that is to introduce and welcome a new Table

Officer.

Earlier this month Suzie Seo joined the Legislative Assembly as

Parliamentary Counsel for a one-year term. Suzie has a wealth of

parliamentary experience, having previously served as Parliamentary Counsel,

Assistant Law Clerk and Table Officer for the Senate of Canada for many

years, and joins us from her position in the office of legisla­tive

counsel and Ministry of Attorney General.

I should add she’s joined here today in the gallery by her husband,

Dan Bourgoin, and her two sons, Noah and Adam.

Let’s all please give them a great welcome. We are very lucky to have

her.

R. Chouhan: It gives me great pleasure to introduce two of my dear friends. Mark

Olsen is the president of LiUNA. We call it LiUNA 1611, but it is the

Labourer’s International Union of North America. With him is Bruce Ferguson,

my other dear friend, who has served the labour movement for the last many,

many decades. He’s the president of the retired members of LiUNA. Please

join me to give them a very warm welcome.

D. Davies: It gives me great pleasure to introduce two people that made the trek

through planes, trains, automobiles and ferries a couple days ago, all the

way from Fort St. John: my constituency assistant, Tamara Wilkinson, coming

down today to view all the great happenings in the House, as well as Wendy

Maldonado. She is an intern in my office in Fort St. John, and she is a

social services worker diploma student who is doing a practicum at my

office. If the House would make them both feel welcome.

[1:40 p.m.]

E. Foster: It gives me great pleasure today to introduce a young man from my

riding who has a great interest in poli­tics. This is his first

opportunity to see the House. He is a member of my executive. He is a

vice-president of the B.C. Young Liberals. He will be heading to Thompson

Rivers University in the fall, so I will lose him out of my riding, but my

colleagues from Kamloops will have him to work in their riding. Would the

House please make Corbin Kelley very welcome.

Tributes

GERRY FURNEY

Hon. C. Trevena: Yesterday in the throne speech, the Lieutenant-Governor recognized

those British Columbians who had passed away in the last year. I would

just like the House to recognize a legend of B.C., from my constituency,

who was mentioned, who did die just last week: a former mayor of Port

McNeill, Gerry Furney. I think there’s nobody in this House who hasn’t

got a fond recollection of Mayor Furney. He was a true legend in his

time and has left a legacy for the north Island that will go on for

many, many years.

Mr. Furney emigrated from Ireland. He came to Port McNeill in 1956

as a logger, ten years before it became incorporated. When it was

incorporated, he became an alderman, and he became the mayor. While

there is no way to match across the country who has been the

longest-serving mayor, I think that with his more than 40 years of

service, he was set to be Canada’s longest-serving mayor. He stood down

five years ago, and the role has been taken twice since then. Nobody has

been able to continue with his solid majority in Port

McNeill.

Really, he invested so much in the north Island, in the community,

in Port McNeill. He will be sorely missed, not just for his

community-mindedness, not just for his great heart and great ideas that

he had — some of which we agreed with, some which we didn’t agree with,

but he was always open to talk about them — but for other things. He was

a very social man. My colleagues know he played the trombone. He wrote

poetry. In fact, his poetry book Popcorn for Breakfast is in

the Legislative Library.

I hope that the House will pass on condolences of this House to

his wife, Carmel, his children, and make sure that the memory of Gerry

Furney will live long in British Columbia.

Introductions by Members

J. Routledge: I am delighted to introduce Laird Cronk, the president of the B.C.

Federation of Labour. Please join me in giving him a warm

welcome.

Tributes

KATHRYN GIBBONS

S. Chandra Herbert: I wanted to speak to honour the memory of a constituent of mine

who passed away yesterday. Kathryn Gibbons was an incredible mom, an

incredible activist. She formed the West End Families in Action

committee — really, a voice full of life and joy.

Her husband, Tom, just said: “Do something fantastic in Kathryn’s

memory. Be an activist. Speak up for someone or perform a random act of

kindness.” I think that’s a good message, good advice for every day of

the year.

I just want to say thank you to Kathryn for being such a light in

our community.

PAUL LAZENBY

D. Routley: I’d like the House to help me celebrate and remember Paul Lazenby,

who as a Cowichan Valley resident has been a volunteer and a dedicated

servant to his community for many, many years. His dear partner, Rhoda

Taylor, a dear friend of mine, has lost her life partner, and we are all

forlorn about that. Paul never lost an idealism that fuelled an

overwhelming desire to make things better — better for community, better

for family, better for environment.

Those who loved Paul and love Rhoda, and I count myself chief

among those, are devastated by his loss.

I’d like to have the House remember what a dedicated and lovely

person Paul Lazenby has been.

Introductions by Members

R. Glumac: I have two introductions today. First, I’d like to introduce a good

friend and mentor from my constituency whose energy and enthusiasm grow

exponentially every single day: Jacqui Boyer. Would the House make her feel

welcome.

[1:45 p.m.]

I’d also like to introduce Coquitlam school district elementary school

counsellor Harriette Chang. Almost 50 students, who you’ll see up there, are

joining us in the Legislature today. Harriette teachers at Heritage Mountain

and Mundy Road Elementary School. Students accompanying her are representing

five schools in school district 43 — Heritage Mountain, Mundy Road

Elementary, Charles Best, Port Moody and Gleneagle secondary schools — and

one school in the Okanagan school district, Summerland Middle School.

Accompanying them are numerous parent volunteers, teachers and

principals.

They’re here to help us celebrate Real Acts of Caring Week and are

truly making a positive difference, not only in their own community but

across Canada. Would the House make them feel welcome.

D. Ashton: I, too, would like to emphasize what the member for Port Moody had

stated. Today I’m really proud to have some folks here from Summerland that

have come down to show what many of us do in this House. We all do acts of

real caring. It’s not noticed all the time, but each and every one of us

steps out of that boundary quite often and ensures that others are

helped.

The kids from Summerland, if I could just be so quick: Lily Keys,

Mackenzie Stevens, Kate Robinson, Sam Plant, Everett McKinley, Samantha

Robertson and Maria Scarfo; the teacher, Melissa Burdock, who actually

brought this to Summerland Middle School; the principal, Darcy Mullin; and

last but not least, and I may have missed one, Jillian Stevens, a neighbour

of mine.

Would the House please make these kids and all the other kids here,

who have really stepped forward in society to make a difference.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 2 — PROTECTION OF PUBLIC

PARTICIPATION

ACT

Hon. D. Eby presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Protection of Public Participation

Act.

Hon. D. Eby: I move the bill be introduced and read a first time

now.

I’m pleased to introduce the Protection of Public Participation

Act. The bill is virtually identical to Bill 32, 2018, introduced on the

15th of May last year. However, as the bill did not proceed during the

limited time available in the fall sitting of last session, the

legislation is now being re-introduced in the new session.

The only substantial difference is that in this bill, it is

proposed that the act would apply to litigation commenced on or after

May 15, 2018, that being the date this legislation was first introduced,

in order that the legislation not apply to circumstances arising prior

to its introduction.

The purpose of this act is to enhance public participation by

protecting expression on matters of public interest and litigation that

unduly limits such expression. Lawsuits that are improperly motivated by

the intent to silence expression are often referred to as strategic

lawsuits against public participation, or by the acronym

SLAPP.

The act would not, however, require the difficult assessment of a

plaintiff’s motive. Rather, the act would provide for a legal basis and

expedited process by which, at an early stage in the proceedings, a

court would be able to determine whether a lawsuit arises out of

expression on a matter of public interest and, if so, to weigh whether

the likely harm to a plaintiff is serious enough that the public

interest in allowing the lawsuit to continue would outweigh the public

interest in protecting the expression that gave rise to the lawsuit. In

so doing, the act would improve access to justice, would balance the

protection of freedom of expression with the protection of reputation

and economic interests.

The act is based on the Uniform Protection of Public Participation

Act adopted by the Uniform Law Conference of Canada in 2017, which in

turn is based on the 2015 Ontario act of the same name.

Many British Columbians and a large number of civil society groups

in B.C. have called for legislation to protect public participation. In

2017, the Union of B.C. Municipalities adopted a resolution endorsing

such legislation, and in February of last year, 15 eminent legal figures

signed an open letter calling for legislation based on the model of the

Ontario act.

The ability of citizens to participate freely in discussion and

debate on matters of public interest without fear of undue legal threat

is vital to a vibrant democratic society. The Protection of Public

Participation Act will be of great importance in protecting that

fundamental democratic value.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. D. Eby: I move the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 2, Protection of Public Participation Act, introduced, read a

first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading

at the next sitting of the House after today.

[1:50 p.m.]

BILL 3 — MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND

HOUSING STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2019

Hon. S. Robinson presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes

Amendment Act, 2019.

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time

now.

I’m pleased to introduce Bill 3, the Municipal Affairs and Housing

Statutes Amendment Act, 2019. This bill amends the following statutes:

the Building Act, the Cultus Lake Park Act, the Local Government Act,

the Resort Municipality of Whistler Act and the Vancouver

Charter.

The amendments address regulatory gaps in issues that have been

identified in the Building Act, make targeted changes to help modernize

key aspects of the Cultus Lake Park Act, allow local governments to

better respond to various community needs and ensure that local

government legislation is up to date.

The amendments will have meaningful impact by ensuring that local

government legislation is clear and operates effectively and by enabling

local governments to respond to circumstances in their

communities.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Robinson: I move this bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 3, Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act, 2019,

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

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

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

REAL ACTS OF CARING WEEK

R. Glumac: Giving flowers to strangers, buying someone a coffee, asking

respectful questions in question period — these are all examples of real

acts of caring. It’s doing something kind for another person without

expecting anything in return. It began in 2005 in grades 4 and 5 in

Central Community School in Port Coquitlam. Thanks to the continued

efforts of the students that are here today, the idea continues to

spread.

To date, there have been 55 local proclamations passed in

municipalities recognizing Real Acts of Caring Week. Each one of these

was initiated by local students. I’m pleased to announce that, once

again, our government is issuing a Real Acts of Caring Week proclamation

for February 10 to 16, 2019. That’s going to be happening right after

question period.

This initiative is helping students feel safe and welcome and

connected at school. It’s helping to reduce bullying, and it’s

supporting students’ overall mental health and well-being. These

students are true leaders, and it’s great to have so many of them here

today so that we can honour their leadership and commitment to spreading

kindness.

I think the best way that we can do that is for all of us to do

our part to promote kindness and empathy to our colleagues, to our

neighbours, to our co-workers and to all British Columbians — not just

during Real Acts of Caring Week but all year long.

LUNAR NEW YEAR CELEBRATIONS

T. Wat: It’s a great honour for me to rise in the House today to take note

of one of the most celebrated festivals among Chinese, Korean,

Vietnamese, Singaporean, Malaysian and many other communities the past

week.

February 5 marked the beginning of the month-long lunar new year

celebrations. The Leader of the Official Opposition, our colleagues and

I were proud to join local communities in attending two of the largest

celebrations, including the countdown at the Aberdeen Centre in my

Richmond North Centre riding and the Vancouver Chinatown

parade.

The countdown and parade have attracted thousands of participants,

spectators and cultural groups. British Columbia is home to a large

Asian population. Almost 1.3 million or 28.3 percent of British

Columbians are immigrants, the majority of which were born in

Asia.

In our province, lunar new year carries a meaning beyond the

traditions of just family dinners, lion and dragon dances and red

envelopes. It is an occasion that reminds us of the contributions Asian

Canadians have made to the province’s culture and to our economy, making

British Columbia a diverse and vibrant place to live.

Being a multicultural society helps us attract skilled immigrants

to grow our economy and nurture understanding among different cultures.

As the critic for multiculturalism and a former Minister for

Multiculturalism, I have always recognized that our strength lies in

tolerance, acceptance, mutual understanding, harmony and cooperation

among the many people that call this province home.

[1:55 p.m.]

And 2019 is the Year of the Golden Pig, which symbolizes wisdom,

luck and fortune. I wish everyone a happy, healthy, prosperous Year of

the Golden Pig.

新年快樂.

Xin Nian Kuai Le.

萬事如意.

Wan Shi Ru Yi.

身體健康.

Shen tin Jian Kang.

恭喜發財.

Gung Hay Fat Choy.

[Text and transliteration provided by T.

Wat.]

ART KUBE

J. Routledge: It is with great sadness that I rise today to mourn the passing of

a labour legend and community leader. Art Kube passed away on Sunday,

February 10. He leaves behind a rich legacy of advocacy and activism.

Brother Kube’s commitment to the people of British Columbia and Canada

never wavered, and for that, he was awarded the Order of Canada in

Art was born in Poland in 1935. He apprenticed in structural

layout in Vienna before moving to Canada in 1954. Art spent his early

years working as a heavy-equipment operator and steel fabricator and

volunteering as an in-plant organizer for the United Steelworkers of

America.

Art was an organizer and then regional director of education with

the Canadian Labour Congress. He was elected president of the B.C.

Federation of Labour in 1983, during which time he chaired Operation

Solidarity, one of the largest worker-led movements in B.C.’s

history.

Art’s volunteer activities were as varied as his union work. Art

was a founding member of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, a

founding member of the national co-op housing foundation and a founding

member of Seniors on Guard for Medicare. He was a longtime board member

of the United Way of the Lower Mainland and Council of Canadians. He

also helped negotiate the creation and implementation of the labour

studies program at Simon Fraser University.

After he formally retired in 1995, Art became president of the

Council of Senior Citizens Organizations of British Columbia and a

director of the New Vista Society, a non-profit housing and long-term

care facility for seniors. He was also president of the National

Pensioners and Senior Citizens Federation.

Art Kube, you inspired generations of leaders who came behind

you.

CANADIAN PACIFIC HOLIDAY TRAIN

AND FOOD BANK

FUNDRAISER

L. Throness: Every year for two decades, the CP Holiday Train travels for

nearly a month from Montreal to Coquitlam and many places in between,

stopping at locations big and small across Canada to give a concert in

December and raise money for food banks. Over the years, they’ve raised

$16 million and 4.5 million pounds of food for food banks

nationwide.

One of those regular stops is at the town of Agassiz in my riding,

and it’s a big hit. People travel for many miles along with their kids

to greet the brightly lit train, see the side of a boxcar open up to

reveal a full band and enjoy a concert, this year by the Sam Roberts

Band. I’ve attended in blizzard and driving rain, but that doesn’t seem

to deter a crowd of thousands.

This year Canadian Pacific gave a cheque for $7,000 to the Agassiz

food bank for their Christmas hampers, and the event sparked further

donations from the audience, which brought with them almost 1,500 pounds

of food and $1,500 in cash as well. I had the privilege of speaking to

the crowd to thank CP for its efforts, and this year I reminded everyone

that CP wouldn’t need to do this. There are a number of roads into

Vancouver, but only one railroad track, and every year CP dedicates that

precious space to those who are most needy at Christmas.

The Holiday Train reminds us that the people of Canadian Pacific

have big hearts, and in a time when the company is hurting from the

tragic loss of three staff members in a derailment in our province, our

hearts go back out to them both in sympathy and in gratitude.

Special thanks to Mike LoVecchio of CP for being there on the

ground every year to direct traffic and welcome guests. Thanks to the

performers who travel and play in all kinds of winter weather. And

thanks to the good people of Canadian Pacific for going thousands of

miles out of their way for food banks every year.

MOOSE HIDE

ANTI-VIOLENCE CAMPAIGN

B. D’Eith: At lunchtime today, members from all sides of the House gathered

on the steps of our parliament proclaiming today Moose Hide Campaign

Day. This is the eighth year of the B.C.-born campaign. During this

time, the campaign has grown from small beginnings — a moose, two

people, Paul Lacerte and his daughter Raven, and a big idea to inspire

men to stand up against violence towards women and children.

[2:00 p.m.]

No one should ever have to live in fear. No one should have to

know fear in the company of a loved one. In the last eight years, these

small pieces of moose hide have become a huge symbol. Last year the

campaign reached a landmark one million pins, and this year it reached

1.5 million pins.

This begs the question: what makes these pins so powerful? They

start conversations. They spark debate. They make strangers stop in the

street and ask questions, because it’s silence where violence can

flourish. Now, sometimes violence is in plain sight, because people

don’t understand what they’re seeing. Sometimes they just don’t want to

see it or don’t want to believe.

That’s why we gathered on the steps today. That’s why we wear the

moose hide pins: because we want to talk about violence. We need to see

it when it happens under our noses. We need to recognize the signs so we

can take action.

Today it was really exciting to hear of a campaign launched with

K-to-12 students, because education is the key to ending systemic

violence. The children and youth on the moose hide learning journey

today are the parents of tomorrow who will teach their kids healthy

attitudes towards women and children.

Now, my challenge to all of my colleagues here in this chamber is

to take the message of the Moose Hide Campaign Day to heart. Talk to

your sons and daughters, nephews, nieces and grandkids about why

violence is never the answer. Talk to them about a moose, a father and a

daughter on the Highway of Tears and why one small square of moose hide

can change lives.

Haychka .

JORDYN HUITEMA

J. Martin: Jordyn Huitema is a 17-year-old grade 12 soccer phenomenon from

Chilliwack who, in 2018, won the Canadian Soccer Association’s female

Youth International Player of the Year award. When she turns 18 in May,

it has been reported she will be turning professional with the French

powerhouse Paris Saint-Germain Football Club, a team she has previously

played two games for in the 2018 International Champions Cup.

Jordyn was also the recipient of the Golden Boot award at last

year’s Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association

of Football under-20 Women’s Championship. This young soccer phenom has

had a myriad of accomplishments, including playing for Canada’s under-15

team for three years, two years for Canada’s under-17 squad and two

years with the under-20 team.

Jordyn has also had the privilege of playing for our senior

women’s national team and has played in 16 international matches for

this distinguished squad, which is ranked fifth in the world. She first

played for this team at the age of 15. In the Confederation of North,

Central America and Caribbean Association of Football World Cup

qualifying round last year, she scored an incredible four goals in a

match against Cuba. Did I mention she was a phenom?

If that wasn’t enough, last year Jordyn became the first

participant to play for the under-17, the under-20 and the senior

women’s national team all in the same year. Last fall she captained the

under-17 team to a fourth-place finish in the under-17 FIFA World Cup,

an event in which she scored three goals.

Will the House please join me in recognizing this exceptional

young woman from Chilliwack, Jordyn Huitema.

Oral Questions

RIDE-SHARING SERVICES

A. Wilkinson: We gathered here yesterday for the throne speech, of course, the

first day of the session. We were greeted by a throne speech that was

virtually devoid of content, apart from a few tidbits for

consumers.

Now, there’s one major item of consumer interest that this

government has chosen to thoroughly and completely obstruct. Yesterday

at Vancouver Airport, there were between 200 and 300 people waiting for

taxis. There was no taxi service available in real terms in Victoria or

Vancouver. Yet we have this government doing everything it can to block

ride-sharing. It’s available in every other part of the world, and we

have this government creating a regulatory nightmare of quotas, caps and

price controls.

Last week it reached the point where the federal Competition

Bureau weighed in. I don’t know if this has ever happened

before.

Interjections.

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

Members.

Proceed.

A. Wilkinson: I’m not sure this has ever happened before — that the Competition

Bureau has felt the need to weigh in on the ineptitude of a provincial

government. But they came out and said that this is simply unacceptable

in a modern society.

[2:05 p.m.]

Can the Transportation Minister explain to us why it is that she’s

triggered the remarks from the Competition Bureau that British Columbia

is far, far behind the world in consumer interests?

Hon. J. Horgan: It’s great to be back in the Legislature, it’s great to be back in

question period, and it’s great to see the Leader of the Opposition

starting with kindness and generosity in his first question.

Dismissing consumer protection as tidbits is ironic when he then

segues into: “What are we going to do to let consumers have more

choice?”

Well, I’ll tell the member. I’ll join with members on this side in

saying that for five years, ride-sharing tried to break through the wall

of Liberal indifference to consumers. It was only when the government

changed that they were able to enable ride-sharing, and it’s coming this

year. We’re pretty excited about it.

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

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: Well, it’s a pleasure to see that the Premier has decided to

continue the tradition of protecting his ministers from questions. We’ll

try this one again.

The Competition Bureau said: “Instead of regulating things like

caps on the number of drivers, geographic boundaries and price

regulation, just let the principles of supply and demand decide what is

best.”

Perhaps this time we can extract an answer from the minister

responsible rather than the Premier, but I see he’s ready to leap to his

feet to answer the question. Has the minister responded to the

Competition Bureau…?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, if we may allow the Leader of the Official Opposition to

finish his question.

A. Wilkinson: Has the Minister of Transportation responded to the Competition

Bureau’s critique, and what did she have to say?

Hon. J. Horgan: I apologize for my unbridled enthusiasm, but I’ve been waiting

months and months and months for the Leader of the Opposition to come

forth with some substantive questions. It’s ironic that he starts with

an area where his government, when he was in power, had ample

opportunity to address the shortcomings of ride opportunities for the

public, to put in place consumer protections to ensure that the existing

industry was protected while we introduced competition that would free

up the market for the people who are asking for this.

Again, I thank the member for his question. I’m delighted to know

that we’re now on the same page. All sides of this House want to see

ride-sharing coming as quickly as possible, and the good news is,

because of this government, it’s coming this year.

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

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: Well, the Premier seems to have embarked on his little study in

glaciers, as it melts in front of us and takes two years to implement

something that could have been done in two weeks.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Thank you.

A. Wilkinson: The Premier’s concept of serving consumers’ interests is to create

blockades, price controls, caps on supply — all designed to obstruct the

consumer interest, when everyone knows the level playing field required

for this to proceed and to keep the taxi industry viable is well known

and well described. But this Premier hasn’t got the necessary drive to

get this done and is dragging it out over two years, perhaps to open an

election window.

Premier, why the delay?

Hon. J. Horgan: Based on the results of the by-election in Nanaimo, an election

window is something I’m sure the member on the other side will want to

jump through at an early opportunity.

In all seriousness, the question about introducing ride-hailing in

British Columbia has been active since 2012. Now, I appreciate that the

Leader of the Opposition just arrived in 2013, but there are members on

the front bench of the opposition who were here in 2012 and did

absolutely nothing.

After the last election, we came into government hopeful that we

would be able to access some sense of progress over that five-year

period and found zero. It was only after the election, after the

introduction of legislation on this side, that the courageous people in

the Liberal caucus decided they had a solution, and it would only take

about five minutes.

Well, if it only takes five minutes, hon. Member, why did it take

you five years to get zero for the people of British

Columbia?

J. Thornthwaite: Every group that is interested in ride-sharing, apart from all of

the NDP’s friends, are slamming the quotas, the boundary restrictions

and the heavy-handed price controls. Even TransLink is telling the

minister: “Hurry up and get with the times.”

My question is for the minister. Has the minister told TransLink

why she is blocking ride-sharing for British Columbians?

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. C. Trevena: I’m very pleased to be talking about ride-hailing again in this

Legislature and answering the opposition’s questions again. The

opposition, when they were government, the B.C. Liberal government….

Five years, as the Premier said. They had five years, from when Uber

first came to British Columbia, to get it right. They did

nothing.

With the support of our friends, the Third Party, the Green Party,

we got legislation through the House. The Passenger Transportation

Amendment Act is in place, and by fall this year there will be app-based

ride-hailing in B.C.

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

supplemental.

J. Thornthwaite: Except that nobody believes ride-sharing will come under your

legislation.

Everyone agrees that the quotas for NDP friends are a bad idea for

consumers. Even the Vancouver police department calls the minister’s

boundary controls “counterproductive and one of the problems we’re

trying to solve.”

When is the minister going to stop blocking

ride-sharing?

Hon. C. Trevena: I know that the member has only been here in this place for five

years so may still just be getting to grips with the fact that when you

bring in legislation that leads to regulation to enable something, it

takes time to get those regulations in place.

I’ll leave it there for the member. We are

introducing….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, if we may hear the response.

Hon. C. Trevena: We have the legislation in place. We are working on the

regulations. App-based ride-hailing will be in B.C. later this

year.

RESPONSE TO SPEAKER’S REPORT

AND CLERK MEETINGS WITH

MLA s

A. Weaver: While the official opposition and government quibble over the

bringing in of ride-hailing here in the province of British Columbia, it

could have happened four years ago if my private members’ bill had been

debated on this floor. B.C. Greens stand ready to ensure and bring

ride-hailing here. There is no excuse for delays — no government excuse,

no opposition excuse. Let’s get on with it and do it.

Hon. Speaker, it’s been three weeks since the 76-page report that

you wrote containing allegations of misconduct by senior officers of the

British Columbia Legislative Assembly was released. To suggest that the

public is outraged over the culture of entitlement exposed in that

report would be a gross understatement, yet government has been largely

silent on the matter, almost acting as if nothing has happened. Frankly,

this is irresponsible and unacceptable.

My question is to the Premier. What is his government planning to

do to increase accountability and transparency in this place as a first

step to rebuilding public trust?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question. I would say that every member

in this House takes that report extremely seriously. That’s one of the

reasons why it was publicly released. It’s one of the reasons why the

Legislative Assembly Management Committee has been discussing and

looking at ways of dealing with that report.

More importantly, from the government’s perspective, hon. Member,

most recently we had a letter received, which members of your caucus

also received and which was made public, from the three key independent

officers of this Legislature — the Merit Commissioner, the Office of the

Privacy Commissioner and the Ombudsperson — on three important reforms

that could in fact take place that would help to restore confidence in

many of the activities that this chamber is responsible for.

I have made it clear, on the part of the government, that we will

accept every single one of those recommendations, and I also made it

clear that every single one of them will be implemented. We have already

let the independent officers know that we intend to work with them to

implement them, and they have expressed satisfaction with

that.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Third Party on a supplemental.

A. Weaver: Well, that answer demonstrates exactly the point I’m trying to

make: yet another reactive approach by government and no proactive

leadership on a file that’s crying out for leadership.

[2:15 p.m.]

Rebuilding public trust in this institution for British

Columbians, listening and responding to external parties, is one thing.

We need leadership from this government, and it’s sorely missing on this

file.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the report is the alleged

partisan nature of the Clerk’s office. The report details 39 entries of

in-province trips taken by the Clerk since March 2017 for individual

meetings. Four of these involved former B.C. Liberal Speaker Bill

Barisoff. Four involved the former Premier Christy Clark, all of which

occurred after she was no longer Premier. Fourteen were with former B.C.

Liberal MLA Geoff Plant. Two were with the B.C. Liberal MLA from

Abbotsford West. One was for a meeting at the B.C. Liberal Party

offices.

Let me be clear. The Clerk has never once visited the B.C. Green

Party, nor any of our MLAs, outside of this Legislature.

My question to the Premier is this. How many times since March

2017 has the Clerk visited the B.C. NDP party office or an individual

MLA’s office in Vancouver or elsewhere in the province of British

Columbia, those MLAs being NDP MLAs?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member for his question and his concern about the

report tabled by the Speaker in the break after the last sitting of the

House. I agree with him that it’s incumbent upon all of us, all members

here, to demonstrate leadership. It’s not one party. It’s not one

person. It’s all of us that have to demonstrate to the public that we’re

serious and genuine about real reform to make sure that there’s

transparency and absolute certainty that the activities of all members

of this House, all Table Officers of this House….

Welcome, Sue, to the Table. I bet you didn’t count on this, did

you.

In all seriousness, the Clerk has never been to my office, whether

it be at the Legislature or in my constituency. He has never visited the

party office of the B.C. NDP. I have no knowledge of any of the members

of my caucus ever having a visit from the Clerk of the

Legislature.

Again, the questions of partisanship are in your report. The

questions of partisanship are in the public domain. And I will remind

members that when the Clerk, Mr. James, was appointed, it was not with

the support of the official opposition — the first time in our history

that an individual was appointed to head this jurisdiction, to head this

table, that did not have unanimous consent. I think we need to start, as

we go forward, to ensure that all of us, all 87 of us, are focused on

restoring public confidence in the work that we do.

I know that each member, regardless of their political stripe,

regardless of their former vocation, came to this place with a good

conscience to make life better for their neighbours. I know that in my

heart, and I know that we can demonstrate that to the public if we work

together and not hector each other on who was right and who was wrong

and whose fault it is. There’s a problem here. We all have to fix

it.

RIDE-SHARING SERVICES

J. Johal: This NDP regulatory disaster is deliberately designed to block

ride-sharing in favour of NDP friends and insiders. This is what senior

Lyft executive Joseph Okpaku told me: “We’ve never entered a market with

all these restrictions in place.”

To the Transportation Minister, why is she blocking

ride-sharing?

Hon. C. Trevena: I thank the member for his question. I find it very amusing to

think that we’re being accused of blocking ride-hailing when that side,

as the B.C. Liberal government, had five years to do something and did

nothing. We acted as quickly as we could to bring in legislation. We

have legislation.

The only benefit of that lengthy delay and the fact that the then

government failed on the ride-hailing file is that we’ve been able to

learn from other jurisdictions. We’ve been able to learn, to ensure that

we get it right for B.C. Garland Chow has said — he’s a professor

emeritus of transportation at UBC — that we aren’t going to need a whole

bunch of band-aids next year and the year after because we’re going to

get it right the first time.

Mr. Speaker: Richmond-Queensborough on a supplemental.

J. Johal: Last year the Crown Corporations Committee was looking into

ride-hailing. We presented a thorough report. We should be moving

forward at this moment. Instead, the Transportation Minister wants the

committee to look at class 4 licensing quotas and boundaries. It’s

clearly there, clearly stated by her, to stifle ride-hailing.

[2:20 p.m.]

The ride-sharing industry is very clear that they will never come

to British Columbia under this minister’s draconian rules, which is

exactly what NDP friends and insiders have asked. They will benefit

directly from blocking what consumers want.

Why is the NDP putting the interests of their friends above the

interests of consumers?

Hon. C. Trevena: As I say, we are learning from other jurisdictions. We’re seeing

what has happened in other jurisdictions, which have been dealing with

incredible congestion thanks to the introduction of app-based

ride-hailing. We are learning from that. We have a commitment to safety

of passengers, drivers and other people on the roads. We cannot ignore

that responsibility.

I have to say that I really find it incomprehensible how the

opposition can continue to say that we have been blocking things, that

we are favouring one side or the other when the former Transportation

Minister, now the MLA for Kamloops–South Thompson, said back in 2014….

He was the minister. He was faced with ride-hailing, which that side did

not bring in.

He said at that time: “My message to Uber and any other company

like Uber is: we have rules. We have laws in this province that are all

about protecting the travelling public and ensuring people can travel

safely. If Uber wants to operate in this province, they’re going to have

to operate under the same rules taxi operators currently abide

by.”

We have moved beyond that. We are working to design the

regulations to ensure that app-based ride-hailing can come to

B.C.

RIDE-SHARING REGULATIONS

AND CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST

CONCERNS

L. Throness: There are only 234 taxi licences in B.C., and just one of them can

be very valuable — hundreds of thousands of dollars. Their value would

be directly impacted by decisions on ride-sharing. If the minister or a

member of her office working on the file had any private interest in a

taxi licence, it would obviously be a perceived or a potential conflict

of interest.

My question: if the minister found such a conflict in her office,

would she remove the staff member from the file?

Hon. C. Trevena: I thank the member for his question. I’m somewhat confused by it,

but I’m sure that his supplemental will try and bring some more light on

it.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Chilliwack-Kent on a supplemental.

L. Throness: I would like to take this a little bit further, because the public

needs to know the motivations of those working on the ride-sharing file.

If anyone, either directly or through an immediate family member, owns a

taxi licence, they shouldn’t be making the rules for

ride-sharing.

Would the minister require anyone with a potential or perceived

conflict of interest on ride-sharing to recuse themselves from the

file?

Hon. C. Trevena: Thank you to the member. I’ve got to say I have every faith in the

professionalism of all my staff, both my political staff and the public

servants who’ve been working diligently on this file, who absolutely

have integrity. I think the member is making insinuations…. I think it

would behoove all of us to either be clear about them or drop

them.

S. Bond: The Parliamentary Secretary for Sport and Multiculturalism is the

lead government member on a committee that is making recommendations on

ride-sharing regulations. However, licensing documents from the

Passenger Transportation Board confirm that the parliamentary

secretary’s immediate family member is the owner and operator of a

Bluebird Cab taxi licence.

To the Minister of Transportation, is she aware of this perceived

conflict?

Hon. C. Trevena: I think that the member is trying to dig up some dirt that does

not exist. I have huge respect for the work of all members of the

committee, who have been working diligently — both in the first round

and in the second round, this latest round — to ensure that we are

bringing app-based ride-hailing to B.C.

I think the question that this member really needs to address is

why we can bring app-based ride-hailing to B.C. and that side of the

House was unable to do so.

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

supplemental.

[2:25 p.m.]

S. Bond: That’s a very unfortunate characterization of a legitimate

question that British Columbians are asking. Most British Columbians

have a pretty hard time accepting that someone can make the rules for

ride-sharing when their family owns a taxi licence. This government

continues to block ride-sharing, and ultimately, it benefits the private

interests of a member of the committee making the rules about

ride-sharing.

Will the minister stand up and explain her member’s involvement in

the ride-sharing file given his family’s private interests?

Hon. C. Trevena: I think that every member of this Legislature behaves with

integrity. We are all honourable people. We are all appointed to various

roles as honourable people. The member that the opposition member for

Prince George–Valemount is talking about has been active on the

committee, as have all members been active on the committee. They are

coming up with recommendations that I as the minister will be making

decisions upon.

I’m the decision-maker. The buck stops with me. It does not stop

with the committee members.

G. Kyllo: The Parliamentary Secretary for Sport and Multi­culturalism

has been one of the most active members of the government side on the

ride-sharing file. Just weeks ago he led the government side in a

meeting where he grilled ride-sharing representatives for what he

claimed were safety concerns.

Given the private interests of his family, can the parliamentary

secretary explain his extensive involvement in this file?

Hon. C. Trevena: I believe I’ve answered that question.

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

G. Kyllo: We do know that the parliamentary secretary has been actively

involved in the file, both publicly and behind the scenes. Emails from

the Premier’s chief of staff, Geoff Meggs, last fall make it extremely

clear that political staff were directly in contact with the

parliamentary secretary to discuss the Hara review on taxis.

Will the parliamentary secretary disclose the nature of those

internal conversations and how he has worked behind the scenes to block

ride-sharing in B.C.?

Hon. C. Trevena: Obviously, the member is aware that he’s not allowed to ask a

parliamentary secretary a question. I think I have answered the

questions here. I think that we’re very clear that we believe that

everybody who’s working on both sides of this House — in all three parts

of this House — has integrity and wants to get to a solution that works

for all of British Columbia. That is what my focus is as the minister

who is making the final decision.

P. Milobar: It’s disappointing to hear how much confusion there seems to be

from the Minister of Transportation today on almost every question

asked. However, what this really is about today…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, if we may hear the question. Thank

you.

P. Milobar: …is the serving of private interests of the NDP friends and

insiders, friends like Moe Sihota. The minister has rolled out the red

carpet for the NDP-connected taxi cab app, Kater, a business backed by

private interests that want ride-sharing blocked.

Why is the minister favouring Kater over other

companies?

Hon. C. Trevena: This government is neither associated nor affiliated with Kater or

the developers in any way. Any suggestion that it is, is untrue. I think

what that side of the House is trying to do is deflect from the reality

that for five years, the B.C. Liberals absolutely failed on this file.

For five years, they had the opportunity to do something, but they did

nothing. We will ensure that app-based ride-hailing is available in

British Columbia this year.

Mr. Speaker: Kamloops–North Thompson on a supplemental.

[2:30 p.m.]

P. Milobar: I haven’t been in this House for that long, but even I know this

government’s approach to ride-hailing has Moe Sihota’s fingerprints all

over it.

When did the minister make a backroom deal with Moe Sihota and

others connected with Kater to give Kater the advantage over other

ride-hailing apps?

Hon. C. Trevena: I’m stunned at this line of questioning. I know that these are

challenges that are really unfair, but it’s the classic question. I

would wonder if the member would like to have this discussion out in the

corridor where he’s not protected by parliamentary privilege.

As I have said, our government is not associated with Kater. Our

government is committed to getting app-based ride-hailing in operation

in British Columbia, because people have waited too long. They have

waited too long for this to come. They knew, from 2012, that there was

this solution out there. Five years, and the B.C. Liberals ignored it.

“Five years,” they said. “We will get to it eventually.” We got to work

on it immediately, and we now have legislation in place.

M. Polak: Well, I’ll be really clear. I’d be happy to talk about any of this

outside in the hallway, and I imagine the minister may be forced to very

shortly.

The facts are these. There is a member who has influence on the

file whose family has an interest, ownership, in a cab company. That’s a

fact. The fact is that Moe Sihota is directly working together with

Kater.

The facts, as we’ve displayed today, are that in spite of all of

the commentary from those in the public realm, those third parties who

have an interest in pursuing ride-sharing and supporting it have pointed

out the apparent flaws that exist in the legislation, the flaws that are

going to ensure that ride-hailing never gets here.

Well, I would put to you that they aren’t just flaws. They aren’t

just mistakes. These are very purposeful actions to ensure a certain

outcome. What is that outcome? Well, the public wants ride-hailing. The

NDP friends don’t. The minister’s decision. Whose side is she

on?

Hon. C. Trevena: I’m happy to receive a question from that member who, as I think

this House is aware, was a former Transportation Minister herself. In

fact, I think she must have been the Transportation Minister when Uber

first came to B.C. in 2012. At the time, the member was so open to Uber

coming that she suggested that there would be a minimum fee of $75 per

fare. If anything is going to be blocking ride-hailing, I would think it

would be that.

She said at the time that “Uber is using rates below those

required by the Passenger Transportation Board,” our ultimate safeguard

on transportation. We have an independent Passenger Transportation

Board. She continued: “However, we must ensure that it’s fair and it

does not detract from existing businesses that are licensed to operate.

In the interim, starting this weekend” — that was back in November 2012

— “the company can use a minimum rate of $75 each trip.”

I’ve got to say, with that kind of ridiculous approach, it’s no

wonder that we’re only getting to app-based ride-hailing now.

[End of question period.]

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, 2017.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne.

[2:35 p.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Throne Speech Debate

R. Singh: I move, seconded by the member for Courtenay-Comox:

[That we, Her Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative

Assembly of British Columbia in Session assembled, beg leave to thank Your

Honour for the gracious speech which Your Honour has addressed to us at the

opening of the present Session.]

Mr. Speaker, it’s my great honour, and I’m very pleased, to speak in

support of the throne speech, which is focused on the work that our

government is doing to make life better and create opportunities for people.

Making life better starts with the choices we make today. The choices of the

past….

We know for the last 16 years we had a government that was not working

for the people of B.C., but our government is making different choices and

putting people first. From affordability to services and a strong,

sustainable economy, our government is fixing the problems and making

progress on the things that matter most.

I can say, especially hearing from my constituents in

Surrey–​Green Timbers, that affordability remains the biggest

challenge facing B.C. families. Too many families are living paycheque to

paycheque. No matter how hard they work, they can’t seem to get ahead. And

rather than letting costs rise uncontrolled, our government is making life

more affordable and helping families get ahead.

I’m so proud of the work our government has done to make life more

affordable. I hear, whenever I go out in the community and talk to my

constituents and also to people in Surrey, that they are so happy with the

changes our government is making. We reduced the MSP prices by half, and we

are going to eliminate them fully in the coming year. This has made a big

difference in an average working family’s household. Now a family of four, a

couple, can have about $1,800 in their pockets that they can spend on the

things that really matter to them. I have heard from so many families who

are benefiting from it.

Also talking from the Surrey context, the tolls that we eliminated

last year are making a big difference. Even now, although it’s been almost a

year and a half since we did it, I still hear from people in Surrey how

happy they are that we eliminated that unfair tax.

[2:40 p.m.]

Also, our government will maintain its freeze on ferry fares for major

routes and discounts on minor and northern routes. That is also something

that we were hearing a lot from people, and our government is committed to

making life more affordable.

One thing that I keep on hearing often — it comes in, in every

discussion everywhere I go — is housing. For far too long, housing prices

have left too many people unable to find affordable housing.

The previous government failed to address the housing crisis. They

made choices to benefit the wealthy few while costs spiralled up for

everyone else. I’m so glad that our government’s choices are making a

difference. We are seeing a drop in foreign and domestic speculation,

moderate home prices in the Lower Mainland and increasing vacancy rates for

rentals.

It means a lot for the people of B.C. I can say that for my

constituents in Surrey, this is huge for them. Whenever I go and talk to

them, there are so many families who are struggling to be able to afford a

house. This is a dream, especially, I can say, for a lot of newcomers who

make Surrey their home. It is their dream to come to a new country, a new

city and be able to get a new house, be able to buy a new house.

For the last so many years, they were just falling behind. They were

not in any position to get into the housing market. I’m so proud that our

government is making changes and making efforts to make it possible for

those people to get into the housing market.

One thing I also want to say is that the housing crisis wasn’t created

overnight, and it won’t be fixed overnight. But our government is determined

to fix the problems and make housing more affordable for people.

Another issue that is very close to my heart is child care. We know

that families were paying tens of thousands of dollars a year for child

care, and they were waiting for months and years on wait-lists. Past

governments have not helped parents to find the child care they need and

move their lives forward. But this government has taken its first steps to

make quality child care more affordable and more available to more B.C.

families.

We are starting to make progress. Tens of thousands of B.C. families

are enjoying the benefits of more affordable child care. Child care costs

have been reduced by hundreds of dollars a month. Young families can

purchase a home for the first time, and more parents can participate in the

workforce.

This has come to me…. I’ve heard firsthand from families. A lot of

women in my constituency had to make a choice because child care was so

expensive that they were not getting into the workforce. It was not that

they did not want to work. They just could not do it because they could not

afford the child care costs, so they were making the decision to stay at

home.

With the steps that our government is taking, more and more families

are benefiting from the child care discounts. Also, more women — I say women

because it’s usually the women who are the primary caregivers — are coming

into the workforce, which is, in turn, helping our economy.

In the throne speech, it was announced that the government’s plan is

to develop new collaborative legislation that will give universal access to

quality, affordable child care the force of law. I’m proud that our

government is taking steps to make sure that affordable child care is there

for every family that needs it.

Quality public services are the key to stronger and healthier

communities. After years of underfunding, our government is making record

investments in education, with more support and better learning environments

for students. This is something which was resonating in my community of

Surrey — that in services, we were just lagging behind. Surrey, as we know,

is the fastest-growing community in B.C. We get more than 1,200 people who

make Surrey their home every month. But we were just lagging behind in the

services that we were providing.

[2:45 p.m.]

Education is the one thing that we all should be investing in. I am so

happy that our government has approved 24 seismic upgrade projects.

One-third of them are completed or underway. We have hired 3,700 new

teachers, including special education teachers, teachers at colleges and

counsellors. And we are working to make schools more inclusive, with the

expansion of anti-bullying programs and additional resources for mental

health and wellness.

Along with that, I can say that for Surrey, with the growing community

and the more kids we have in that community, I’m so glad that we have so

many new capital projects that are coming up. Our government is committed to

build more schools in those communities.

Public health care is a right, yet too many British Columbians can’t

find a family doctor and are waiting for too long for care. This was another

issue that I was hearing from my community over and over again — health

care. I’m so glad that the throne speech underscored our government’s work

to provide better, faster access to health care in all corners of the

province.

The government has opened a network of urgent primary care centres,

and I’m very glad to say that the first urgent care centre that opened was

in my community of Surrey. Along with the urgent primary care centres, we

have 200 more family practice physicians, 200 nurse practitioners and 50

clinical pharmacists and other health care providers.

We are building, renovating and expanding hospitals in communities

around the province. Government is increasing staffing hours in residential

care homes so seniors can get the care they need and deserve. I hear so much

about it every day — about our seniors who have given so much to build our

communities, and when they need the care, the staff do not have enough hours

to care for them. So I’m really glad about the announcement that the Health

Minister made to increase the hours in residential care settings.

We have also added thousands more surgeries and MRI exams throughout

the province.

To make sure people don’t have to choose between food or medicine,

government cut or eliminated Fair PharmaCare deductibles for 240,000 people

last year. I can say that this has personally affected me. My parents, who

are seniors, don’t have much income here. The first time they ever went to

get some medications, they did not have to pay anything. I could see the

smiles on their faces when they came back. There are so many more seniors —

as it says, 240,000 seniors in our communities — who are benefiting from

this.

Another emergency that we dealt with and our government has dealt with

and is very committed to is the overdose emergency. It’s the worst public

health crisis in B.C.’s history, and our government is working hard to help

save lives. We are expanding harm reduction and increasing access to

naloxone, connecting people to life-saving supports, including treatment and

recovery, and allocating more resources to law enforcement to address the

criminal elements of this crisis.

Only last week I was standing with the Minister of Mental Health and

Addictions in Surrey, where she announced the expansion of services to deal

with this crisis — and services that are more culturally sensitive, clinics

like Roshni Clinic, which is in Surrey. I’m so glad that our government is

not only looking to address this crisis but also keeping all communities in

mind and providing the culturally sensitive care that is

required.

The throne speech presented a vision for a strong, sustainable economy

that works for people. For far too long, choices were made to benefit only

the wealthy few. This government is making different choices and building a

prosperous economy that works for everyone. We want to make sure people can

afford to live and work here, with a good job, with good pay and a home that

families can afford. We are creating opportunities for people so that they

can see a future for themselves in their communities. We are committed to

shared prosperity for many, not just for the few.

[2:50 p.m.]

I’m also very proud of our government’s bold action on climate change.

CleanBC was created in partnership with the B.C. Green caucus. It is our

road map that will help us build a low-carbon economy that creates

opportunities for all while protecting B.C.’s air, water and land. CleanBC

will improve where we live and work through building retrofits and new

net-zero energy standards for new buildings.

As we reduce emissions, we also create jobs and opportunity for

people, businesses and communities. A cleaner, better future for everyone is

what CleanBC is all about. We need to work together to seize this

opportunity and address the challenges of climate change.

Also, I’m very proud of the work this government is doing to achieve

reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. This is a cross-government priority,

and B.C. will be the first province in Canada to introduce legislation to

implement the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples.

It gives me so much pleasure that I’m part of a government which,

instead of focusing on just one single sector, is investing in all sectors

and supporting innovation across the board. We believe that a prosperous

economy works for everyone, not just the few.

The LNG Canada project will create thousands of jobs and generate $23

billion in government revenue that will be reinvested into the

infrastructure and services B.C. families depend on. This project met

government’s four conditions for any major infrastructure project: a fair

rate of return for our natural resources, job opportunities and training for

people in B.C. and meaningful partnership with First Nations. It is included

in government’s CleanBC plan as well.

The throne speech outlined government’s plan to strengthen traditional

industries while making sure they work for people. We’re increasing

processing and promoting partnerships with Indigenous communities and

creating jobs and opportunities for local workers.

Our government recognizes B.C.’s potential to be a global hub of

connectivity and innovation. Encouraging technological advances across all

sectors will benefit every part of our economy. Also, infrastructure and

mobility are critical to our economy and the livability of our

communities.

This government is making sure public investments provide public

benefits. That’s why community benefit agreements on major infrastructure

projects will provide better training and more trades opportunities for

Indigenous people, women and youth around the province. Our government is

opening doors to skills training so that people can get good jobs with good

wages and businesses have the skilled workforce they count on.

I’m pleased to see the throne speech confirm that ride-hailing will

enter the market this year. I’m so proud to be part of the committee that is

working on making ride-sharing a reality in the coming year, and I’m so glad

of the Minister of Transportation’s commitment to ride-hailing. For so many

years, people were asking for ride-hailing, and the previous government was

not listening to them. I’m proud of the government that is listening to the

people and is committed to provide ride-hailing, which will come this

year.

In closing, I just want to say that our government is making a

different choice. We are committed to making life better. We are creating

opportunities for people so that B.C.’s bright future and unlimited

potential is shared with everyone, not just a few. I really look forward to

this work and to continuing to serve the people of this province.

R. Leonard: I’m pleased to second the motion moved by the member for Surrey–Green

Timbers. It is my privilege today to be able to speak to this government’s

second throne speech.

I want to acknowledge that this is….

Interjection.

[2:55 p.m.]

R. Leonard: Is it our third?

Interjection.

R. Leonard: Not at all, not at all.

Okay, let me start that again. I am privileged to address this

government’s third throne speech, as we enter into another full budget

cycle.

I would like to acknowledge that we are in the traditional territories

of the Lekwungen-speaking peoples, particularly the Esquimalt and Songhees

Nations. I think this is an important thing to acknowledge especially today

as the Moose Hide Campaign began once again this year — and the

acknowledgment of all the work that’s being done by the organizers for the

Moose Hide Campaign, recognizing that today has been proclaimed as the Moose

Hide Campaign Day.

It’s a real privilege to be able to stand here and acknowledge that,

knowing that every party and every member of this House is supporting the

work to reduce the violence that is perpetrated against, particularly,

Indigenous women and children. I’d like to also acknowledge that in my

constituency, it’s the territory of the K’ómoks First Nation.

I would also like to take an opportunity today to acknowledge my

husband Ron Eby’s constant support and his commitment, particularly, to

reducing our energy consumption in the house. I’d like to share with you

that I have to endure the power being turned off to my hot water tank so

that I’m never sure if I’m going to have a hot shower in the morning, as he

tries to reduce our energy consumption. But it’s his commitment, and it’s

part of the many things that he does every day to make life better for

British Columbians and to do our part helping to reduce our greenhouse gas

emissions, which is a big part of why I stand here today.

I’d also like to acknowledge my executive. They are very involved.

They’re very committed. They have a lot of special talents and skills to

support the work of this government. I have been privileged to have them

support me through many trials and tribulations, as this is a first term for

me as MLA.

I’d like to also make a special shout-out to my constituency

assistants, particularly Leanne Rathje, who’s been with me since, oh, almost

day one. For many months this past year, she has had to take on the

challenges of meeting the needs of people in my constituency,

alone.

I’d also like to welcome a new constituency assistant, Matt Landry.

His youthful energy and enthusiasm and his skills and talents are most

welcome. I’m looking forward to working with him. I’m sure that the

constituents in my community are going to be very well-served by this young

man.

The first speech that I remember…. I remember the excitement and the

anticipation of being part of a new journey that was being charted by our

new B.C. NDP government. It was like a ship setting sail on its maiden

voyage. I get, now, a year later, to look back on what has been an amazing,

amazing trip so far. We had 16 years of inattention to the plight of all but

the top 2 percent of British Columbians. Today there is a very different

feel in our province. We see the positivity, the hope and aspirations, after

so many years of barriers for people wanting to make life better.

There are so many things that were mentioned in the throne speech. I’m

sure I won’t touch on all of them, but I’ll go through a life cycle. I’m

going to start with health, because most people’s first introduction to the

government is through our health care system. We’ve done so many good things

to make life better for British Columbians.

[3:00 p.m.]

I’ll start with the Fair PharmaCare. As the member for Surrey–Green

Timbers mentioned, 240,000 people are benefiting from the cuts to Fair

PharmaCare. That’s a lot of impact. We’ve also supported urgent primary care

provision, and it’s happening in my community. There are more family

doctors, more pharmacists. In my community, I’m particularly proud that we

are supporting nurse practitioners in a big way.

We have a new hospital in the Comox Valley, and when it opened, there

simply weren’t enough beds, right from the get-go. As time went on and

things didn’t settle out, we were very privileged to have more beds added to

try and relieve some of the pressures in the health care system in our

community.

On top of that, we have a desperate need for residential care for

seniors, and our government created temporary beds until the request for

proposals was approved. This request for proposals added on to the 70 beds

that had been approved through the previous government. What we did was made

permanent those temporary beds that were a stopgap measure, and we added

more respite beds, added more hospice beds and added more residential care

beds. So instead of 70, our community is going to be receiving 151

beds.

It’s going to be provided through two different models. We’re going to

have a dementia village, which is a really exciting possibility that’s

opening up with Providence Care. We also have an inspiring new facility

that’s coming to town, a new provider.

We’ve also seen an increase in the community care hours so that people

are able to stay at home, where we know people want to be. We’ve also, of

course, added, across the board, throughout the province, an increase in

hours so that residential care beds have the kind of care that they need.

It’s a standard that is being met by millions of man-hours, staffing hours,

to make sure that people, if they have to go into care, are going to be well

cared for.

I know that this is…. I’ve witnessed that with a lot of friends who

have aging parents. The last place they want to see their loved ones go to

is a residential care facility. In fact, it can be a wonderful experience,

taking people out of isolation, if it’s done well, and we have that

commitment to doing things better.

We’re also, in the health care field, adding more hip and knee

surgeries and more MRIs. One of the things that we all hear about is the

long wait-lists. That’s starting to be chipped away at so that people don’t

have to suffer and can get on with their lives.

We also have more health care training spaces at our North Island

College. The Minister of Health made a comment, when he was making the

announcement around the residential care beds recently, about how we really

need to value the jobs of the people who do the care. It is not a place

where you’re going to see people entering into that as a profession unless

we actually value it and celebrate it. I think that’s one of the avenues

that we are pursuing — to make sure that we are reflecting, in our policies

and programs, that value.

After you’ve given birth and you go home and you’ve dealt with all of

your aches and pains…. The next big thing that was in the throne speech was

child care. So many people have had to wait very long periods of time to

find decent-quality affordable child care. Many families end up having a

parent stay at home because they simply cannot find it. Our economy really

deserves to have people who have developed their skills and talents come

back into the workforce when they are ready and not be seeing child care as

the barrier for the advancement of people in their careers, an advancement

for the businesses where they serve.

I’d like to make a comment, too, about women who leave the workforce

for a period of time to raise their children. It’s an admirable thing that

women do. It’s, generally speaking, women. But when they leave the

workforce, there are long-term effects. They’ve reduced their earning power.

They’ve reduced their pensionability.

[3:05 p.m.]

They have to take a place where…. They haven’t advanced their careers

for so many years, and getting back into the workforce is often a very

difficult thing. So for us to take the steps to really make child care a

number one driver of our economy is something that I value so

much.

In terms of what’s going on in my community, we’ve seen new spaces

come. We have more spaces at North Island College for training the early

childhood educators.

Again, the issue around valuing that job, the early childhood

educators. We’ve increased wages. We’ve added bursaries and on-the-job

training so that people can work and improve their skills. We’ve also made

more affordable the child care for families. I’m very proud to say that not

only do we have the programs relating to reducing child care fees and

subsidies; we’ve also introduced pilots for the $10-a-day child care. And

one of those pilots is in our community.

We are also working on partnerships. At Lake Trail School, where we’re

doing a $26 million renovation replacement, it includes 60 new child care

spaces. Of course, we have a program where we will partner with local

governments and school districts, public institutions, to provide $1 million

to develop those child care spaces, a half a million dollars for non-profits

and a quarter of a million dollars with for-profit child care

institutions.

What we have done is focused on quality affordable child care. The

throne speech makes mention of the fact that we are going to have new

collaborative legislation that will give universal access to quality

affordable child care the force of law. Not a program that’s going to be

dismissed at any time in the future.

Now after you get the kids in school, you have a whole new set of

issues to deal with. I have mentioned Lake Trail, and we know that the funds

are going into not only seismic upgrades but also new builds, to make sure

that we get rid of portables. We also know that there’s been the contract

language reinstating so many teachers that are coming back into the

classroom. That’s so important, especially after seeing a 14 percent

increase since 2013-14 in mental illness and behaviour

categories.

Our government is providing for 3,200 special education resource

teachers, 180 educational psychologists and 918 school counsellors. I know

in my own community, kids entering into kindergarten on the vulnerability

scale are doing abysmally, and they need all of the supports that they can

have to become successful in life.

Nearly half of the students who have mental illness or behaviour

categories don’t graduate. One of the issues around mental illness is

anxiety. As I say, the numbers are growing. There are things that we can do

to make life a little less anxious for our young people. If they see that

there’s hope in the future and that they can have confidence that they’re

going to have a place in our economy and that they are going to have a

better life, that helps. It’s not all about the supports. It’s about seeing

that there is a future for them.

In my community, it’s been forever that kids leave the valley — that

they don’t see those opportunities and have to leave their families. It’s a

big scary world out there, and there’s a lot more that needs to be done to

train our young people so that they see that future.

I want to talk next about the environment, because I know that that’s

a deep concern for the youth of this province.

[3:10 p.m.]

I also know it’s very important to my constituency as a whole. People

are very, very passionate about the environment. I want to say that the path

forward on climate change has not been very stellar with our old government.

They undermined the recommendations that were being brought forward by

people who work in the field, even going so far as to go outside of the

province to make sure that they got the direction they wanted.

However, we now have a new government, and we have charted a new

course, in partnership with the Greens. I think that it’s going to give the

confidence that people need in our future in B.C. The CleanBC plan offers

clean energy jobs. It’s going to be dealing with solid waste, cleaner

transportation, dealing with buildings and reducing pollution from industry.

I’d like to just touch on that because a lot of people hear the word

“CleanBC,” but then they don’t get a fleshed-out version, a sense of what it

is that we can accomplish if we stay the course.

The training. As I mentioned earlier, that’s the future of our youth.

It’s a place to build confidence and a place for success, and we are

investing in that.

On solid waste. I know in my community, particularly, the issue around

solid waste is that it’s getting more and more expensive. The opportunities

for solutions are diminishing. The throne speech makes mention that we are

going to be helping communities to achieve the reductions that they need. I

know that’ll be welcome news to many in our communities, especially in local

and regional governments.

On clean transportation. I had somebody come into my office who was

just so excited that they were getting one of the electric vehicles. She

said: “It’ll be my last vehicle, and I never would have been able to do it

without the $6,000 incentive program that’s available.” We really need to be

focusing on those renewable fuels because, by and large, the biggest

contributor to our greenhouse gases in our everyday lives is our

vehicles.

In terms of our buildings, of course, there’s the whole issue of

retrofits — another thing my husband is very keen to hear about. I know that

we spent $1.7 million additionally on an affordable housing project called

the Braidwood housing project. I was told by the organizers that it was, in

major part, to increase building efficiencies.

We all have a part to play. It makes life more affordable when we have

reduced energy costs. I’m excited that we are going to be looking at

net-zero energy building standards so we can make sure that everybody

benefits from that now and into the future.

Of course, all of that reflects on the ability for us to increase our

jobs and opportunities. There’s a company in my community called Prisym,

which I was just reading about in our local community development newsletter

that comes out every week. They’re a solar energy provider, and they’re

integrating renewable energies into new and existing buildings. They’re

going out and providing complimentary information sessions so that

contractors, as well as people who are doing their own contracting, can

benefit from those possibilities.

I remember many years ago when I was in local government and hearing

about the opportunities and the incredible savings there are if you are

building new — being ready to adopt those renewable energies, rather than

trying to fit them in long after you’ve built the houses. Of course, most of

us don’t live in brand-new houses. Most of the marketplace is older

buildings, so we have to find ways to make that happen.

I’d like to just make a comment about the consumer protections that

were mentioned in the throne speech. I don’t go out to concerts a lot, but I

do remember having an opportunity to see Duke Ellington and Ella Fitzgerald,

and it was pretty exciting. It was before there was such a thing as bucket

lists. It would’ve been on my bucket list to be able to see such

performers.

[3:15 p.m.]

There are performers now who try to make it accessible for people to

see them perform, and the whole scalping industry has made it inaccessible

to so many people. I’m very proud that we are going to be taking action to

try to circumvent the software that is making it difficult for people to be

able to enjoy concerts and other events throughout B.C.

Also, I know that people — oh, so many people — have to live paycheque

to paycheque. The idea of dealing with short-term loans in a way where….

We’re increasing consumer education and providing oversight and some capping

so that we can start to influence the direction, to make life more

affordable. You don’t want to be seeing people being taken advantage of, and

I applaud our government for taking that on.

I can’t tell you how many people have turned to me about cell service,

saying: “Oh, if you can do something about cell service….” I recognize — it

was mentioned in the throne speech — that we don’t have all of the power on

the issue of the cost to consumers of cell service. But where we have

authority, we are paying attention and doing what we can.

On the issue of ICBC, I hear a lot of comments about: “Oh, we need the

competition. We need to go into private insurance.” It’s been just shown

over and over again that that’s not the way to drive down the costs and make

sure that people have quality insurance. We’re committed to that — to having

a public insurance system that provides the lowest cost and a quality

product. The lack of regulation and the skimming off of ICBC’s revenues is

over. Our government last year put in $950 million to try and straighten out

the books, and I’m pretty impressed with the work that’s being

done.

I’d just like to conclude by saying that we have so many

opportunities. The future is bright; hope is in the air. We have every

opportunity to turn to our youth and say that we’ll hand on the baton to the

next generation, once we start to further implement the things that we have

started in the last year. It isn’t a rehashing. It is the beginning of the

building of the foundation that we started last year. We have to build on

it. It’s going to take time, and people need to be patient. They need to be

persistent in making sure that they hold our feet to the fire, and we will

accomplish a better B.C. for everyone.

P. Milobar: As I rise to address the throne speech…. I was thinking back

yesterday, as I was listening to it, and throughout the night and today,

getting ready to rise and speak, and I reflected on many years ago, when I

and a great many in North America were really taken by, really entertained

by and quite the fans of a television show that was a show about nothing.

Unfortunately, this throne speech is about nothing. That’s not a good thing

for the citizens of British Columbia. That’s by no means a way to try to run

a government.

When I was listening again yesterday to the throne speech being read

by the Lieutenant-Governor, it struck me…. I thought: “Well, I’ll give it

the benefit of the doubt. Maybe I’m just not quite hearing correctly. I’ll

wait, and I’ll read it in print after it gets printed out by Hansard.” When

you read it, it’s the same as it sounded. It was a throne speech that sounds

like and was read like each minister was asked to submit two to three

sentences that they would like to see inserted into the throne speech.

Everything just seemed to be cobbled together in a random order of

commitments and looking back on things.

[3:20 p.m.]

It wasn’t a throne speech that was actually looking forward and of any

great significance. In fact, it was a throne speech that sounded more like a

year-in-review interview that you often see around Christmastime than what

you would expect to start a legislative session. It’s not just me. That’s

widely what we’ve heard out there from pundits and other organizations in

the 24 hours now that it’s been out there. And there’s no wonder. It was a

throne speech totally devoid of any forward-looking, of any substance

issues.

What it was, was a throne speech that really just started to reiterate

announcement after announcement that had already been made over the last

year. I guess that for this government, that feels like a forward-looking

document. In spite of their insistence that they have checked off a whole

lot of things on their to-do list, all they’ve done is create task forces.

They’ve created studies. They’ve created enabling legislation that has zero

regulations attached to it.

They haven’t actually followed through on the vast majority of things,

in actual practice, that they promised in the election back in 2017 — two

years later, three throne speeches later. And, yes, I agree. It’s easy, with

how bland they have been, to realize it has been three and to actually think

it has been less. In the 18-plus months now that these three throne speeches

have been brought forward, and despite repeated press releases reannouncing

the same things, there has been very little progress, in a real, tangible

way, that this government can point to on a wide variety of things — things

that they touched on in the throne speech.

There’s all sorts of motherhood-and-apple-pie language in there about

working together, about working with communities. Yet what do we see in

action with this government when communities try engaging? What we see, when

it comes to the employer health tax, is communities being told point-blank

by the Finance Minister: “Suck it up. Deal with it. Pass it on to your

property tax payers. It’s not my problem.”

What do they get told by the same minister when they bring forward

legitimate concerns around the speculation tax and the arbitrary way it was

implemented? “Deal with it. And you know what? If you’re lucky, we’ll change

things a little bit so that I’ll meet with you once a year.” How magnanimous

is that — a meeting once a year with the Finance Minister so the

municipalities can get told: “Too bad. The tax stays”? That’s been the

response, in actuality, by this government towards partners that they

referenced in this throne speech.

That’s why, I think, people are very disappointed in this throne

speech. It hasn’t actually brought through anything of

significance.

It’s somewhat sad that much earlier on in the throne speech, there’s

great deference and acknowledgment of the CASA agreement and the Greens, but

the word “job” had to wait for 20 minutes in. I think that speaks volumes to

the citizens of this province about the importance within this House that

the government places on trying to cling to power or not and whether or not

they’re truly concerned with what’s going on in communities around this

province. If they were really concerned with what’s going on with the job

creators in this province…. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

Yesterday we heard the Premier make it very clear. In fact, it was

referenced in the throne speech as well. The only way people are struggling

to keep their heads afloat in the last 18 months…. People who used to have

one job now need two, while the government is trying to say they’re making

life more affordable for them. That doesn’t sound like a more affordable

B.C. It doesn’t sound like a B.C. that holds the promise of opportunity for

people.

It sounds like a province where people, through no fault of their own,

are starting to see their hours cut, are starting to see their shifts

removed, because of government policies that are layering 19 different taxes

on individuals and employers in this province, job creators in this

province, entrepreneurs in this province. The ripple effect is starting to

happen.

[3:25 p.m.]

So what happens? The person gets their hours cut a bit, and we get a

throne speech that acknowledges that they now need two jobs to try to keep

their household afloat — a household that hasn’t quite yet received the full

brunt of those 19 taxes, a household whose jobs rely on those same job

creators, who have already started to cut hours, not quite receiving the

full brunt of those 19 taxes. But boy, do they start coming on in a hurry in

2019, because like most things this government has done over the last 18

months, they’ve done nothing but delay.

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

Well, at a certain point, the bill gets sent in the mail, and 2019 is

that magical year where this government needs to come up and start finding

their extra $5.5 billion in taxation that their latest budget had created —

$5.5 billion spread over 19 different taxes. That’s what the public has in

store. That’s what the job creators and the innovators in this province have

in store for them in 2019.

When people start to open their bills, when people in May get a

speculation tax bill that was sent in error for several thousands of

dollars, when they get it layered on with their property tax bill that comes

in June to the municipality, which is inflated because of the employer

health tax, when people’s bosses start to get a further assessment of the

employer health tax and people start to see their hours cut even more, the

government’s answer is a bland, visionless, benign throne speech on how

they’re going to deal with things in 2019.

The poverty reduction plan is a great example of delay and kicking

things down the road. The poverty reduction plan was supposed to be a key

pillar in the election platform of the government. The poverty reduction

plan was supposed to be out and started to be actioned last spring, a full

year ago.

What happened last spring? We were told: “Oh, wait till the fall.”

What happened in the fall? We saw it right at the very end of the

legislative calendar. What did we see at the end? We saw enabling

legislation. That was it. No dollars attached, no programming attached.

Instead, we have people living in poverty and the agencies that work with

those people, our most vulnerable, being told by their government: “It’s

okay. We promised this. But just wait another year.”

Let’s look at the timeline. The budget doesn’t come out for another

week. Something like the poverty reduction plan spending won’t be approved

through this chamber for some time after that. Nothing can actually happen,

moving forward, with the poverty reduction plan until those approvals are

made.

This means any substantive change to programming, any substantive

change to staffing to try to help with the programming, any substantive

change within the poverty reduction plan, in all likelihood, won’t be

instituted until late, late 2019, or this time next year — hardly a

government that was putting the poverty reduction plan as a high priority,

as they campaigned on.

We know why that was. They had many other serious priorities at play

to occupy their time. They needed to make sure that the debacle of a PR

referendum got rushed through in their first year instead of dealing with

things that would actually impact people’s day-to-day lives, like a poverty

reduction plan that they had campaigned so hard on.

They made great promises during the election. All of your dreams can

come true if you just vote for the NDP. Everything we’ve committed to in our

platform fits under the existing B.C. Liberal budget framework. There would

be no new taxes. There would be no increases needed. In fact, they could do

everything. All they would do is shuffle the cards a little bit, and

magically, massive commitments around housing, poverty reduction, transit,

schools, health care…. You name it. It was all fully funded within the

existing B.C. Liberal framework.

[3:30 p.m.]

So what did we see when the very first actual budget was brought

forward by this government? Nineteen new taxes and $5.5 billion extra in

taxes. Did that accomplish things in their platform? Absolutely not. In

fact, the vast majority of their promises sit totally unfilled with token

little injections of the start of a program here or a pilot project there,

with no real deliverable that people in their everyday lives, en masse, can

point to.

They campaigned on affordability. Only with B.C. NDP math is adding

over $5 billion of taxes considered affordability. It hits the end-user.

Needing to find these new taxes, which they campaigned that they would not

bring in…. Job one was to make carbon tax no longer

revenue-neutral.

Now, we introduced the carbon tax. In fact, the Finance Minister,

who’s now in charge of the carbon tax, campaigned aggressively against a

carbon tax when it was first being brought in. My, how the times have

changed. The Finance Minister has gone from campaigning against carbon tax

to now trying to use it as a revenue cash cow for government. The first year

was last year. The fiscal year is just winding down. No new spending of any

significance for all that extra carbon tax revenue that they brought

in.

Now we’re heading into another budget, another $5 lift. Industry is

uncertain if there’s going to be anything for them to help innovate and

reduce their footprint. Homeowners are unsure if there’s going to be

anything of consequence there. When you ask the Environment Minister about

that, whom I’m the critic of, the Environment Minister says: “Whoa, although

I’m the minister responsible for climate change, I’m not responsible for how

carbon tax gets spent.”

It seems like a bit of a moving target for people to try to get a

handle on where all this extra revenue that’s being generated goes. Why it’s

significant is…. We go through this February cold snap across our province,

including the Lower Mainland, the capital regional district and the rest of

the Island. If anyone takes the time to look at their Fortis bill…. I know a

lot of people don’t. In this day and age of direct debit, you get your bill,

and it comes directly out of the bank account. It’s all electronic, your

electronic bill. You get the email. You might glance at it. I think people

would be very interested to see it, now that carbon tax is no longer

revenue-neutral.

When this side of the House was in government and introduced the

carbon tax, there was a recognition: (

a) it had to be revenue-neutral; and

(

b) the people in colder climates and more rural areas travelled farther

distances and needed to heat their homes for longer portions of the year. So

there was an additional $200 homeowner grant put onto your property tax

bill, not if you lived in the Lower Mainland but for those areas that would

be impacted that way.

Madam Chair, may I stop myself for one second to be the first to

welcome you to your new chair, your very first session.

The carbon tax is now no longer revenue-neutral. We’ve been told that

existing homeowners can expect no more relief. We’ve been told that existing

homeowners, like municipalities, can just suck it up and figure out how to

pay for it. They can pay for it at the pump. This April they’ll pay another

1.4 cents a litre every time they go and fill up, with no corresponding

offset coming from this government. On their Fortis bill, they’ll pay for it

as well.

Now, I won’t get into the minutiae of all the rounding of all the

numbers. But essentially, and right now, if people are to go to their Fortis

bill and look, I think they would be surprised to find out that the natural

gas on their bill actually costs less per gigajoule than the carbon

tax.

[3:35 p.m.]

Now, carbon tax is designed to help people change how they structure

things around their life and to try to make sure that they bring forward

energy-efficient ways to live. On April 1, the carbon tax will go up again

on your Fortis bill to make it that much more expensive than the gas that

you’re consuming. Homeowners will be told by the government: “Well, just put

in a more efficient furnace.” That won’t change the fundamental fact that

the tax itself will still remain higher than the product your furnace is

consuming.

There are a great many people out there that can’t afford to put in a

new furnace. Despite what the government will probably roll out next week —

some form of an incentive plan, like we’ve seen in the past — a $1,000

incentive won’t necessarily still enable people to cover off what they need

to install a new furnace, let alone the payback time on it.

I say this because a lot of people that will need to access the equity

in their homes to try to do some of these energy retrofits that the CleanBC

bill is going to be demanding of them need the equity in their home to be

able to go to a bank. They need equity in their home to be able to help, in

part, meet the new stress-test requirements to refinance.

A lot of people are going to go to their banks and find out that the

stress test alone will be a struggle for them to be able to refinance — let

alone a few extra dollars to try to bring in some energy efficiencies to

their home — and then find out that the bank is getting a little more leery

as well. With much celebration, this government seems to think it’s

wonderful that people are losing hundreds of thousands of dollars of equity

in their homes as we speak.

I don’t think anyone on this side thinks that government should not be

trying to help in the housing crisis, but draining people’s home equity out

of their houses is not the way to do it. Expanding housing options, working

with municipalities — not telling them to suck it up here and deal with it

there — to get supply flowing is what is needed, not policies that are

actually seeing projects put on hold. Large rental projects are getting put

on hold because banks are telling the potential landlords: “We won’t approve

the borrowing because the numbers are no longer going to work, based on

government policy.”

The government policy is doing the exact opposite of what they claim.

That’s no surprise, because just about everything in this throne speech is

doing the exact opposite of what their flowery words try to say.

An interesting piece in there — talk about populist politics at its

finest: cell phones. We’ve even heard it walked back by the Premier

immediately after the throne speech. We heard it today, from the previous

two speakers, starting to get walked back, in a recognition that the

provincial government doesn’t actually have any control over cell phones.

The further explanation by the Premier yesterday was really that it’s about

transparency on billing, which was dealt with federally a few years

ago.

Now, I’m not sure if the Premier is unsure on how to read a cell phone

bill or unsure what it is when you go into a cell phone provider, but it’s

pretty straightforward. It’s almost like a menu in a restaurant. They show

you how much data you get for X amount of dollars a month. They show you how

many texts you get. Most plans are unlimited now. They show you how much air

time you get. Most plans are close to unlimited or an amazing amount of air

time, because it’s all about data. Then they show you what the overage

charge is if you go over your data. They tell you there’s a $6.95-a-month

administration fee.

They tell you: “This all could be yours if you take this phone out of

here today with a two-year contract or a three-year contract.” I think it’s

down to two years now, by law. It’s all pretty up front. Now, when people

start to get into trouble with their cell phone bills, it’s usually because

they start going over their data usage, which can get very

expensive.

Well, if the Premier was woke, he would know that data alerts on your

phone are lit, because that’s what everyone does. At least they can set a

data alert with their provider. It warns you when you’re at 90 percent of

your data usage for the month. I don’t know. Perhaps the Premier has been in

government for so long that he hasn’t had to pay that close attention to his

own cell phone bill. I’m not sure. Certainly as a father of three

20-somethings, I have to look at those cell phone bills regularly. They’re

not that confusing. If people are confused, it’s very easy for them to

connect with their provider.

[3:40 p.m.]

I guess I bring this up because if that’s the crowning glory in a

throne speech, that’s pretty sad. I agree the public likes to know what it

is they’re purchasing, but I think they would expect a little bit more out

of their government’s forward-looking view of how they’re going to use

legislative time, how they’re going to use resources of their taxpayer

dollars with staff time and staff expertise. I think they would want people

to come up with something of a little more substance to their everyday life

than trying to design a program on teaching people how to read a cell phone

bill. Obviously, they’re not worried about how people read their Fortis

bill, where the carbon tax is more expensive than the gas itself.

Let’s look at CleanBC. It’s amazing, to me, hearing yesterday in the

throne speech that CleanBC is now predicated on the “abundant supply of

hydroelectricity.” Remarkable, coming from a government propped up by

another party and both of those parties spent the better part of the last

five years screaming and yelling about how bad Site C would be and that we

don’t need the hydroelectricity. Yet here we have a CleanBC document that

very clearly says we’re going to need it and everything else we can get from

hydroelectricity and that “Oh, by the way, it’s nice, clean, green energy as

well.” Seems a little contradictory.

At the same time, they’re talking about LNG — LNG and their four

conditions. There are four conditions, one of which is a fair rate of

return. A fair rate of return. Let’s think on that. So they’re propped up by

a party who doesn’t want LNG but won’t vote against LNG. In fact, they

supported a change in legislation that allowed the Environment Minister to

set LNG GHG emissions as a separate, stand-alone entity by regulation and

never having to come to the House to confer again. He can just do it by

order-in-council, whoever the Environment Minister is at the time when LNG

comes forward. That was propped up by the Green Party as well.

The fair rate of return. Now, this side of the House obviously

supports LNG. We worked on it for many years. We were trying to bring

forward an investment climate that would enable it. In the NDP math world,

the fair rate of return to meet their four conditions is an additional $6

billion of taxation given back to the LNG industry.

Somehow walking away from an extra $6 billion is a fair rate of return

in the NDP way of thinking things. But that wraps in with CleanBC — a clean

B.C. that is missing 25 percent of the emissions needed to hit their

targets. But you won’t hear the government talk about the missing 25

percent. No, no. Guess what they said they’re going to do. They’re going to

study it. They’re going to work on it. Oh, and it’s going to take 18 months

to 24 months. Isn’t that convenient? The 18 months to 24 months it’s going

to take to find that missing 25 percent of emissions magically won’t be

found until after the next general election.

In spite of them being threatened to be brought down, in spite of them

being told that there was no way they would get to continue to govern by the

Green Party unless there is an emissions plan that actually takes into

account LNG and still meets our targets, both parties on the other side of

this House have no problem turning a blind eye to 25 percent of the emission

target. Now, one could argue that the first 75 percent in any plan, although

it will be difficult, would be the easy 75 percent. It’s the missing 25

percent that’s going to require the real heavy lifting, the real political

fortitude and the real change in things to try to make happen. But no

mention of the missing 25 percent.

In fact, when you look at the missing parts through this whole farce

of a throne speech, it’s quite astounding. The $10-a-day child care — yet

another massive campaign promise, a massive campaign promise that has not

been delivered on.

[3:45 p.m.]

When the Premier was asked yesterday point-blank about $10-a-day child

care being connected to any of the language in the throne speech, there was

a lot of tap dancing. No commitment at all to actually delivering. In fact,

it was just discussion around evaluating, looking at the pilots, seeing how

things are working, seeing how we can expand or not. No wonder people that

have qualified for the pilot are singing its praises, because those scarce

few people that actually qualify hit the equivalent of the child care

lottery by the government.

It’s like they went to their corner store and bought a Scratch and Win

and got an extra “$1,000 a month until your kid is out of school” prize.

Maybe that’s the government’s next plan for child care. It could be a whole

new Scratch and Win. I won’t even ask for a royalty of it. You could work

with B.C. Lotteries, and people could win child care for life, because

that’s the way this government is dealing with it — like it’s a lottery. For

a government that’s supposed to be predicated on very socialist values

around all for one and one for all, they sure don’t mind picking winners and

losers when it suits them.

Let’s look at the last week leading into the throne speech. Our

Premier, our illustrious Premier, chose to go down to Washington state. What

was the topic down in Washington state? Nothing of economic consequence to

British Columbia. No.

One would have thought that the Premier, based on his stand and

concern around one tanker a day being added to the current fleet of ships

coming in and out of our ports, would have gone down there to strike a hard

bargain with the governor of Washington state to talk about all those

tankers going back and forth, up and down the Washington coastline, up to

Alaska, right in front of all our same waters. But no.

Instead, we have talk about a high-speed link that sounds like it’ll

actually get people to unload before they hit the Massey Tunnel. That’s

great. They can get a high-speed link to Washington state, and then they can

sit in the Massey Tunnel waiting for, well, a taxi, I guess, because there

won’t be Uber.

What do we have for internal transportation from this government? No

plan for a Massey Tunnel replacement. No plan for the Cariboo connector. No

plan for North Shore rapid transit. No plan for Fraser Valley gridlock. No

plan for four-laning of the Trans-Canada Highway at any time. They’re more

interested in photo ops down in the States, because there was no mention of

tankers down our coastline from Washington state in a much higher volume

than the one a day that the Kinder Morgan project would create. No. Instead,

they would rather fight with Alberta on their oil, with no plan for better

highway connections with the rest of our own country.

I started with a Seinfeld reference. I guess I’ll end with a

Simpsons reference. Instead, they’re worried about pushing a

monorail project, like we have seen infamously dealt with on The

Simpsons .

That’s not leadership. That’s not vision. That’s not being part of

Confederation. That’s trying to be an isolated silo without actually moving

forward with the projects and the types of infrastructure that our

communities need, that our country needs, moving forward.

Thank you for this time, Madam Speaker.

Deputy Speaker: The Leader of the Third Party.

A. Weaver: Thank you. Welcome to the new position as Assistant Deputy Speaker. It

gives me great honour to speak, as not the first but the second person,

under your oversight.

I thank the member for Kamloops–North Thompson for his remarks. I must

say, somewhat cynical in the remarks, but I understand that. I do share some

of his concerns about the throne speech, and I’ll come to that in more

detail later.

Interjection.

A. Weaver: The member for Peace River North suggests that I’m cynical too, but I

beg to differ with the member.

I am the designated speaker. I know members opposite are looking

forward….

Interjections.

A. Weaver: You hear them groaning in delight, but the member for Vancouver–West

End is quite excited by the words to come.

Let me start, please, with thanking my staff in the Legislative

Assembly for helping us, in the B.C. Green caucus, do the work that we do

day in, day out. Without their support, we would not be able to be prepared

for issues like this, speeches like this.

[3:50 p.m.]

I’m very grateful for the work of the staff, both in the Legislature

and the constit office as well — and, more generally, to the people in this

building. Whether it be the guards, whether it be in the cafeteria, the

people who clean, the people who take…. Or even Libby, who is now upstairs

somewhere, ushering people into the gallery. It must be tough for these

people to work here knowing that there’s a cloud over this place. Let it be

said that we are very grateful for the hard work that they do, and we’ll all

move beyond this. So thank you to the people who work here, and to the

public service in general.

None of these bills that we’re going to debate in the upcoming session

would be possible were it not for the hard work by the public service. Let

me tell you, it is my experience that British Columbia has the best and

brightest from all across Canada in our public service. I say that because

it’s one of our key strategic strengths. It is the quality of life in

British Columbia that we can offer people, which is why we can attract and

retain some of the best and brightest.

It’s also one of the reasons why we have an affordability issue.

People choose to live in B.C. because it is a lovely place to live. Great

economy. Great weather, except for the last couple of days. Wonderful

people. Friendly, relaxed atmosphere. And never a dull moment in the B.C.

Legislature either. Lots to do here in British Columbia.

Finally, to the people of Oak Bay–Gordon Head, I thank them for

entrusting me as their representative in this place. I have countless

meetings with constituents, and I do appreciate the ongoing feedback that

they give. Thank you to them.

Now to the throne speech. Let me start by saying that I’m pleased that

the throne speech did recognize the important work that’s been achieved on a

number of priority initiatives outlined in our confidence and supply

agreement with the B.C. NDP. That agreement, written a couple of years ago,

basically put in writing our shared values, values that, collectively, we

wish to focus on as a condition of our support in this minority government.

Values with respect to affordability. Values with respect to putting people

first — education, child care, and so forth.

In particular, in this throne speech, one of the things that I think

is critical, at least from my perspective, is that it highlighted the

importance of CleanBC, a framework that will guide British Columbia as we

respond to the challenge yet realize it is but an opportunity. That is, the

challenge of climate change is actually an economic opportunity.

Let’s be clear. CleanBC is not a climate plan. CleanBC is an economic

vision. It’s a vision for the economy of British Columbia grounded in

innovation, grounded in clean energy and grounded in positioning British

Columbia as a leader in the new economy. It’s the B.C. Green vision. It’s a

vision that we recognized is what is needed to position British Columbia as

leaders in the new economy.

We will never compete with our traditional resource sectors if we

continue to do more of the same. We can’t compete with Indonesia. We can’t

compete with Thailand in terms of just digging dirt out of the ground. The

reason why, of course, is that they don’t internalize some of the

externalities that are so precious to us: environmental externalities,

social externalities, standard of living externalities.

It costs more to dig dirt out of the ground in B.C. than it does in

other jurisdictions. We won’t compete head-to-head unless we continue down

the path of race-for-the-bottom economics, which I’ll come to shortly — a

card that the B.C. NDP have taken from the Liberal play deck but actually

taken to a whole new level. We’ll come to that, moving forward.

The way we compete is by recognizing that we have to be smarter and

more efficient. You can’t grow the economy just by doing more of the same.

You grow it through efficiency. What does efficiency mean? It means that

when we dig the dirt out of the ground, we do so in a manner that is cleaner

and more efficient. As such, we can actually export not only the dirt and

the minerals that arrive but also the technology and knowledge that has been

acquired in the development of efficiency measures.

I’ve referenced many times, in various speeches, an innovative company

by the name of MineSense that developed sensing technology in bucket face

that can actually take rock at the rock face and actually determine at the

face whether it’s economical to ship that rock to the crushers or whether it

should be put aside for fill later.

That is being smarter. That is being more efficient, because not only

can MineSense then mine mines in B.C. and compete internationally, but

there’s technology that is B.C.-based, internationally leading technology

that we can export. And not only export, we can actually send our people

there, to other jurisdictions, to showcase some of this

technology.

[3:55 p.m.]

And it saves money. It saves money because less water is used in the

crushing process, which is cleaner. It saves money by not having to worry so

much about the backfill. So these are the kinds of technologies that we need

to position ourselves.

Forestry. Probably the single most important industry, historically,

in British Columbia. Forestry. Hardly a mention in the throne speech about

forestry. A few words but hardly a mention. Yet our opportunities for

innovation in the forest sector, whether it be through value-added — people

like Structurlam, an incredible CrossLam and glulam manufacturing company

based in Okanagan Springs and Penticton…. My friend from Penticton is not

here. An amazing company, B.C.-based technology….

R. Coleman: Okanagan Falls.

A. Weaver: Okanagan Falls. What did I say?

R. Coleman: Okanagan Springs.

A. Weaver: I’m thinking beer. The member for Langley East correctly pointed out

that I said Okanagan Springs as opposed to Okanagan Falls. Clearly, my craft

beer senses were…. I was getting thirsty, I think.

Anyway, a company that has built CrossLam and glulam, that led to the

highest wood-constructed building in the world, UBC’s 18-storey student

residence. Our beautiful Harbour Air — CrossLam and glulam

projects.

This is where we have opportunities for innovation. We talk about

building schools and hospitals — lots of that in the throne speech — but

we’re not talking about building schools and hospitals that showcase

innovation and allow us to position ourselves as a leader in the new

economy.

Each school and hospital that’s built is an opportunity for

innovation. We can build a bunch of brick walls and hammer some drywall

together, or we can recognize that by spending a little more now — it may

not even be more, in fact; many would argue it’s the same cost or even

slightly less — we can save in the long term through operating cost

reductions in terms of heat and so forth.

I really think that we need to recognize that CleanBC is a plan, an

economic vision, for British Columbia, one that is grounded in our strengths

as opposed to chasing the weaknesses of others.

You know, this year’s throne speech also referenced some very

important investments in child care, education, addressing affordability and

improving transportation services. These clearly are important issues for

British Columbia.

Likewise, we know that wild salmon have an immense cultural, economic

and ecological value for British Columbia. I’m glad to see, again, that this

was recognized in the throne speech. We can thank…. A lot of good work on

this area came from my colleague from Saanich North and the Islands, whose

advocacy for wild salmon led to the establishment of the Wild Salmon

Advisory Council last year.

With the work of that council now complete, I expect — and I’m sure my

colleague from Saanich North and the Islands will insist — that government

will get to work and actually start implementing the recommendations,

starting right up front with movements towards habitat protection and

restoration of critical streams, salmon-bearing streams across British

Columbia.

We often focus on overfishing, often focus on fish farms, important

things to focus on, but what we tend not to focus on is habitat destruction

of the streams to which these salmon return. And that is critical in British

Columbia.

With that said, with the good in the throne speech, I do tend to agree

with my friend from Kamloops–North Thompson that the throne speech looked a

little bit like each minister was given a memo and asked to provide a couple

of sentences about what they would like in the throne speech, and a rather

disjointed potpourri of issues and items and things are slapped together in

the throne speech, missing, critically, a broader overall vision as to where

this government would head.

Now, again, I do have some troubles with that, because I listened with

interest in question period today as the Transportation Minister went back

to the tired narrative of saying: “You didn’t do it for five years.” At some

point, government needs to recognize that they’re government now; they are

not in opposition. And when you’re government, it does not do you any

service to blame someone for not doing something five years ago.

You’ve had two years. We’ve been talking about ride-hailing for two

years. You actually promised that it would happen last year. It hasn’t.

You’ve actually promised it would be one of the things you would do

immediately when government got elected. It hasn’t. This is what we look for

from government. We look for leadership, look for a vision, and we look for

no longer passing the buck and blaming.

[4:00 p.m.]

Just as the B.C. NDP were tired of the B.C. Liberals turning around

and referring back to the decadent era of the 1990s, I’m a little tired,

honestly, of hearing about the last 16 years of the B.C. Liberals. Let’s

move on. I think some of the B.C. Liberals never get tired of hearing about

the last 16 years, but….

An Hon. Member: I loved those 16 years.

A. Weaver: Some of them actually loved them.

I really want to talk not about the last 16 years or, heaven forbid,

the 1990s. Like, the 1990s? I was in Montreal in the 1990s — not relevant to

me.

An Hon. Member: Most people left B.C.

A. Weaver: Most people left B.C. I was one of these people who left B.C. in the

early 1990s.

Let’s get on with what we’re going to do now. What is the vision that

is actually driving the narrative of the throne speech? That, sadly, I

think, is missing. A throne speech that tries to be all things to all people

all the time ends up leading to contradictory legislation. It focuses on

short-term policy instead of long-term outcomes.

We start ending up doing things like campaigning on reducing hip and

knee replacement lineups. We know that that’s important, but we also know

that people over the age of 65 are typically those who need hip and knee

replacements. Except me. I’m under 65, and I need one. Nevertheless, if

you’re looking for short-term wins, so-called quick wins, that you can

actually camp