First Session, 42nd Parliament

(2021) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, March 3, 2021

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 19

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 4 — Firearm Violence Prevention Act

Hon. M. Farnworth

Bill 9 — Local Elections Statutes Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. J. Osborne

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Message of thanks and COVID-19 response

F. Donnelly

Clarence Boudreau

S. Bond

Community Social Services Awareness Month

N. Sharma

Coldest Night of the Year fundraising walk in White Rock

T. Halford

Pentlatch language revitalization

A. Walker

Role of social workers

D. Davies

Oral Questions

COVID-19 response for hockey and sports teams

S. Bond

Hon. J. Horgan

COVID-19 response for tourism attractions

T. Wat

Hon. J. Horgan

Data collection on long-term COVID-19 cases

S. Furstenau

Hon. A. Dix

COVID-19 response for tourism attractions and community events

T. Stone

Hon. R. Kahlon

L. Doerkson

COVID-19 response for arts organizations

C. Oakes

Hon. R. Kahlon

Government response to COVID-19

P. Milobar

Hon. R. Kahlon

Hon. J. Horgan

Speaker’s Statement

Conduct of members during question period

Reports from Committees

Finance and Government Services Committee, annual review,

budgets of statutory offices, March 2021

J. Routledge

B. Stewart

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 6 — Home Owner Grant Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. S. Robinson

M. Bernier

J. Sims

D. Davies

M. Starchuk

T. Shypitka

S. Chant

L. Doerkson

M. Elmore

A. Olsen

A. Mercier

Hon. J. Osborne

D. Coulter

J. Brar

Hon. S. Robinson

Bill 8 — Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. S. Robinson

M. Bernier

J. Sims

D. Coulter

M. Elmore

A. Mercier

S. Furstenau

P. Milobar

J. Brar

Hon. S. Robinson

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. N. Cullen

K. Greene

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 2021

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: R. Russell.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 4 — FIREARM VIOLENCE

PREVENTION

ACT

Hon. M. Farnworth presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Firearm Violence Prevention

Act.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time

now.

I’m pleased to introduce Bill 4, the Firearm Violence Prevention

Act. The Firearm Violence Prevention Act will provide police with new

tools to address the misuse of firearms, particularly the use of

firearms by gangs and organized crime to perpetrate violence. The

legislation closes gaps in the existing federal and provincial firearms

schemes by introducing new prohibitions and measures that will enhance

the safety of British Columbians.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 4, Firearm Violence Prevention 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.

[1:40 p.m.]

BILL 9 — LOCAL ELECTIONS STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. J. Osborne presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Local Elections Statutes Amendment

Act, 2021.

Hon. J. Osborne: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time

now.

I am pleased to introduce Bill 9. This bill amends the Local

Elections Campaign Financing Act, the Local Government Act, School Act

and Vancouver Charter. This bill proposes amendments to the Local

Election Campaign Financing Act that builds on the work of this

government to improve the transparency and accountability of campaign

financing in local elections for British Columbians. Amendments to the

Local Government Act, School Act and Vancouver Charter will improve and

modernize the administration of local elections.

The amendments to the Local Elections Campaign Financing Act

include enhancements to the regulatory framework for elector

organizations; an increase to the time period during which election

advertising is regulated before an election; clarification of the

activities that fall under election advertising rules; implementing

sponsorship contribution limits, similar to the limits we previously

imposed to limit the influence of big money in campaign contributions;

enhancing enforcement tools by providing Elections B.C. with additional

investigations tools and the ability to impose progressive enforcement

through administrative monetary penalties; and minor changes to help

ensure that the local elections financing framework is effective and

works as intended.

The amendments to the Local Government Act, School Act and

Vancouver Charter include changes to ensure that candidates have access

to residential properties, such as strata properties, to canvass voters

and distribute candidate information; address the disenfranchisement of

some individuals by removing the requirement that individuals must have

been a resident of their community for at least 30 days in order to

vote; and ensure consistency among the choices that a court has when

declaring an election invalid to improve efficiency for local

governments.

We’re proposing these amendments to respond to issues identified

following the 2018 general local elections. These elections were the

first in which a full suite of campaign financing rules under the Local

Elections Campaign Financing Act applied. The amendments will more

closely align the campaign financing rules for local elections with

those established for provincial elections in the Election Act, while

continuing to account for the unique nature of local

elections.

The changes in the campaign financing rules will apply in relation

to the 2022 general local elections so as not to impact any ongoing and

scheduled by-elections. However, the new rules relating to sponsorship

contribution limits will be made retroactively, effective from tomorrow,

to prevent prohibited sponsorship contributions from being made between

the time that the legislation is introduced and royal assent.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. J. Osborne: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 9, Local Elections Statutes Amendment Act, 2021, 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)

MESSAGE OF THANKS

AND COVID-19

RESPONSE

F. Donnelly: Mr. Speaker, first I’d like to offer my congratulations on your

historic election as Speaker.

I’d also like to acknowledge that I’m on the traditional unceded

territory of the Kwikwetlem First Nation.

Since this is my first time speaking in the House, I’d like to

thank the people of Coquitlam–Burke Mountain for placing their trust in

me. I’m excited to get to work on their behalf to secure funding for new

schools, like Burke Mountain secondary and middle; more child care

spaces and affordable housing; better support for seniors; and, of

course, providing relief to hard-hit businesses, families and

individuals.

[1:45 p.m.]

Thank you to all who helped on my campaign. You know who you are.

I couldn’t have done it without you. I offer my congratulations to all

members on their election or re-election and to those who stepped up for

the election and put their names on a ballot.

These are certainly challenging and unprecedented times. COVID-19

has taken so many from us and dramatically altered our lives — making

sure we keep our distance, wearing masks, keeping up with work

responsibilities, care for children, operating schools and businesses.

So many have been isolated for months. Our lives have been turned upside

down, especially for our most vulnerable citizens.

I would like to acknowledge our provincial health officer, Dr.

Bonnie Henry, and her team. Dr. Henry has been a pillar of strength,

providing sound advice and leadership since the pandemic began. She has

done a remarkable job leading the fight, alongside our tireless Health

Minister.

All our health care workers should be commended, along with

front-line workers and essential service providers. As vaccines continue

to roll out, we’re finally beginning to see a light at the end of the

tunnel. However, we still need to look out for one another, especially

for these next few months.

Let’s keep each other safe and healthy so we can focus on

recovery. Let’s work together for the sake of our amazing

province.

CLARENCE BOUDREAU

S. Bond: He is a singer-songwriter who goes by the name Penny Slim. He gets

that name because he was born in Penny, British Columbia, located on the

northeast side of the Fraser River, east of Prince George.

Just recently Clarence Boudreau, a.k.a. Penny Slim, turned 90

years old. Well, as you can imagine, we were all very disappointed that

we couldn’t give Clarence the big birthday celebration that he deserves,

but his family and our community made it a memorable occasion

nonetheless.

Clarence started playing music when he was five years old, and he

hasn’t stopped since. He has written many original songs, including one

about the 2018 wildfires that has garnered a lot of attention. The smoke

was unbearable, and it meant that Clarence and his wife, Olga, were

stuck inside because they were sick of the thick smoke. It seems a

fitting topic for Clarence to sing about, since Clarence served as a

fire warden for about 30 years.

Clarence Boudreau has his very own YouTube channel, where you can

check out his songs, including the wildfire one.

Clarence and his wife, Olga, have been married for almost 70

years. That will be another memorable event as they celebrate their

anniversary in July of this year. The first song that Clarence ever

wrote was a ballad called “Full Moon,” and it was a tribute to his wife

Olga. The words go something like this. “Full moon, full moon, I’ll be

humming the tune as we walk hand in hand by the river.”

Clarence, we want to recognize your milestone birthday, the

incredible story of your love for Olga and the gift you are to our

community. Our wish for you is continued good health and much happiness

with your beloved Olga. We can’t wait to celebrate your 70th wedding

anniversary. In the meantime, we look forward to another Penny Slim

original.

Happy birthday, Clarence, from all of us here in the B.C.

Legislature.

COMMUNITY SOCIAL SERVICES

AWARENESS

MONTH

N. Sharma: I rise virtually today to acknowledge March as Community Social

Services Awareness Month. This month is an opportunity for British

Columbians to recognize the important work of community social services

workers and to thank them for their resilience, commitment and

dedication to their role.

Throughout the past year, we’ve all struggled with the effects of

COVID-19. Community social services agencies have been there to provide

support and assistance. They’ve stepped up by adapting their services

and coming up with innovative solutions to deliver the programs and

services that British Columbians need, often in very trying

circumstances.

Some of you may have used the community social services sector.

Certainly, most of us know of an individual or family that has turned to

this sector for help. Whether it’s a newcomer looking for language

skills training before starting a job search, a woman looking for

shelter to exit an abusive relationship, an at-risk youth in need of

safe counselling services or a senior looking for help to access a local

food bank, community social services workers are there to provide help

and assistance.

[1:50 p.m.]

In British Columbia, over 2,000 agencies employ more than 46,000

individuals who work in the community social services sector. Take a

moment to think about their critical role, the work they do and how they

contribute to building healthy and caring communities in B.C. As we look

to building a strong and inclusive economic recovery and a better future

for British Columbians, these workers will continue to play a vital

role.

I would like to invite all members to join me — in fact, everyone

in B.C. — in recognizing March as Community Social Services Awareness

Month.

COLDEST NIGHT OF THE YEAR

FUNDRAISING WALK IN WHITE

ROCK

T. Halford: Today I am proud to talk about an event that I participated in.

That was the Coldest Night of the Year for Sources B.C.

The White Rock Coldest Night of the Year virtual event raised more

than twice its target, bringing in $220,000 for homeless prevention

services on the Semiahmoo peninsula. The virtual event kicked off on

February 19 and ran through February 21. Any time during that three-day

period, participants were encouraged to complete either a two or a five

kilometre walk close to home.

Now, being a rookie MLA, I chose to do this walk with my

six-year-old daughter Sasha. I will be very honest. We did not complete

two kilometres. We completed one lap around our local track at the South

Surrey field. I will say that, doing this as one of my first events, it

was an absolute privilege.

I want to point out, too, that on the day that I was sworn in, my

first meeting as the MLA for Surrey–White Rock was with the White Rock

Pride Society. At that time, I was invited to participate, with the

White Rock Pride Society, on their team for the Coldest Night of the

Year. That was led by captain Ernie Klassen. Through Ernie’s efforts, we

actually raised over $16,000.

I should also point out leadership by example. Sources B.C. CEO

David Young and his team, the Virtually Virtuous, raised over

$60,000.

Today I would like to say thank you to all the participants who

participated in the Coldest Night of the Year and raised awareness and

much-needed funds for our most vulnerable.

PENTLATCH LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION

A. Walker: I’m joining you today from the traditional territory of the

Pentlatch-speaking people, a territory defined by a language that has

not been spoken fluently since the passing of Chief Joe Nimnim in 1940.

I bring to this House, for the first time ever, a Pentlatch phrase:

ts xwi yahm .

Franz Boas, in 1886, spent three weeks with these people and

recorded their vocabulary and their stories, but their language has been

sleeping for the last 80 years. A language previously spoken by

thousands of people in this area for countless generations is now being

revived.

Through the leadership and the tremendous work of Chief Michael

Recalma, Jesse Recalma, Mat Andreatta, Sarah Quinn, who works with the

Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, Sarah Kell, Su

Ur­banczyk, Lisa Recalma and so many others, life is being

breathed into this sleeping language once more. Waking this language

allows the descendants of the Pentlatch people to reclaim their

identity, to recognize and connect with their history and to own their

own future. I commend the incredible and tireless contributions these

people have made.

You may ask: “What does ts xwi yahm mean?” Well, in these

uncertain times that we live in today, I share with you this simple but

important lesson. Ts xwi yahm means “wash your

hands.”

I would like to ask my colleagues to join with me in

congratulating these hard-working people for their tremendous progress

in revitalizing the Pentlatch language.

ROLE OF SOCIAL WORKERS

D. Davies: The Dalai Lama once said: “It is not enough to be compassionate.

You must act.”

March is recognized across Canada as National Social Work Month.

This incredible group of people have committed themselves to working to

help people. That’s how my opening quote fits this statement so well. It

recognizes the many thousands of social workers in British Columbia and,

indeed, across the country who have taken on this most notable

profession. I can speak from the know, as I’m reminded every day. You

see, my spouse is a registered social worker.

[1:55 p.m.]

Over the past year, communities across our province have come

together and gone to great lengths to help prevent the spread of COVID.

At the same time, the impact of the pandemic on our mental health has

been unavoidable to most of us, if not all of us. That is why this month

it is especially important that we recognize and honour this special

group of front-line workers, who are there to support the most

vulnerable members of our community and are the safety net for people

who find themselves in a time of crisis, whether because of COVID or

otherwise.

Our social workers are essential to meet the needs of British

Columbians, who are facing overwhelming uncertainty, are carrying the

pain of loss or are subject to the economic health and social

inequalities that exist in our province and which have been made worse

by the pandemic.

Our health and well-being go beyond just physical health. The

essential work that many social workers do every day ensures that those

who feel they have no one to turn to can always reach out and find a

helping hand. I encourage all British Columbians to reach out and thank

our social workers.

Oral Questions

COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR

HOCKEY AND SPORTS

TEAMS

S. Bond: We know that the Premier is sitting on hundreds of millions of

dollars in unpaid relief funds from his government’s botched grant

program. It seems that his incompetent Jobs Minister can’t get relief to

those who need it. So we have some ideas about how those funds could be

used for some desperately needed support.

Twenty-two community hockey teams from the Western Hockey League

and the B.C. Hockey League have written to the Premier. Together they

are asking for $9.5 million so that WHL teams and B.C. Hockey League

teams, like the Premier’s own Victoria Grizzlies and my Prince George

Spruce Kings, can survive without fans in the stands.

A simple question. Hopefully, a very simple answer. Will the

Premier provide B.C.’s local hockey teams with the $9.5 million in

funding they need to survive the hockey season?

Hon. J. Horgan: I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question.

Although I quibble with some of the

preamble, I absolutely share her

view that the BCJHL brings people together.

She and I shared an arena together. We had not so much physical

distancing at that time. She cheering on her team, me cheering on mine.

The important thing for both of us was to see young people learning the

benefits and value of sport, which is something that is profoundly

important to me and, I believe, to all members of this House.

The question was straightforward, and I’ll do my level best to

give a straight answer. I have been in discussion with BCHL leadership.

We’re working with the minister responsible. The minister is here to

answer further questions on this issue.

We are not yet in a position to make a final determination on the

funds that have been requested, but there is good news. Although both

the member and I talked about our BCHL teams, there are also WHL teams

in Prince George, in Kamloops, in Kelowna, in Victoria and in Vancouver,

and all of them will be hitting the ice again very, very soon. That’s

good news for the kids; it’s good news for the teams. We can do that,

according to Dr. Henry, in a safe and effective way.

There’s going to be more news about both hockey leagues. They

provide an economic benefit. Certainly, the WHL restart will be a bonus

for Kamloops and Kelowna. It will also be a difficult time for those

teams, because outside of those two cities, they will not be having

revenue coming in.

We understand the issue. We’ve been working on it for a number of

months. I regrettably have to say, “Stay tuned,” at this

point.

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

supplemental.

S. Bond: The Premier is right to point out the role of the WHL in our

communities as well. We’re delighted to see that they’ll be returning to

play. Having said that, there will be no fans in the stands, and there

have been significant economic impacts.

[2:00 p.m.]

I know the Premier would forgive me for reminding him that my

Prince George Spruce Kings swept his Victoria Grizzlies in the last

championship that we saw each other play against.

The bottom line is, and the Premier is aware of it, that you can’t

have a league without teams to play in it. It’s more than just the 22

local hockey teams. From local football teams like the Langley Rams to

baseball teams like the Victoria HarbourCats, community sports teams

across the province are struggling to survive without funding from this

government. So I’m pleased to hear that there’s contemplation around the

local hockey teams.

Will the Premier agree today to step up and deliver funding more

broadly to community sports teams before the end of the fiscal year?

Simple question, yes or no?

Hon. J. Horgan: I love it when someone with as much ministerial experience as the

hon. member says: “Simple question, yes or no?” If there’s anyone in

this place, aside from the member from Abbotsford, who knows that that

is just not true, it’s the Leader of the Official Opposition. But I

understand the intent.

This has been, as we all know, an extraordinarily challenging year

for all of us, wherever we may live, whatever we may do. But the impact

on minor sports, the impact on junior sports…. Whether it’s junior

football, whether it’s my beloved Victoria Shamrocks, whether it is any

organization that all of us can name from our communities, they’ve been

affected by the pandemic.

We have done what we can to make sure that there’s a framework in

place so those organizations can engage with government. As I said, the

Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport has been involved in those

discussions with the two leagues that we talked about with respect to

hockey. I am engaged in casual discussions, I would call them — I’m not

talking about money with these organizations — with others, whether it

be junior football, whether it be the Western Lacrosse Association and

others.

I appreciate very much the Leader of the Opposition raising this

question. I think it’s another one of those times when we can all say:

“Yeah. This is something we need to get into. We need to make sure we

put our shoulder to the wheel, provide the resources to keep these

organizations going until they can get back on their feet and get bums

in seats.”

I thank the member for her question. Again, if there are further

questions, I’m sure she could take it up offline or further through

question period with the minister responsible.

COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR

TOURISM

ATTRACTIONS

T. Wat: We are having another example of British Columbians paying the

price for the Premier’s incompetence.

Attractions like the Richmond Night Market in my riding are going

into a second summer with no support from this government. Last year

they had to scrap $800,000 worth of memorabilia due to the cancelled

2020 season. They are also on the hook for a monthly lease of

$65,000.

My question is to the Premier. What relief is the Premier

providing to attractions like the Richmond Night Market?

Hon. J. Horgan: I’ll certainly, again, take issue with the

preamble from the

member. I’m sure that the three newly elected New Democrats from

Richmond will have a different view on the competence of the government.

But perhaps in her isolation, not just because of the pandemic but

because of the absence of Richmond MLAs to talk to….

I know that the three members on this side of the House are

welcoming any intervention she may have to strengthen the night market

and keep Richmond going through the next number of months as we finalize

our plans on vaccinations and get British Columbia back to

work.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Richmond North Centre on a supplemental.

T. Wat: I guess I’ll take a no from the Premier.

Here’s yet another example of the Premier’s unacceptable

incompetence. Butchart Gardens employs over 500 people during the

summer, but they rely on international visitors. We are going into our

second summer without support for attractions.

Again my question is to the Premier. How many of these events must

shut down for good before the Premier will be competent enough to

act?

Hon. J. Horgan: I know my spouse, Ellie, has visited Butchart Gardens a number of

times, when she’s been able to do that, to keep that attraction going.

Local visitors are critically important.

If I understand the member from Richmond correctly, she wants us

to open up the border. She wants us to invite people from around the

world to come to British Columbia to keep these tourism operations

going. That’s just not going to happen. Not on our watch.

[2:05 p.m.]

Now, again, had the member started with a more appropriate

question — how can we work together to address these issues? — I’d be in

a better position to answer it. But I can say if we’d now…. If we’re

degenerating back into…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: …partisan hyperbole, then I can say quite confidently that the

minister responsible for jobs, economic recovery and investment is on

the job. We’re going to see results for people very, very soon. I know

he’s going to be up any minute now, giving it right back to

you.

DATA COLLECTION ON

LONG-TERM COVID-19

CASES

S. Furstenau: I want to start by saying I absolutely support taking every effort

to minimize the fatalities associated with COVID-19 and the

evidence-based response to prioritize the vaccination of elders. I also

think there’s room in the discussion, especially with the recent

approval of the AstraZeneca vaccine, to consider not only years of life

lost but years of life limited by the long-term health impacts

experienced by some COVID-19 patients.

As the head of the Center for Post-COVID Care in New York has

estimated, at least 10 percent of COVID-19 patients end up developing

chronic symptoms. Most long-haul patients are women, relatively young,

and many only experience mild illness when first infected. Added to

that, recent data from the U.K. suggests that roughly 15 percent of kids

under the age of 16 have at least one lingering symptom five weeks after

their initial diagnosis.

My question is to the Minister of Health. The answer can be short

and, hopefully, sweet. Is his ministry collecting data about long-term

COVID illness experienced by British Columbians, and if so, where is the

information being posted for the public?

Hon. A. Dix: The member will know — and I appreciate her question — that this

subject, the issue of the impact of COVID-19 as a long-term impact, is

at the centre of our responses.

We have many centres of excellence that are supporting people who

are addressing COVID-19. The point she makes is an important one, in

terms of both immunization and in terms of the future of the pandemic.

This pandemic has had a profound impact on people’s lives — those who’ve

lost their lives, those who got sick and those who continue to deal with

that.

Those issues, and how we deal with those issues, are something

that has been repeatedly reported on and answered by Dr. Bonnie Henry in

our public briefings. We’d be very happy to set up a briefing about

those with the hon. member so she can get a sense of the actions we’re

taking in support of people who are dealing with the long-term effects

of a pandemic and of a virus that can have deep impacts on people of all

ages.

S. Furstenau: I do look forward to a briefing, and I will ask in the briefing

again about the collection of data around people who are experiencing

these long-term symptoms and where that data is publicly

available.

As reported in the New York Times , COVID long-haul

patients report a stunning array of mysterious symptoms: fatigue, pain,

insomnia, memory problems, brain fog. This should, as the minister

points out, raise important questions for how we organize our COVID

policies in B.C., which professions are prioritized for vaccination and

the level of risk we are expecting front-line workers to

take.

Younger people may be less likely to die, but the long-term

impacts from this virus are not always trivial. For health care workers

and teachers, who have the highest number of WorkSafeBC COVID claims,

respectively, as well as the 12,000-plus recorded cases for children and

teenagers, this is particularly worrying.

My question, again, is to the Minister of Health. How is the

minister accounting for long COVID in decision-making, and how is he

preparing to support long-haul patients, both medically and in the event

that they are unable to work or go to school, while navigating a long

and uncertain recovery?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, the member will know that we have established three

specialty clinics in British Columbia to address the needs of people who

are dealing with the ongoing effects of a COVID-19 infection. That

effort, which is a significant effort in our health care system, is

something that’s been ongoing for some time. I’d be happy to brief the

member on it.

The member talks about immunization clinics and the decisions that

will be made. We’ve made it very clear from the beginning, from December

in our briefing, then January in our briefing and then this week in our

presentation about immunization plans, that the focus of our effort is

to deal with those who are most vulnerable. So long-term care was first,

then assisted living.

[2:10 p.m.]

Rural and remote Indigenous communities had high priority. Health

care workers who serve those, who are most vulnerable, have been very

substantially immunized. That reporting we’ve done

consistently.

Our plan for the coming months was laid out on Monday. It again

focuses on an age-based approach but also includes those with specific

needs who are not in the age-based, including those, for example, with

developmental disabilities.

With respect to the AstraZeneca vaccine and, potentially, the

Johnson and Johnson vaccine, we are doing modelling based on the

evidence. Reports and recommendations are made by the BCCDC and Dr.

Henry based on the evidence of what would have the most positive effect

both on the outcomes for people and on the outcome of the pandemic in

British Columbia.

That ongoing review will guide us as we use, potentially, other

vaccines. It could be AstraZeneca or Johnson and Johnson or others.

These are considerations.

Everything we do is based on the evidence. Every person who is

immunized is followed on their immunization path. Every person who tests

positive for COVID-19 gets support and is involved in contact tracing

and follow-up support. That effort will continue based on the evidence

in B.C. and led by our extraordinary team of public health

professionals.

COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR

TOURISM ATTRACTIONS

AND

COMMUNITY EVENTS

T. Stone: We have yet another example of an organization that’s been left

flapping in the wind because this government can’t seem to shoot

straight when it comes to getting supports out to organizations that

have been decimated by this pandemic.

The Pacific National Exhibition is a beloved summer attraction. We

all can recall time spent there as kids or taking our kids there. Last

year the PNE lost almost 90 percent of its revenue. The pandemic has led

to 100 full-time staff layoffs and the loss of 4,100 part-time jobs

associated with the PNE, yet the PNE has had no government

support.

My question to the Premier is this. Will the Premier step up and

deliver the relief to the PNE that is so desperately needed by the end

of this fiscal year?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I thank the member for the question.

Certainly, we know there are many businesses that are struggling.

I know that not having international tourism and not having the ability

for businesses to attract even local customers has been hard, especially

for some of our tourism operators, some of the larger tourism

operators.

I know that the Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture has been

engaging with them about the challenges they’re facing and how we can

navigate that and support them. I suspect she’ll have more to say on

that very soon.

We do appreciate the member raising that concern. It’s something

we’ve heard. We’ve been engaging with them for months now to make sure

that we understand fully the challenges they face now as well as the

challenges they face going forward, coming out of the

pandemic.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Kamloops–South Thompson on a

supplemental.

T. Stone: Well, simply put, words are not good enough. Talking about

continued engagement is not good enough. Saying that you’ve been working

on it for months is not good enough.

This is a minister that established a $300 million program six

months ago and has only managed to push $50 million out the door. That’s

incompetent. This is a minister that refuses to loosen up the

eligibility criteria so that these dollars, the very dollars that are

there to help organizations who need it, businesses that need it, get

that support…. That’s incompetent.

There are a few more examples of organizations that desperately

need help. They have been hit hard by the pandemic and are, again,

struggling because of this government’s incompetence.

The Vancouver Art Gallery’s revenue has fallen by 75 percent.

Science World’s revenue is down 85 percent. The Vancouver Aquarium was

forced to close and needs funds to feed its animals. These attractions

are struggling, while the Premier, the Minister of Jobs, the Minister of

Tourism and the government generally do nothing to support

them.

My question, again to the Premier, is: will the Premier provide

the supports that are so desperately needed by all of these

organizations so that they can make it not just through this fiscal year

but well into the future and be enjoyed by British Columbians from

across the province?

[2:15 p.m.]

Hon. R. Kahlon: The member mentioned incompetence. Imagine a minister that runs a

profitable insurance corporation and turns it into the red — billions

and billions of dollars. That is incompetence.

Imagine a minister….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: All right, Members. Okay, Members.

Members will come to order.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Okay.

Minister, take your seat, please.

Are we finished?

The minister will proceed.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Obviously, his incompetence is a bit of a hard thing for him to

deal with.

We know it’s a tough time. We know it’s difficult times for

businesses. We know it’s tough times for our tourism operators. When you

can’t have international tourists come in and your business relies on

that, it’s certainly a challenge for businesses.

Interjections.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Now, the member wants to continue. Maybe he wants to hear more

about his incompetence. Imagine a minister who runs ICBC into the ground

and then hands away free buildings to lobbyists. Now, if he wants to

keep going, I can keep going on this because I’ve got a long

list.

I’ll talk about the businesses that are struggling right now. We

know it’s a difficult time. We know if you can’t have international

tourists here…. We know that even if you can have domestic tourism here,

these businesses are struggling. We know there are grants available for

many businesses that have less than 149 employees. They can apply. Many

are applying.

Over 60 percent of the dollars….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, a question was asked. Now let’s hear the

answer.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Over 60 percent of the businesses that have applied for the grants

so far have been tourism operators. Money is going out the door. We’re

going to continue to work with the larger operators that have over 149

employees — to both work with them on the challenges they’re facing now

as well as how they can be successful in the years ahead.

L. Doerkson: We have another example of British Columbians paying the ultimate

price for this government’s incompetence. Communities like Williams Lake

host stampedes and festivals that bring in economic activity and help to

celebrate our local culture.

Sadly, the Williams Lake Stampede had to cancel their event last

year and may not be able to open again this year.

The question to the Premier is: will he commit to providing some

relief to these struggling community events?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you to the member for asking his first question. Welcome to

this House.

Hon. Speaker, thank you for raising the concerns that he has in

his community with the rodeo. I’ve had the privilege of attending that

rodeo. It’s a fantastic event and draws people from throughout the

region and outside of the country as well.

We know it’s a challenging time with the rodeo having been

cancelled. I’m happy to meet with the member and even with the Minister

of Tourism, Arts and Culture to engage with the rodeo to see how, again,

we can support them in the current challenges they’re facing as well as

how they see their economic recovery going forward.

L. Doerkson: These groups would like engagement from our government. This is

what we need help on right now.

Yet another couple of examples of this government’s incompetence.

Communities like Quesnel have had to cancel Billy Barker Days now for

two years in a row. They just made the announcement recently. Armstrong

has had to cancel the Interior Provincial Exhibition and Stampede last

year and may not open in 2021. I believe many events in our province are

seriously at risk of never coming back.

When will the Premier support these events so that they can be

there for British Columbians when it is safe to reopen?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you again to the member for the question. His question was

that these organizations want to engage with government, and that’s what

I’m offering. I’m offering to join him, if he would like, to engage with

those organizations.

It’s a challenging time. I think the public knows that when you

can’t have international tourists here, when you can’t have people

traveling to other communities to visit and also attend these important

events we all love to attend, it’s a challenge. I think the member

understands it’s a global pandemic. We’re going to see this challenge

for some time.

I’m willing to engage with the organization that he’s mentioned,

as well as my colleague from the Tourism, Arts and Culture Ministry.

We’ll have that conversation in the coming weeks.

COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR

ARTS

ORGANIZATIONS

C. Oakes: Well, we’ve heard today that the government has a strong

understanding of what is going on and that they understand the

challenges.

[2:20 p.m.]

We have more examples of British Columbians paying the ultimate

price for this Premier and this government’s incompetence. One in four

art workers lost their jobs last year, and groups are in desperate need

of support. Arts societies across the province are facing another year

of almost no revenues. Organizations like Island Mountain Arts in my

riding, theatres and independent cinemas are begging this government for

assistance.

There is money that this government has not been able to get out

the door. Will the Premier provide arts funding for theatres and arts

societies before the end of this fiscal year?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you to the member for the question. I’m happy to engage with

the member regarding the theatre in her community that wants to access

funding.

We’ve had theatres that have applied for and received money. I

know that a theatre in Trail just recently got money. They sent me a

really lovely note about how the dollars have helped their business and

how they see their future now because of the dollars.

I would say to the member that if they have less than 149

employees, they certainly can apply. Money is available. I would

encourage her to help them with their application and to guide them to

the place where they need to be. If she would like us to engage with

them directly to help them, we’re happy to do that.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Cariboo North on a supplemental.

C. Oakes: Well, perhaps the minister should give the same advice to his own

ministers.

Ana Rose Carrico of the Red Gate Arts Society says that venues

like hers might not be able to stay afloat financially. She’s in a

minister’s own backyard. Perhaps the ministers could actually go and

help their own constituents and do their jobs. She says: “The venues

that have the ability to survive are the ones that are going to have

money. The smaller, more local venues will have to shut

down.”

Hey, if the Arts Minister won’t act and the Jobs Minister won’t

act, will the Premier step up or let arts societies close for

good?

Hon. R. Kahlon: The member may be aware that there’s $25 million, part of

StrongerBC, for the B.C. Arts Council, which directly supports these

organizations. The member may want to direct the concerned groups to the

pot of money that the Arts Council has available. As part of StrongerBC,

we also have millions of dollars available for theatres and other

organizations of that kind that want to pivot and do some infrastructure

upgrades to their facilities.

Those dollars are available. If the member would like, she could

reach out, and we can get her direct contacts for the businesses so that

she can help them in her community.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO COVID-19

P. Milobar: We have, yet again, another example of this Premier’s incompetence

and his minister’s incompetence when it comes to distributing the funds

that this assembly unanimously approved almost 12 months ago now and

that are still sitting there.

Since we’re hitting year-end, it’s critical that these dollars get

out the door, especially for agencies that don’t currently qualify. Many

local B.C. museums, for example, don’t qualify. They’re run by

non-profits. They’re not able to access the small business recovery

grants that are out there, and they could be closing for

good.

Again to the Premier, the Premier has had over 11 months now to

help these groups out. Will he commit today to helping them before the

end of this fiscal year, when that money disappears?

Hon. R. Kahlon: The member has his timelines mixed up. As he’ll know, this program

was launched in late October. We made significant changes to the program

on December 21. Since then, we’ve seen a significant increase in

applications.

We’ve seen $51 million go out to small businesses. That has helped

30,000 employees, and 33 businesses in his community, he’ll be happy to

learn, have gotten that money. That means a lot to the 33 businesses in

his community. I know that 33 is maybe a small number to those that live

in Vancouver, but it’s significant in smaller towns in the

province.

I’ll say to the member that the pandemic has shifted throughout

the last year, and so have our supports. We’ve been nimble all the way

through the process, and we’re going to continue to be nimble. We’re

going to continue to engage with organizations that don’t fall below the

149 employees mark. We’re going to work with them to find support, not

only how they can survive now but also how they can go

forward.

[2:25 p.m.]

P. Milobar: That’s very concerning. It highlights…. I know the Premier and the

mutual admiration society on the other side of the House don’t like to

hear the word “incompetent” today. So blundering, bungling, amateurish,

incapable, inept, clumsy. You name it. That was highlighted in that last

answer by the minister.

Here’s a simple timeline for the minister. On March 23 last year,

unanimous support…. And $1.5 billion was supposed to be targeted and

earmarked to help businesses and agencies. It hasn’t been spent. It

hasn’t gone out the door. We’re asking the minister and the Premier

questions about agencies that don’t even qualify and if they can still

get help, and the minister goes back to prepared speaking notes about

businesses we’re not even asking about.

The question was about museums that don’t qualify for any grants.

They’re about the PNE, which doesn’t qualify for any grants. They’re

about animals needing food at an aquarium. Instead, the minister talked

about ICBC. If you want to talk about incompetence and not trying to

answer a question, that’s it right there.

Again to the Premier, when will these groups, who have been asking

for 11 months — most of whom have been closed for those 11 months

because of health orders or incapable of being able to operate, have

been having the same request for 11 months on money that was approved in

this assembly 11 months ago…? Perhaps the Premier can let the minister

in on that memo.

When is that money going to go out to these groups? You’re sitting

on it. There are hundreds of millions of dollars sitting there, as we

approach the fiscal year-end at the end of this month, that haven’t gone

out to these groups. When will they get an answer that they’re going to

survive or that they’re going to have to close for good?

Hon. J. Horgan: I was just asked a question. I won’t thank him for doing

so.

I will say to the House, particularly to the official opposition

for the line of questioning today, that they’ve identified a whole host

of agencies, businesses, operations that are struggling. We get that

because it’s happening in our constituencies as well — 57 of them on

this side, 30 on that side of the House, 87 across the province. It’s

not one way or the other here. It’s all British Columbians.

Now, we together, collectively, put $10 billion into the B.C.

economy between budgets — unprecedented. That money is spent, Member.

It’s spent, and you know it is. The funds that we have available have

been targeted to small and medium-sized businesses.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: What we are doing now, in cooperation — the Minister of Jobs, the

Minister of Tourism — is reaching out to the very organizations that

you’ve articulated and saying: “How can we make this work for you?”

That’s what we’ve been doing.

Interjection.

Hon. J. Horgan: “How about a cheque?” says the member on the other side. “How

about a cheque?”

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: If only that had been the attitude of the official opposition when

they were cutting programs for people. If only that had been their

position when they were abandoning people through 16 years of

neglect.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. J. Horgan: We will address these issues in a responsible way to meet the

interests of all British Columbians wherever they may live.

Here is a news flash for the member from Kamloops. It’s a global

pandemic, dude. Get with the program.

[End of question period.]

Speaker’s Statement

CONDUCT OF MEMBERS

DURING QUESTION

PERIOD

Mr. Speaker: Members, you may think you know that making a big noise is a good

way of doing question period. The Chair doesn’t appreciate

it.

Also, I want to share with you that I have received phone calls

from members who may not be sitting in the gallery. They used to come

here but not anymore. They still watch us. They listen to the language

being used today. I heard the words “competence,” “incompetence,”

“incompetent” numerous times.

An Hon. Member: So?

Mr. Speaker: So the point is…. If the member will sit down and listen before I

finish my statement. The point is that let’s be temperate in our

language in our debate, because the public is watching. Opposition

members have every right to ask these questions. I understand they’re

passionate and all that, but be careful. Be careful.

Interjection.

[2:30 p.m.]

Mr. Speaker: I’m not stopping you from asking a question — incompetent. I’m not

stopping you. All I’m saying is it was used so many times. People take

notice of it. Just be careful; that’s all I’m saying, okay?

You have the right to ask questions. We will have a wonderful

debate in the House every day.

Reports from Committees

FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT

SERVICES

COMMITTEE

J. Routledge: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select

Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services for the first

session of the 42nd parliament titled Annual Review of the Budgets

of Statutory Offices , a copy of which has been deposited with

the Office of the Clerk.

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

Motion approved.

J. Routledge: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the

report.

Leave granted.

Mr. Speaker: Member, continue.

J. Routledge: I move that the report be adopted. In doing so, I would like to

make some brief comments.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

J. Routledge: This unanimous report summarizes the committee’s recommendations

for the budgets of the province’s nine statutory offices.

Committee members met with all statutory offices in February to

carefully review their budget proposals for the upcoming three fiscal

years. The committee supported necessary increases to address

non-discretionary pressures as well as additional funding to support

offices with fulfilling their legislated mandates. Committee members

appreciated the efforts of the offices to find innovations and

efficiencies and encourage all statutory offices to continue to find

these opportunities to ensure fiscal responsibility and

prudence.

The committee also acknowledged the challenges posed by the

COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on each office and extends its

appreciation to all officers and their staff for their continued work on

behalf of British Columbians and for their engagement during the budget

review process.

I would also like to extend my appreciation to all committee

members for their diligent and thoughtful consideration of the budget

submissions, and particularly recognize the Deputy Chair, the member for

Kelowna West, for his support and work during this process.

B. Stewart: I want to thank the Chair for her remarks about this report. I

know that it was an incredibly difficult timeline to work with, and the

Clerk of Committees and their staff really pulled out all the stops, as

well as all of the statutory officers, to do their job.

The presentations were, indeed, gratifying — to see the challenges

that they face, some of the innovations that were presented. I know that

there were fairly substantial increases due to legislative pressures and

obligations, such as the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner,

the Ombudsperson and the Human Rights Commissioner as well as the

Auditor General. We look forward, as a committee, to seeing their future

progress reports and making certain that they’re thoughtful in terms of

the challenge of the resources that British Columbians have in these

tough times.

I just want to thank all of the committee members from both sides

of the House for their thoughtful and probing questions. We look

forward, as a committee, to the reports coming back and updates on the

progress of their individual offices and the Case Tracker System, which

is a part of this.

Motion approved.

[2:35 p.m.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading on Bill 6, Home Owner Grant Amendment

Act.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 6 — HOME OWNER GRANT

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that Bill 6 be read a second time now.

These amendments enable the full centralization of the homeowner

grant program, a program that provides property tax relief for 1.1

million B.C. homeowners each year.

In December 2020, government introduced the Finance Statutes

Amendment Act. This act ensured that all homeowner grant applications

must be provided to the province for the 2020 and 2021 tax years,

effectively removing local government’s legal obligation to collect and

process homeowner grant applications. This was the first step in

centralizing the homeowner grant program. The amendments in this bill

are the final steps to ensure the province meets its commitment to fully

centralize the program as announced in Budget 2020.

After listening to our municipal partners, who said that

administering this program was a burden, we made the decision to

centralize the program. The province already administers homeowner

grants for rural properties, and it makes sense to centralize and

streamline the program. Local governments support this change, as it

removes an administrative burden and ensures that they will not need to

collect and store sensitive personal information.

This is important as the province meets its commitment from the

30-point plan for housing affordability to collect social insurance

numbers on homeowner grant applications. Collecting social insurance

numbers adds rigour to the homeowner grant administration to help fight

tax evasion, reduce fraud and ensure people are paying the right amount

of tax.

Centralization not only lifts an administrative burden from our

local government partners but will also make it faster and easier for

homeowners to apply. This means all owners will have access to an online

application as well as being able to apply over the phone with a

government agent. Centralization also ensures all B.C. homeowners are

treated fairly. This means that eligible applicants will receive the

full grant they are entitled to, while ineligible applicants will not

receive a grant. These amendments do not change existing eligibility

criteria for homeowner grants and do not change grant

amounts.

The amendments also modernize the Home Owner Grant Act, ensuring

consistency with other modern statutes and providing more tools to

increase efficient recovery of amounts owed to government. Ministry

staff consulted with local governments and the Union of B.C.

Municipalities on changes to the program before the amendments were

finalized for introduction. Ministry staff have also worked closely with

local governments on process and system changes to ensure that the

transition to centralization is as seamless as possible.

As well, we have confirmed that there is no notification required

under British Columbia’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Act because the province’s homeowner grant program does not apply on

treaty First Nations lands or Nisg̱a’a lands. Treaty First Nations and

Nisga’a Nation administer their own homeowner grant programs. Although

they have the same eligibility requirements as the provincial homeowner

grant program, these eligibility requirements are not changing with

centralization. The treaty First Nations and Nisga’a will continue to

administer their own homeowner grant programs under their treaty

property tax agreements and in accordance with their laws.

Similarly, the provincial homeowner grant program does not apply

on the reserve lands of a taxing First Nation. If they provide homeowner

grants to residents, they do so under independent property taxation

authority. The province will continue to be available for discussions

with treaty First Nations and Nisga’a Nation on future alignment with

the administration of the homeowner grant program.

[2:40 p.m.]

In

summary, these amendments deliver on the commitment made in

Budget 2020 to centralize the homeowner grant administration, enable our

government to meet another commitment in the 30-point plan for housing

affordability and benefit both local governments and B.C. homeowners by

ensuring that a more efficient and effective homeowner grant program

will be delivered.

M. Bernier: Thank you to the minister for her opening remarks on Bill 6. I

understand there are going to be a few people getting up and speaking to

the bill.

Let me start by maybe just highlighting some of the issues,

challenges and things that we’re going to bring up when we get to

committee stage on this bill later on in this session, whenever that may

be. I think it’s fair to say that, obviously, there are some

reservations around this and some skepticism that we might have on this

side of the House.

When you look at the government’s success rate right now, lately,

of trying to administer and roll out programs, it hasn’t been very

successful. Obviously, we have to really scrutinize and ask the tough

questions — is government ready for this? — because government has been

trying to roll out programs with no success.

We heard today in question period that 16 percent of money that

was approved by this entire House a year ago has managed to go out to

help businesses. We continue to get phone calls or emails day after day

from people in the province of British Columbia who were expecting a

COVID recovery cheque in their bank account by Christmas, as was

promised by the NDP government, and so many have, unfortunately, not

seen that assistance and help.

Whether it’s citizens on the ground, whether it’s businesses or

whether it’s communities, people in this province have not seen this

government fulfil their promises. So I have a hard time understanding

why, at this time, government…. As the minister mentioned many times in

her brief opening remarks on this bill: centralization.

Well, centralization…. What I see under the NDP government is more

about control. It’s about gathering information that they can use on

people. These are some of the concerns that I’m hearing: “Is this just

another attempt by this government to get more of my personal

information? Why do they want it, and how are they going to use it in

years down the road that could negatively affect me?”

We’ll get into discussions again in committee stage. I’m pleased

to hear the minister acknowledge that the idea here is not to change the

eligibility requirements or the monetary amounts that people will be

eligible for under a homeowner’s grant. That’s good news, but I want to

dive into that a little bit further later on.

The minister, I think, was acknowledging that it’s simple and

straightforward, this process. Well, unfortunately, I don’t know if it

is.

Right now, in a lot of parts of rural British Columbia, it is….

For 25 years, it’s been a process where, you know, a senior couple goes

to city hall. They fill out the forms for the application for their

homeowner’s grant. While they’re there, they give a cheque and pay their

taxes minus that amount to the city. I don’t know if I have confidence

that this change is not going to negatively affect some of those people

who, for 25 years, have done something a certain way.

There are a lot of parts of British Columbia, especially in rural

B.C., that don’t have the connectivity, that don’t have access to the

Internet. We saw that actually roll out, the negative problems with

that, this last December when people were trying to apply for their

COVID recovery benefit, unanimously approved by this House to try to go

out by Christmas.

The amount of people that said, “I couldn’t apply because I don’t

have Internet, and the phone number you gave me didn’t help,” or people

who did apply, who didn’t receive the funds, who were asked a whole

bunch of questions to actually have to prove that they were married for

50 years or lived in B.C. for 75 years or that they’re actually on a

pension which, by the way, the government knows about because it might

be a government pension….

These are some of the frustrations that we’ve seen in the province

over the last few years, specifically the last year with some of these

COVID recovery programs that have not worked. Now the government wants

to centralize, as the minister says, to get more information.

[2:45 p.m.]

On the one hand, we’re always telling people: “Don’t give out our

social insurance numbers to people.” Now the minister is saying: “The

government wants your social insurance number in gathering for the

homeowner’s grant in order to make sure they know who you are and they

can gather more information on you.”

I guarantee you that just that comment alone is going to spark

people wondering: “What’s up?” People are going to wonder why the

government wants yet more information from them that they may or may not

have had to submit before. For me, the comments that I’m hearing from

people are: “This is just another example of government trying to

control me. This is government trying to control my life by them

centralizing and getting that information.”

Now, I hope the government is going to be doing, when this passes,

which I assume it will — the government is going to support this — a

very robust exercise on education for people who are going through

this.

The minister said 1.1 million people, obviously, are homeowners in

this province. But when you look at the record of this government of

targeting and almost penalizing through taxation, through information

and through programs that they’ve done in the past — almost targeting

and penalizing homeowners — there is a reason why homeowners might be a

little skeptical about why government wants to centralize and start

taking on this information.

“What’s up? What’s the hidden agenda?” Of course, we have to ask those

questions in this House to get government on record of what their plans

actually are, if there are any other ones. If there’s not, I welcome the

minister and this government to set the record straight for the people

who have concerns that there might be a hidden agenda by government

doing this.

We’ve also heard from local governments that do have some

frustrations or challenges with this that it’s actually something that

they weren’t quite prepared for. Obviously, the minister has mentioned

support for this. Well, that’s great, I guess, for some, but not for

all. We want to make sure we get some of those issues addressed and

brought forward.

One of the big things, again, that we’re going to want to talk

about during committee stage is making sure, as I said a few moments

ago, that government is not centralizing, as the minister said, to

gather this information to further target and penalize and hurt

homeowners in British Columbia. The government keeps touting their

30-point plan. There has been new legislation that’s been brought

forward, too, recently. It just goes to, again, the fact that there is

unease out there with the intentions of government.

I look forward to getting up in committee stage and addressing

some very specific detailed questions about this. But at this point, the

government and the minister have given me no reason why I should be able

to support this bill. I don’t have the comfort that has been given to be

able to support something without that information that so many people

in B.C. are asking about, about the intentions of this bill. There has

been no communication around it, for the most part, to actual

homeowners. That’s why we have 1.1 million people who are homeowners who

are going to have those questions on the intentions of this

government.

I look forward, on their behalf — and any future homeowners,

hopefully lots of them, in the province — to what this will mean going

forward. With that, I will look forward to some of the further comments

and look forward to committee stage.

J. Sims: It is a pleasure today to rise and speak in the people’s

House.

There is nothing more important to the people of British Columbia

than housing. I can remember just a few years ago, and hearing from

members…. I hear almost every day how important housing is. It’s

fundamental. It’s foundational. I’m so proud of the work that the

government has done to address homelessness. We still have a lot to do.

We have to address affordability.

[2:50 p.m.]

It was very difficult for me to listen to my predecessor speaking

about some of these issues and not acknowledging the problems they

created in the housing market when they were in government. But the bill

we have before us today is fairly straightforward. There are no hidden

agendas here. I don’t think you could have anything clearer than this

piece of legislation.

What we have been going through over the last year has been…. I’m

sure we are all aware of it. We live it every day. It’s a worldwide

pandemic, a pandemic that has turned the world on its head, inside out,

upside down, however you want to say it. During this time, so many

things have been highlighted to streamline work and to make it easier

for the people of British Columbia to deal with processes.

Over the last year, we’ve had to learn to do so many things

online. I can tell you I ended up doing things online, paying bills and

things, which I had always said I was not going to do. I ended up doing

banking online. I’ve ended up communicating with my grandchildren on

FaceTime ad nauseam because there is no other way to communicate with

them.

What I’ve learned during this time is how we can all adapt. People

have got so used to dealing with so much stuff with the magic devices in

their hands or on their desktops that they are looking for more and more

things that they can do online, do safely and proceed. Don’t get me

wrong. Like me, many others cannot wait to get back to the pre-COVID

time, somewhat the pre-COVID time, so that we can go out and do things

in person.

This particular bill is in response to the minister paying

attention to what the municipalities were telling us. And you know what?

I’ve been very proud of the work of this government, because we have

focused on listening. Listening is very important. We learn so much from

it. What we heard from the municipalities was how cumbersome,

time-consuming and costly it was for the municipalities to administer

this legislation, the homeowner’s grant, which, by the way, they have

been doing since 1957. They have been doing it since 1957.

Our population has grown. Home ownership has grown, though I can

still tell you that many are still struggling to afford to buy a house.

If any of us watched the news this morning, we know that the real estate

market has picked up again, maybe due to the low interest rates. People

are getting concerned. “Can we afford to buy a house?” But we do have a

large number of people who do own homes already, and they do access the

homeowner’s grant. So what this bill will do is allow online

applications, and the system will be centralized. This is a way to take

away an administrative burden that existed on municipalities.

Only my colleagues across the way, in opposition, could turn a

piece of legislation that actually assists another level of government

with administration and to lower the workload for them and streamline

this as something nefarious and something underhanded that is going on

with a different agenda.

Let me assure my colleague that over the last year we have learned

that we do have to have more safety systems and security systems in

place, but we’ve also learned that different levels of government are

finding safe ways for us to engage and interact online. This is what

it’s going to be. This is instead of manually filling out a form and

then having to mail it. You will be able to go to the government

website, hit a click button. The form will open up. You will complete

it, and you will send it.

[2:55 p.m.]

If you need assistance and you need help with it, there will be

call centres, and you will be able to call and get this done centrally.

There will also be help available for people at Service B.C. centres.

Everybody knows that there are MLAs in every part of this province who

also will be a resource to assist people who are absolutely struggling

with this.

I think, when I look at the work that the minister has done, this

is long overdue, probably. It is streamlining. It is making things

easier. It is, in many ways, compatible with the way we are doing things

right now.

Also, for me, I always look at, if another level of government is

being impacted, what their reaction is. You know, they’re happy about

it.

Let me read to you a quote so we can get it into Hansard .

Here we have a quote from Brian Frenkel, who is the president of the

Union of B.C. Municipalities. That means all the local governments

across B.C. from corner to corner to corner.

This is what he has to say. “For more than a year, local

government and the Ministry of Finance staff have been working together

to ensure the smooth transition of this program to the provincial

government,” said Brian Frenkel. “This change will provide

administrative improvements requested” — and I really want to focus on

that, requested — “by local government and supports the implementation

of the provincial housing plan.”

How unique to have a government that is responsive, that listened

to local government, heard their concerns and moved forward with a

legislative agenda after a year-long consultation. So what could be

secretive about this? What could be hidden about this? And when I’m

looking at how this will make things easier for people, I’m thinking

it’s common sense.

As all of you know, I am a teacher, and I always have to use a

teacher analogy somewhere. I always think if something will pass the nod

test with somebody in kindergarten, it’s okay. It’s okay to move forward

with that. I would say, if I was to explain to my great-granddaughter,

who is not in kindergarten yet — she is four — that this is what we’re

going to be doing and this is why, she would be sitting there going like

this, because it does make sense. It does make sense.

I am very, very proud of the work done by the minister, in

consult. I know two ministers have worked on this, and I acknowledge the

work done by all of them.

Once again, I want to assure people that this is to make it

easier. You can go to the government website online. And by the way,

just to make this crystal-clear, this is not an increased cost for

individuals. The threshold has already been determined, right? There is

nothing that’s going to be taken away at all. It’s just a way to access

the homeowner’s grant.

If you’re finding it difficult…. I do know that there are parts of

this province, having travelled from corner to corner, that do have

connectivity issues. There are parts that do, and I acknowledge

that.

For them, they do have phone calls. They can pick up the phone and

get a lot of this done on the phone. They can also visit their local

Service B.C. centre and the MLA office as well, if they need additional

help, because usually the connectivity in our government offices is a

little bit more stable at times. Well, I’m not going to say too much

there, because we have had issues. But let me tell you that there are

many, many places people can go for help.

[3:00 p.m.]

While I’m up here talking about this legislation, as we talk about

a homeowner’s grant, I know. They are my children, my grandchildren and

many other people’s children and grandchildren who are thinking: “I want

to be able to afford to buy a house and how challenging housing

affordability is.” I want to remind everybody how the housing market was

out of control when we first got elected. We did put a 30-point action

plan in place, and some of it began to have an effect. It was having an

impact. But now, with the interest rates….

I was shocked the other day, when I was looking on their website,

at a bank offering interest rates of 0.99 of 1 percent. This was about a

week ago. I couldn’t get my head around that, because I was a house

owner at a time when interest rates went up to 18 percent, and I know

the impact that had on us.

What has happened is that because of COVID, for a while, people

were not buying. Right now, interest rates are low, so more are

qualifying for mortgages. The housing market is hot again. This is a

concern.

I know for everybody who is in the housing market, you see your

house price go up, and it makes you feel good. Your equity is being

built up. But for those wanting to enter the market, they begin to have

cold sweats, thinking: “Will I ever be able to enter the housing

market?” That is why I am proud of the billions and billions of dollars

that our government has committed to building affordable housing and

also housing for the middle class as well as addressing the homelessness

issues that exist.

I wish there was a magic pill for this, but we don’t have one. But

I can tell you that having addressed some of the major concerns around

the money laundering issue, which was allowed to run rampant by the

previous government, we did begin to see an impact of that.

We all have a lot more work to do, and I’m looking forward to

getting on with that. But in the meantime, what I do want to say to

folks is: when you get new pieces of legislation, sometimes they’re very

simple and they have a lot hidden behind them. When I was listening to

my colleague from the opposition speaking, I kept thinking: is there

something here that I might have missed in my reading of it? Is it more

than it is saying?

Then I began to do my reading again, and I thought: you know what?

This was a request. This is a result of consultation. I know that the

opposition, when in government, really did not believe in consultation

or listening. I don’t think it was part of their vocabulary or their

actionability, so for them, it often does come as news and often as a

bit of a shock that there is a government that does listen to people,

that does want to be responsive, that does listen to other levels of

government.

We do believe in working together in collaboration. Working in

collaboration is very, very critical. That doesn’t just mean within a

party and outside or within one caucus or the other. I believe in

working in collaboration with all of us in the House to find the best

way forward to serve British Columbians. All of us come here to do

that.

I think this is a good time for me to thank the constituents of

Surrey-Panorama for having elected me and sent me here to represent them

again. I am always honoured and in awe of their trust. I would also like

to thank everyone who worked on my campaign. Once again, I will say it

is a privilege, always, to represent the people and to fight for

them.

As we look at this legislation, I’m hoping every member in this

House will find a way to support this legislation, because this

legislation is there to help to streamline and to make sure that we

reduce the burden on municipal governments as they try to administer

this particular provincial program.

The municipalities seem to be very happy with it. They don’t seem

to have concerns. I think the public, when they realize how much easier,

more streamlined, everything is, will be much happier with this as

well.

[3:05 p.m.]

As I said before — and before I stop talking — they can go online,

get information from gov.bc.ca, homeowner’s grant. They can go to the

call centre. It’s a toll-free phone call, folks — 1-888-355-2700, Monday

to Friday, 8:30 to 5 p.m., excluding statutory holidays. Go to a Service

B.C. centre nearest them, and if all else fails, they can contact their

local MLA and get some assistance that way.

As I was saying, a big shout-out to the minister for the work she

has done with the municipalities and for this collaborative moving

forward to find a solution for a problem that existed.

D. Davies: I’m pleased to rise here today — well, not in the House but in the

House virtually — to continue debate on this bill. I’m certain that my

colleague from Peace River South, as well as others, is looking forward

to examining this in committee stage.

My remarks will be fairly short today. I just wanted to bring up a

few points from an angle of more rural and northern remote communities

that are within my riding of Peace River North.

I want to follow up on the member for Surrey-Panorama, her

comments. I’m glad that she did go back and talk about how that

connectivity is maybe not necessarily great all over the province. I can

attest to that, Mr. Speaker. I have communities in my riding, and they

are, across the province….

As the member said, you cannot just pick up your magic devices,

because they don’t work. There are many areas across the province where

there is no cell service. There are many parts of our province that have

poor, if any, connectivity to the Internet. There are still parts of the

province where people have poor landline connectivity.

I’ve had people reach out to me since this was first brought up.

Please, you would have to excuse me and many British Columbians if

they’re not fully confident in the government rolling out more online

services, more “call us; we’re here to help” services, because we’ve

seen those fail and fail again over the past number of months. My

colleague already spoke to this briefly. Whether we’re talking about the

business grants rollout, whether we’re talking about the COVID relief,

we have seen nothing but issue after issue with people trying to get

through on this telephone line.

There are 1.3 million homeowners in British Columbia. Well, that

was a 2016 stat. Those are a lot of people that are going to be phoning,

all at around the same time, when those tax notices come out across

British Columbia. They are worried, and people have reached out to me.

Even some municipalities in my riding have reached out to me. They’re

really concerned about how this is going to roll out.

If you look at home ownership amongst 65-year-olds and older, 78

percent of people in that age bracket own their own homes. It’s probably

safe to say that many of those in that age bracket aren’t necessarily

avid Internet users, who are quite content with going into their city

hall and signing off their piece of paper and handing it in, in a

one-stop-shopping manner. Of course, that is now not available. So our

concern is: is government ready for this?

What has been demonstrated over the past number of months is…. We

don’t think so. British Columbians certainly don’t think so. I can read

lots of things. I’ve had people reach out to me. This is one elderly

person in my riding. Those people who are not connected to the Internet,

like senior citizens who never use a computer…. What exactly will happen

when others cannot apply, but they might still qualify? Is that task

going to be administered or picked up by the municipality? Or is the

province going to have some alternative means to fix this?

[3:10 p.m.]

These are questions that people are asking me. One of my friends

goes: “Well, I guess this is one more thing that I’m going to have to do

for my parents.” We are already seeing kids of elderly folks now having

to pick up doing these other online pieces that we’ve already seen

government move to in many ways.

I said I was going to keep my remarks short. I just wanted to

bring forward some of the concerns that have been raised to me over the

past weeks. It’s really about people. Unfortunately, this bill is not

about people. It is not going to be as easy as I think the government

thinks it might be. Many people, again, don’t feel that government is

going to be ready, as they’ve demonstrated already, to receive, really,

another 1½ million phone calls or interactions via Internet.

We have a lot of concerns. They will be brought up a little bit

more during committee stage. I hope to be able to also speak during that

time. It is important to know that these points are addressed by

government. We do look forward to some robust discussion as we move

forward. As I said, I’ll keep my remarks very short. I will leave this

to the next speaker.

M. Starchuk: It is my honour to stand here for the first time to speak on a

bill that is so pointed at what I used to do.

We see here that the local government is asking for this. I can

tell you, from my four years as a councillor, the lineups, the streams

that were there at city hall of people that were trying to pay their

taxes. They were trying to get their grants and the confusion that was

there. It was confusion young and old.

This program that’s inside of here, to streamline it, to put it in

concert with the rest of the province, is a very, very wise thing to do.

It’s expected to be quicker; it’s expected to be fairer.

We hear the stories about how we’re worried about a social

insurance number, and what’s going to happen. There’s a level that makes

believe that it’s nefarious when, in fact, it’s the actual tool that

will be used to ensure that that person making the application will get

what’s justified for what level of a grant they’re going to get back to

themselves.

When we think about and when we hear about the seniors’ population

— they’re not capable, or it’s tough for them to be online — I want to

just say one thing. I will not give the age of my mother out, but I can

tell you that she will be in the first dose of vaccines. She has no

issues with learning how to get online. She’s fortunate. She has a

computer. She has other people to talk to.

Those are the simplicities of how this thing works. Those of us

that have taken the time to go online and do the clicks that are there

ahead of time will be able to see that it’s not a difficult situation

for the people that are there.

When we take a look at the municipal governments, they’re asking

for the provincial government to do this. They know the amount of time

and effort that’s there for their staff, that they have to pay out of

their budgets to administer something that is a provincial grant. It

just makes sense to listen to those municipal governments and release

them from the burden of the application process that’s there.

We talk about the phone network that will be there for those

people that may not have a computer, that may not be able to connect. We

have those services that are there. The majority of the people that we

find, that are out there, are able to do it online. So the phone system

should not be overburdened.

For those people that feel that they still need to have some

in-person help, Service B.C. is there. But I want to stress that our

constituency assistants are there as well. They will be well-versed in

that. They have our phone numbers. A special little shout-out to Denise

and my new employee Naz, that will be there to help out those people

that need that extra help to walk them through the steps that are

there.

[3:15 p.m.]

No changes have been made to the program’s eligibility

requirements or benefits. It’s the same program that was there before.

The same eligibility that’s there. The only minor change is the amount

of dollars that are assessed to your home to make you qualify. It has

gone up a small bit. Over 90 percent of British Columbians will qualify

for this grant. Those 90 percent will benefit from that in a time when

housing markets are on the rise again.

One of the other parts to this program is that it says that

there’s no cost. It’s in there as “no cost.” But the cost that’s there

to its savings to the municipalities will be the cost of the time that

they don’t have to have those people administering this program. Again,

I want to emphasize that it’s the municipal governments, it’s the local

governments that are asking the province for this service to continue

the way it’s going.

The program, when it unrolls, also has the ability for that person

that does not have a computer, does not have a phone line, does not have

that ability to meet somebody in person, to still go through that paper

application process that’s there. You can call an agent. They can make

arrangements. They can ensure those paper trails that that person would

like to do. We’ve got many people in our constituency that still like to

receive their notices. They still like to receive their bills. They

still like to have that tactile feeling of paper before they pay

something that’s out.

When the province takes over this part — when the billing comes

through, the grant application comes through — it’s going to be the

centralization that’s going to be more efficient for the actual

homeowner. As it sits in today’s world, with the municipal governments

providing that service, there are errors that can happen within the

municipalities because of the familiarity that’s there for them to

process these grants.

By going to a centralized location, we’ll be able to have those

people in a more productive way, that are doing that grant application

on a regular basis, to be more efficient than the system that’s there

today. Going to this grant application process makes it consistent

throughout the province of B.C., where we already have areas that have

this grant application process in place for those smaller

communities.

I stand here today supporting this bill, supporting the minister

and those people that were in consultation with those municipalities in

getting what it is that they were after. The burden that was there on

the municipalities was greatly provided to us to take a look

at.

I know from my riding, Surrey-Cloverdale, it is just a portion of

the city of Surrey where the local governments take care of all the

ridings that are there, and they speak on their behalf as a whole. They

are the ones that are asking for us to do what we are doing here

today.

I support this motion. I like everything about this motion. I like

everything that’s inside of it with regards to the consultation that the

government has had with the local municipalities.

T. Shypitka: Bill 6. I’d like to take my place and talk to the Home Owner Grant

Amendment Act, 2021. We’ve heard from a couple members on both sides

already on this.

This is about switching gears. It’s about switching the process. I

think it was the member for Surrey-Panorama that said it has been in

place since 1957. We also have heard words on making it more simple and

more fair.

We can take both those descriptions. I think the minister herself

said fair. This makes it more fair. We heard the member for

Surrey-Cloverdale say it makes it more fair. I’m just wondering what

they mean by that. Are they meaning it was never treated fairly in the

past, since 1957, where people seemed to get a quick response on filling

in their homeowners grant application? They’d go down; they’d pay their

taxes. Seemed pretty fair for, you know, 60 years almost.

[3:20 p.m.]

The simple part…. I think the member for Surrey-Panorama and the

member from the North Peace region talked about the magic device. The

member for Surrey-Panorama talked about listening to people.

Well, this magic device isn’t so magical when you’re in places

like Grasmere or Baynes Lake or Hosmer or Newgate and many places in my

riding that just have no connectivity at all, whatsoever. They enjoy

what they’ve been doing for many years. That’s simply going to their

local municipality and paying their taxes and, you know, making a day of

it. “We’ll go into town and go shopping.” It’s all been done very simply

in the past. I don’t think this addresses simplification at

all.

There are also issues with personal information that the

government is getting. A lot of people don’t think that’s right. They

get a little freaked out, to tell you the honest truth. I don’t blame

them, seeing what’s been happening so far with this government in the

last three or four years.

A hidden agenda perhaps. There are a lot of conspiracy theories

out there. What’s this leading to? Only time will tell. Some are very

worried about where this may go. Maybe the elimination of the

homeowner’s grant altogether. Who knows?

I was in municipal government for a number of years. This issue

was never raised at the table, of this being an administrative burden to

the municipality. I understand how municipalities and councils…. Any

time you can get rid of any kind of provincial downloading, sure, I’m

all in. But it’s got to be done in a way that is good for the

constituents and the citizens of the area. I don’t think this is really

addressing that, in this bill.

The member for Surrey-Panorama says that we need to listen more.

She was really eager to give some quotes.

I pulled a few quotes, just from my page for today, mentioning

this bill. We’ll throw a couple at you. First one: “This makes no sense.

How will it streamline it? Now we fill out the grant and sign it when we

pay our taxes. How simple is that? Now I have to apply to the province?

Ridiculous.” Another person quoted here: “Wow, huge mistake. Passing

more authority to the province, or to Ottawa, only leads to decisions

that will hurt you later.” Next quote: “This makes me very

angry.”

The next couple of quotes here are from very strong, I know, NDP

supporters. That’s cool with me. I get along with all of my

constituents. This person is a really good friend of mine. He believes

in what this government has been doing to a large part so far, and this

is what his quote was: “It was already as streamlined as possible.” The

next person says: “I wonder how much will be saved by people failing to

apply. Not a good thing.”

There’s already a groundswell on this bill. I don’t think it’s as

simple as what government is trying to make it look like right now. I

think it needs to be a relook at this bill. I think that’s what we’ll be

doing when we get to committee stage, dissecting a little bit, maybe

asking for some changes. Who knows? I think we need to do what’s best

for the people of British Columbia and really examine it as a

whole.

I’m going to make it quick here but just alert members of the

House that this is not as simple and as fair as what government is

saying right now. If government is truly genuine about making this

simple and fair, then perhaps a hybrid system could be put in place.

Perhaps we could have a little of both. Maybe we can have our cake and

eat it too. That might be something that might be suggested in

committee.

I want to go forward. I want to just reach out to both sides of

the floor and say: “Let’s make this right for the people in B.C. and not

for what you’re told is right.” Look deep, and see if this is actually

going to help or hinder.

I mean, we look at some of the online processes that have gone on

so far. We look at the B.C. recovery grant. This is something that was

done online, a grant that was promised before Christmastime. Here we are

into March, and I think only half of it’s been applied for so far. Not a

lot of people happy with that process.

If we look at the speculation tax applications, a lot of people

missed those deadlines. I’m not too sure how many people got caught in

the cracks on that one. I know there were a lot of angry British

Columbians about that process.

[3:25 p.m.]

The B.C. Parks reservation process last summer. What a disaster

that was. It was a simple online reservation process, but it fell very

short of what was promised. Then, of course, government grants for small

businesses here in the province. We don’t need to go into too much

detail on that one to shine a light on how disastrous that has been so

far. People are skeptical about what is simple and fair.

I’ll leave it at that. We’ll look at joining you all later in

committee stage.

S. Chant: I’m honoured to have the opportunity to address the House on this

important topic.

I am speaking to you from the unceded territories of the Squamish,

Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh Nation. I appreciate the opportunity to be

learning, living and playing in these areas.

I find it really interesting that a group of people can look at

something that is straightforward and that is moving us into the 2000s

and say that it is some kind of conspiracy to defraud our seniors or to

make things more difficult — when we have an alphabet of communities

throughout our province, all of which have people that we are committed

to supporting as best as can be, when we work with the municipalities

and we hear from the municipalities that tell us that this process has

been a burden for many years.

I can attest to that. I’ve stood in those lineups. That it was

equitable and fair at all times….

My niece, who is an adult — I am old — purchased a home two years

ago, and she knew nothing about the homeowner grant until her parents

said: “Have you applied for it?” She said: “No. It doesn’t apply to me.”

She had to learn about it.

Across the board, there’s always going to be a challenge with

anything we implement, anything that anybody implements.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

It surprises me that we’re talking about connectivity still, 20

years later. There was another government in power for many, many years

that maybe could have addressed this connectivity problem but apparently

hasn’t.

That’s another thing that we’re looking at addressing. Is it

something that we are going to consider in terms of implementing this

program? Of course it is.

There are structures in place to support people that have not the

capacity to use…. Whether it’s connectivity, whether it’s cognition,

whether it’s capacity to have equipment, whether it’s economic, the

structures are there to support those people. Every person in this House

that has risen to speak to this matter is part of that structure to

support these people, to do what needs to be done in order for them to

benefit from this.

The question of fair and equitable treatment. We’re not looking at

what’s fair for everybody. I don’t know…. Here we are back at The

Lion King . Life is not fair. All of us have things to do in our

lives that sometimes are harder to do than at other times. This is not

one of those things. This is going to be relatively straightforward;

it’s going to be relatively simple.

The connectivity issues. I heard it. I’m sure we will get further

discussions on that, and we will work on solving those problems. That is

our commitment to the people of British Columbia. That is why we

collaborate. That is why we work together.

The bit about the municipalities. Absolutely, anything that we can

do to reduce the workload for the municipality, to give them the time

and the resources to devote to other things that are more [audio

interrupted] with their own areas, more concerned with the myriad of

things that they can do — fantastic. Give it to the provincial

government — it is something that applies to people right across the

province — and let the municipalities use their resources of time and

people, get them so that they can use that elsewhere.

[3:30 p.m.]

We also make sure that this gives the people access to their tax

benefits. Again, we have people that actually have not ever applied for

their homeowner’s grant, for whatever reason. Is it a language issue? Is

it a knowledge issue? Is it a “because I don’t need it” issue? There are

many reasons why people don’t apply. If it’s because it’s an oversight,

let’s figure out a way to deal with that.

I heard somebody say: “You know what? This is just one more thing

to add to what I do for my senior parents.” Okay. If you’re having

difficulty with managing your senior parents, look for other ways to

support that. There are other things available.

We’ve got to come into the 2000s. We’ve got to allow our systems

to move forward. If we keep doing a lot of these things on independent

and different bases, it will allow for inequalities amongst the folks

that we are trying to provide service for. It already has, in a couple

of ways. What we want to be able to do is move forward and provide a

steady and effective system for this.

Perhaps we are learning, over and over, from the different things

that we’ve tried to do during the pandemic. Over and over, people are

talking about having challenges getting through for their COVID

benefits. My constituency assistants have been working every day with

folks to get them access to their COVID benefits and to circumnavigate

and work around these various barriers that everybody is tossing

up.

We will get there. It’s not easy. The province is very large.

We’ve got a huge variety in what we serve. We can still do it, but we

have to work together, and we have to hear what people have to say. I

appreciate what everybody has offered, from across the House, about

things that are concerns. Great. Bring it to the committee. Let’s work

it through. Let’s get it solved. Let’s keep moving forward. Let’s not

stay in 1957, when this all first started. We’ve been doing this method

for all that long.

I can tell you that all of your communities have evolved. We all

know this. I hope that when people are looking at things that government

is bringing forward…. It’s a hope; it’s not a guarantee. There is no

intent of nefariousness.

We are very, very lucky. We live in one of the parts of the world

where we are safe to bring forward our discussions, to bring forward our

concerns, to bring forward our arguments. We can do this in a safe and

respectful environment, listen to each other and work things through —

rather than being removed from our place, sent away or imprisoned for

saying what we have to say. We need to celebrate that.

We have bills that are straightforward and simple and — need I

say, a very bad word — housekeeping bills, which are based on work that

was done last year. We’re bringing it through to get it sorted out and

finished so that we can get on to other stuff that’s important and that

needs to be addressed as well.

Thank you so much to our Finance Minister for the work that she is

doing on so many different fronts. Let us support something that is good

for the people across the province and that is something that we can get

behind readily. Let’s not tear it apart.

I thank you for your time. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the

opportunity to speak to the group.

L. Doerkson: My comments will be brief today. I just wanted to make a couple of

comments around the word “simplicity.” I’ve heard that a number of times

today.

Certainly, I think most of the members on this side of the House

would appreciate simplicity going forward. The problem is that we really

haven’t seen that in the track record. For the short time that I’ve been

in office, I haven’t seen simplicity in anything that we’ve

done.

[3:35 p.m.]

I understand that the bill will centralize the administration of

this program. I guess I have to start by asking: why fix something that

isn’t broken? Many of our residents have conveyed to us that, simply

put, the program works. I think the last member spoke to the fact that

we might look to taking the burden away for other things in

municipalities. I think municipalities would be excited to hear that

from the member. Ultimately, I guess my question is: why would we fix

what isn’t broken?

As to the simplicity, I can assure you that offices in the

Cariboo-Chilcotin riding, which I’m pleased to represent here today,

have been extremely busy trying to sort out what was supposed to be a

simple project in the B.C. recovery benefit — not just for businesses.

It has been a nightmare figuring it out for our residents as well. The

complexities around that are many. Simply put, we have people that

applied back in December and still have not received their $500 in

March. I’ve seen the application process myself. It should be simple; it

hasn’t turned out that way. I’m definitely fearful of that.

I also wanted to bring rural B.C. — of course, I’m the critic for

Rural Development — to the forefront, because I believe a couple of

members here have referred to connectivity. I think one of them laid the

blame at our feet for 16 years of ignoring connectivity. I might point

out that it has been four years for the government to deal with it, if

they saw it as a problem, but I can assure you it hasn’t been dealt with

in my riding. I can assure you that in much of rural British Columbia,

it is a very significant issue — very significant.

I know it’s not just connectivity. But when you get into, I think,

comments that we’ve heard earlier here today…. We heard about the

magical device and online. Simply put, at Big Creek in rural British

Columbia, those devices don’t work, and online is not an option. In many

cases, phone lines may not even be an option in some of those rural

areas. I think we need to understand exactly what we’re referring to

when we talk about rural.

I wanted to talk about seniors a little bit. This came up about a

month ago in my riding. I can quote Glenda Winger, who advocates on

behalf of seniors in our community and runs the seniors centre in

Williams Lake. Glenda Winger reached out to me and suggested that

seniors in our community are going to have a massive issue with

this.

Now, I can appreciate the comments that were made earlier. My mom

is pretty good on an iPad too. I can appreciate that. But we must

acknowledge that there are a lot of these seniors that are not good with

an iPad. They’re not good with a computer. In fact, they may not even

have a computer. I can point out just how important this is, because

that seniors centre that Glenda Winger operates…. She is actually

committed to bringing in volunteers to help seniors in our community to

fill out any of these online applications.

I guess my question to that point is this: if the burden was

supposed to go to the province, why is it ending up at a seniors centre?

Our seniors centre is now going to accept that burden that was at the

city level and is now at the provincial level, but ultimately, they will

find themselves dealing with it. I also have no question that our office

will have very much time invested in this as well.

At the end of the day, I believe that connectivity, those types of

things, are definitely issues throughout all of rural B.C. I appreciate

what the government is trying to do by offloading this burden from our

cities, but I am very, very concerned, going forward, how it will play

out.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise today.

I’m joining you from the traditional territories of the Musqueam,

Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations in our virtual hybrid

sitting.

[3:40 p.m.]

I’m very pleased to speak in favour of second reading for Bill 6,

the Home Owner Grant Amendment Act. I just want to give an overview of

that and some of my remarks and thoughts on the significance of Bill

Starting in 2021, B.C. homeowners will apply for their homeowner

grants through the province, not their municipality, which many had been

doing. The advantage of that is that it will make applying for the grant

quicker and easier.

The homeowner grant program provides tax relief to B.C. homeowners

each year. I know that my office and many offices across the province

assist in this process with homeowners in our area. The change to

provincial administration will streamline the process and ensure that

everyone who is eligible receives a reduction in their annual property

taxes.

Prior to this change, local governments administered the program

in municipalities. The province administered the rural grant program. We

had different administrative responsibilities. It was Budget 2020 that

announced the centralization of the program following discussions with

municipalities that told government that administration of the yearly

grant program was a burden.

Annual tax notices will continue to be sent by municipalities but

will include a link to the province’s online grant application.

Homeowners should apply once they’ve received their property tax notice.

If they’ve not yet applied for their 2020 grant, they can do so

retroactively. It will now be online at the government website to be

accessed.

In terms of Bill 6, I’m pleased with these changes. I think it

will help to assist, to streamline the process, make it more effective.

Fundamentally, I’ve heard, particularly from municipalities…. It was

after hearing from, and our government engaging in consultations with,

local government partners that the province is now taking over

administration of the homeowner grant program to ease the burden on

municipalities, which was requested.

What are the advantages? Centralization has other benefits, such

as full online access, phone service, quicker application processing and

ensuring that those who are entitled to a reduction in their property

taxes receive it. There’s some difficulty in terms of the rural

administration in Metro Vancouver being administered differently. That’s

an advantage in terms of it coming together under the provincial

government.

It doesn’t result in a change to program eligibility for B.C.

homeowners. Let’s be clear. It’s working in partnership with

municipalities, who levy the property taxes in May. In terms of

streamlining the process, similar to previous years, new grant

applications will be reviewed in May 2021, when tax notices are mailed

out.

We know that over 90 percent of B.C. homes are eligible to have

their property taxes reduced through the homeowner grant program. This

provides tax relief to B.C. homeowners throughout the province. The

province is now administering the homeowner grant program.

Municipalities are no longer receiving homeowner grant applications.

It’s important for folks to know that. The province is currently also

accepting retroactive 2020 homeowner grant applications.

Besides the online application portal, there’s a telephone line

for folks to access. I know the previous speaker was talking about

older folks who own their homes but may not be that familiar or

comfortable with the online process or, across B.C., have issues around

connectivity. Certainly, there’s a toll-free line that’s available for

folks to also avail and get that service, if they require it. That, I

think, is an important consideration and important support for folks who

are not comfortable with accessing the online portal.

[3:45 p.m.]

Why did we move to centralize? I mentioned we heard from local

governments that administering the program is time-consuming and a

burden. Certainly, listening to municipalities is important. They have a

lot on their plate. I’m pleased that the provincial government was able

to work in collaboration and take that recommendation from

municipalities and support municipalities in terms of delivering this

service. So that’s positive, certainly in my mind.

I think the benefits, as well, not in terms of relieving

municipalities of that administrative responsibility but that there is

also a benefit to homeowners themselves, where we expect that this

process will lead to quicker application processing and also help to be

more systematic and have more transparency and be able to help prevent

ineligible homeowners from being penalized as well. We look at those as

real benefits to the overall program that have been

identified.

Folks will be advised of these changes on the website, information

which is important to advise everyone across B.C. in terms of this

change, besides us discussing it in the Legislature as we’re doing now.

There will also be notices sent out with municipal and rural property

tax notices. So everyone will be advised, and municipal websites will be

updated, as well, to direct homeowners to the gov.bc.ca homeowner grant

online portal. Then there’s an information line available as well. These

are all positive steps.

In terms of the phone call-in centre to address support that’s

needed, there are also in-person visits that they can make to a nearby

Service B.C. centre. So we have the online portal, which we’re

encouraging folks to access. We also have information on the websites.

We also have a 1-800 number that people can access, and there’s

in-person support available at Service B.C. centres. The locations of

Service B.C. centres are listed online, and we have a number of offices

across British Columbia.

We’re really making an attempt to ensure that we can provide these

services, support British Columbians to be able to successfully fill out

the application and submit their application for the homeowner

grant.

What’s different? Obviously, no longer will individuals be

applying through their municipality. It’s the program and eligibility.

There are no changes that have been made to eligibility requirements or

benefits. As of January 2021, the B.C. homeowner grant threshold is set

at $1.625 million, and this ensures that the same percentage of homes in

British Columbia, more than 90 percent, are under that threshold and

eligible for the full homeowner grant in 2021. The eligibility

requirements and benefits are not changing. There’s also no charge for

homeowners to apply. So certainly that’s an issue of fairness, which I

think is positive.

Overall, I’d just like to summarize, I think, that this is a key

component. It’s positive to support, to listen to municipalities and to

be able to deliver better service to B.C. homeowners applying for this

grant. It’s in the context of efforts of our government to bring

affordability to the housing market right across the

continuum.

We have a number of initiatives, from supportive housing to rental

build to social housing to supporting homeowners, right across the

continuum. This is an important key, an important part of that plan, to

ensure that our priority around ensuring that affordability is central

and an important priority for that government, for our government, that

we make this commitment to British Columbians. Bill 6 is one step

towards that goal.

I want to just end my remarks there. Thank you very much for the

opportunity to speak in favour of Bill 6 at second reading.

[3:50 p.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Are there any other members that would like to speak to the

motion?

The member for Saanich North has put up his hand.

You have the floor.

A. Olsen: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Nice to see you in the chair

this afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to Bill 6, the

Homeowner Grant Amendment Act, 2021.

I’m just wanting to step in on the second reading debate here to

note general support for these changes in easing the administrative

burden on our colleagues in local government, noting that this has been

a responsibility that they have taken on, on behalf of the province, to

administrate the homeowner grant.

I’m just wanting to note that with respect to the provincial

government, who is now going to be accepting the challenge of

administrating this grant, some of the questions that I will have at the

committee stage of this debate will be on the delivery of that grant and

the ability of the government to administrate this new responsibility

that is going to be coming in-house to the province.

As we’ve witnessed and heard over the last number of weeks and

months with the personal benefit, the individual B.C. recovery benefit,

as well as the small and medium-sized business recovery grant, the

provincial government…. A lot of the language that I’ve heard from my

colleagues on the government side of the House here today has been:

“Don’t worry. We’re going to deliver this. It’s going to be fine. It’s

just a few clicks online. It’s going to be all done, and everything will

be fine.”

That’s the same kind of language that we heard prior to the new

year, the change of the calendar year, with respect to the several other

benefits that the provincial government has put in place. “Don’t worry.

It’s easy. We’re going to roll out this money; $300 million will be

rolled out.” In fact, we haven’t seen that to be the case.

I have constituents in Saanich North and the Islands that are

still waiting for their recovery benefit. I’ve been told, and my staff

have been told: “Don’t contact us on behalf of individuals who are

waiting for that recovery benefit, because we’re just overwhelmed with

requests on this.”

I think what’s important is that the government understands that

the support for these changes comes from the Union of B.C.

Municipalities. For all of us whose careers in politics started at the

local government level, we know about that relationship between the

province and local government. We know the challenges. We’ve experienced

the challenges. So on one end, it’s with arms raised and with hands

raised that we thank the provincial government for taking on this

responsibility.

However, I think that it’s important that the administration of

this is smooth and that it be much smoother than we’ve witnessed over

the last number of months. We heard in question period today and

question periods past the challenges that the government has had in

administering these programs that we’ve all been told will roll

smoothly.

Going a little further, I think that it’s important to recognize

that the government has had some advice, I believe, in the MSP Tax

Force, the basic income panel, around the homeowner grant and around

some changes that could be made to the homeowner grant that would

support more residents and support British Columbians, and there are

some recommendations that are not appearing in this

legislation.

[3:55 p.m.]

As we go forward to the committee stage of this bill, I think

it’ll be a good opportunity to canvass with the Minister of Finance

whether or not the government is considering those other

recommendations, whether or not this is the full suite of changes that

are intended for the homeowner grant, or whether we can expect to see

some further changes to this important program for many homeowners — in

fact, for most homeowners — in British Columbia.

With that, I just wanted to be able to step into this debate and

to raise those points. It’s really, I think, to encourage the government

to ensure that if, in fact, members of the government are going to stand

in the debate and talk about the ease of administration for this

program, that that, in fact, be what is delivered should this bill pass

— that British Columbians who are applying online are able to do so with

ease and that there are not huge delays, like we’ve seen in the

administration of other programs for British Columbians who are looking

for the support from their government.

With that, I’d like to raise my hands to the Speaker for giving me

the opportunity to speak today on this bill. I do see some of the others

now have entered this space, so I will take my seat, or I will just roll

back a little bit and thank you for the opportunity to speak to Bill

HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM. Thank

you.

A. Mercier: I’d like to thank the House for giving me this opportunity to

speak to the Homeowner Grant Amendment Act.

I can’t think of a better example of administrative competence

than this act. I mean, this is just the hallmark of political competence

to be able to centralize administration like this and reduce red tape. I

would hope that even the members of the so-called free enterprise

coalition would line up behind something that is just so

bureaucratically competent as this practice. What this does, ultimately,

at the end of the day, is centralize administration of the grant in the

hands of the province. What that does is alleviate the pressure on our

municipalities and our municipal elected officials. That’s just good,

competent public policy.

I can’t think — other than, of course, the members of this House —

of a harder-working group of elected officials than the people, the

women and men, that represent our local communities. They work so hard.

I’m just thinking of all of the elected officials in the two Langleys,

of the mayors and council, and all of the hard work that they put in,

day in, day out, to serving the public and doing it competently. We owe

them that same diligence of returning that type of competent

administration.

The centralization of the administration of the homeowner grant

into the hands of the province is the way to do that. It’s a benefit

that’s going to pay off in spades. I’d like to really…. I don’t intend

to speak to this motion for too long, because I think that just the

legislative competence of this is so evident that it’s hard to belabour

that point. But the fact is that the Minister of Finance, the former

Minister of Housing, has done such a good, strong, credible and

competent job, in not just this act, but in representing the province to

municipalities.

That’s something I know, because I hear about it from elected

officials all of the time, from local elected officials in my region,

and not all from my riding or ridings of even the governing party of the

NDP. I hear mayors and councillors from Liberal ridings tell me

constantly that the Minister of Finance has done a tremendous job at

repairing the relationship of the province with the municipalities.

That’s a relationship that, over 16 years, the previous government, the

B.C. Liberals, did everything in their power to destroy.

[4:00 p.m.]

At the end of the day, we need to bring back that political and

administrative competence. We’ve been doing that over three and a half

years. I’m proud to be a member of a government that’s doing it. I’m

proud to stand up and speak to this act. I’m excited to see this

implementation. Really what this is, is this is the other side of the

debate we had the other day about the Residential Tenancy Act, which was

relief for renters. Well, this is about helping homeowners and would-be,

prospective homeowners.

This is going to be applicable…. The eligibility requirements

haven’t been changed. So this is going to be applicable to over 90

percent of folks buying homes in this province. This is just good,

competent public administration that helps our residents and our

communities and really alleviates the burden and the pressures on

municipal governments across this province.

Deputy Speaker: Were there any other members wishing to speak to Bill

Minister of Municipal Affairs, you have the floor.

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you very much, hon. Speaker. Great to see you in the

chair.

It’s a pleasure to stand, or rise, in the House and speak in

support of this bill. As most of the members know, I am a former

small-town mayor and can speak with some direct experience in watching a

town administrate the homeowner grant program.

I want to spend a little bit of time talking about that, and I

also want to spend a little bit of time talking about what I am hearing

as the Minister of Municipal Affairs from local governments on the

monthly calls that I undertake with them, having been a mayor on those

same calls when the former Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing was

in her office.

We know, and we’ve heard directly from local governments, that

they are looking for every opportunity they can to simplify their lives

and to streamline processes like this. This is an excellent example of

that.

When I say streamline, what I mean is: This is a grant that comes

from the province directly to a homeowner. But for years, municipalities

have played this middle-person role. That provides a point of contact

for citizens to walk into their local government offices and speak to

somebody and ask questions. But it increasingly, with the growth in our

communities, has become more and more of an administrative burden to

municipalities.

Sometimes what people don’t see from the outside is how much of

the administration and operations take place behind the scenes. It is

more than simply filling out the paperwo