Fifth Session, 41st Parliament

(2020) REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

(HANSARD)

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY,

SECTION A

Virtual Meeting

Friday, June 26, 2020

Afternoon Meeting

Issue No. 4

ISSN 2563-3511

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Committee of Supply

Proceedings in

Section A

Estimates: Ministry of Labour (continued)

J. Martin

Hon. H. Bains

G. Kyllo

C. Oakes

M. Lee

FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2020

The committee met at 1:30 p.m.

[S. Malcolmson in the chair.]

Committee of Supply

Proceedings in

Section A

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

LABOUR

(continued)

On Vote 35: ministry operations, $17,185,000

(continued) .

J. Martin: Welcome back. Hope everyone had a nice little lunch break

there.

Carrying on with some line of questioning around workers

compensation. I think we got two questions in just prior to when the

member from Cowichan took over.

With the changes to the Workers Compensation Act last spring to

expand presumptive conditions, can the minister tell us how many claims

were made under the previous scope and how many have been made under the

new expanded criteria, please?

The Chair: For the benefit of the public, this is a subsection of the

B.C. Legislature. We are reviewing the spending estimates of the

Minister of Labour. Right now the minister is conferring with his

advisers to answer a question from his opposition critic, the member

for Chilliwack.

I am on Songhees and Esquimalt territory. The rest of the

members you may see popping up are from all over the province,

participating digitally so that we can do our work reviewing budgets

and spending, and do it safely.

There will be lots of long pauses while we get answers to the

questions that the opposition is asking.

[1:35 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Thank you, Member, for the question. I’ll give you some

numbers.

I’m told that mental health disorder claims in 2017 were 3,900; in

2018, there were 4,400; and in 2019, there were 5,400. Those are the

numbers that WorkSafe has seen coming their way as far as the mental

health disorders are concerned.

J. Martin: Thank you for that, Minister. To follow up, can you tell us how

many front-line staff were dedicated to processing claims before and

during the pandemic?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, before COVID-19, there were 1,320 staff to deal with

claims. During COVID-19, there hasn’t been any significant reduction in

those numbers.

G. Kyllo: It’s a great pleasure to join the debate today in estimates. If I

may, I’d like to go back to WorkSafeBC and the accident fund.

Early on, my colleague from Chilliwack had asked some questions

with respect to the size of the surplus, or the accident fund. I was

just wondering if the minister would be able to share with us…. He had

indicated previously that the accident fund was at 152 percent. I’m just

wondering if he could share with me what that 152 percent, what that

number, actually related to in real dollars. I understand that was at

the end of fiscal 2019.

[1:40 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: As you know, we are still going through the year — volatility in

the market and the fluctuation in the marketplace. It’s hard to tell

from day to day where the funds will be at the end of the year or in a

couple of months. But I can tell you, if you need numbers, that by the

end of last year — those are the numbers available to us — they were at

around $20 billion.

G. Kyllo: You said approximately $20 billion. I just wonder if you could

share with us what the exact number was at December 31 of 2019 for the

accident fund.

Hon. H. Bains: The number I’m given is that by December 31, 2019, they were 20.5.

That’s what represents 152 percent funding.

G. Kyllo: I have a series of questions, so I’m hoping that I’ll have the

floor for about the next 40 minutes or so. Thank you very

much.

So $20.5 billion. Do you know what the actual total value of the

accident fund is as of June 1 of this year?

Hon. H. Bains: Yes. On May 31, the numbers are $19.5 billion.

[1:45 p.m.]

G. Kyllo: Thank you very much. So since December 31 till June 1, there has

been a $1 billion reduction in the total accident fund. Now, for those

of you that are listening from home, I just want to recognize that these

funds are set aside to provide supports and services and wages for

injured workers in our province.

That reduction of $1 billion is quite a large number. That’s a

thousand million dollars. If you compare that, it’s about 25 times

larger than your entire ministry budget.

What do you have to say to injured workers that have concerns

about your inability or, I guess, the loss of what equates to $1 billion

in funds that were set aside to provide supports for injured workers in

our province?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, you must understand. I don’t know whether you were on when

this question was asked.

The WCB’s mandate…. They have given themselves a mandate to have

the accident fund funded at 130 percent, and they were at 152 percent at

the end of last year.

As I said in my answer to the question before, they are at 145

percent now. Remember, their mandate is to maintain 130 percent. Now,

why are we at those numbers? Because of growth in the economy in the

last two, three, four years, and more revenue came in and also a good

strategy of investment. Good investment return came in. As a result of

that, they were able to amass well over 130 percent that is required

under their mandate. So they were over 130 percent at a level of 152

percent.

Yes, the market was very volatile. Every investment took a deep

hit during this summer because of the COVID-19, but they started to

recover again. Same thing happened with WCB. They took a hit, but

they’re recovering again.

You know, that 130 percent funding was never in danger. I want to

make sure that the employers and the workers of this province understand

that the WCB was always in a good, sound funding position. They are in a

good, strong funding position, and they will be, I’m expecting, going

forward. I think there is no risk to anybody when it comes to making

sure that there are sufficient funds available to pay for claims of

past, current or future, and to provide services that the WCB is

mandated to do.

You’re talking about if there was any hit during the COVID-19 in

the market. They have built up an extra cushion. That’s the surplus that

people are talking about, over and above 130 percent. I think it

fluctuated. They’re recovering. They’re almost to a point where they’re

reaching towards the pre-COVID-19 position.

G. Kyllo: Thank you for confirming that there has been a $1 billion loss.

For those listening at home, that’s a thousand million dollars that have

been lost from the accident fund since December 31 of last

year.

[1:50 p.m.]

I appreciate that you have responsibility for WorkSafeBC. It

appears that it’s a $20.5 billion total accident fund within WorkSafe.

That’s a significant amount of money, and I would assume that that must

be top priority for you as a minister to have a full understanding of

how those funds are being invested and what the operational efficiencies

are of WorkSafeBC, and receiving, I would hope, at least monthly updates

as far as any concerns or any risks there may be with respect to the

investments of the workers accident fund.

I’m just wondering if you could confirm for me how often you

receive financial updates on the performance of WorkSafeBC, specifically

with reference to the accident fund, which is set aside specifically for

caring for injured workers in our province.

Hon. H. Bains: I get regular updates through the chair of the board — now the

acting chair. I have been advised from time to time that they are always

in a good, sound financial position. They advised me, as I said, that

they were sitting at 152 percent — well over and above the 130 percent

required by their mandate.

Then, during COVID-19, as the markets started to fluctuate, I was

made aware that the funds, just like all the other investments, were

taking a hit. But very quickly, it started to recover again. That’s why

I’m suggesting that it went down, but it is back to 145 percent

again.

G. Kyllo: So, Minister, taking it from your answer, you’re not provided with

regular updates. I would estimate that, as having responsibility for

overseeing WorkSafeBC, you would be provided with at least, at very

least, monthly updates on the financial performance of the

organization.

In any event, can I ask you: did you have any conversations with

WorkSafeBC with respect to how those dollars were invested — whether

they were invested conservatively, whether you had any questions with

WorkSafeBC with the onset and advent of COVID-19? Was there any

discussion directly with WorkSafeBC about the potential for moving those

funds into a safer place where they would not be subject to the

volatility and the $1 billion loss that has been evidenced through the

COVID-19 outbreak?

[1:55 p.m.]

The Chair: Another public service announcement from the Chair. Just a

reminder that you are asking your questions and giving answers

through the Chair. Thanks for keeping that in mind.

Hon. H. Bains: To the member, the investment is made through B.C. Investment

Management Corp. That is the entity that is used by other public sector

entities to invest. I am advised by the WCB that they knew well ahead of

time…. They thought that there would be a downturn in the economy

coming. They anticipated that, but no one knew what kind of hit it would

take in the economy.

But they were prepared. That reflects on the results that we see

here today. They were at 152 percent funded, end of December last year,

pre-COVID. They went through a real tough time, as all markets did, and

we’re still sitting at 145 percent.

That shows the results — that they were prepared and that the

funds were well secured. I would say that the employer and the workers

should be very pleased that the investment is in good hands, as I think

the results show.

G. Kyllo: To the minister: might I ask, with respect to the comments that

you provided the news media about three or four weeks back, I guess it

was…. With respect to your commentary indicating that the surplus had

been wiped out, I’m just wondering: what did you rely upon in providing

that advice to the media? I think we can also appreciate that the

general public have a great amount of concern, and that comment caused a

great amount of concern for individuals across British Columbia when the

minister had indicated to the media that the surplus was

gone.

I might remind the minister that he’s indicated that the surplus,

over and above the 130 percent requirement, was 22 percent. That’s a

significant amount of money. So I’m just wondering: what information did

the minister rely on in advising the media that the surplus had been

wiped out?

[2:00 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: I just want to re-emphasize that, as we canvassed those numbers,

WCB’s mandate had set for themselves to be funded at 130 percent, and

they were at 152 percent. The market was volatile. The market was taking

a hit. All market investment was taking a hit at that time. If you look

at how deep a hit the market took — all different North American sides

of it — and a $20 billion investment, you could do the

calculation.

The fact remains that it took a hit, but then it started to

recover again, like all other markets. From 152 percent, it went down.

Then it’s going back as the economy is improving. It’s going back to 145

percent. So I think that’s what’s important.

That funding was always there. There was always a strong funding

position. Even during COVID-19, of course they took some hits. They

played a number of scenarios. One scenario was that they could lose $3

billion, which means over and above 130 percent. We had a cushion built

up over 130 percent. So the workers’ benefits and employers’ investments

were in pretty good shape.

As the market is improving, we are improving as far as that

particular investment is concerned. As I said, the recent number shows

to us they’re back at 145 percent.

G. Kyllo: Well, thank you for that, Minister. However, the 22 percent

additional surplus for the 130 percent, which is a requirement — and you

had indicated at December 31 that was 152 percent — equates to $2.9

billion. So that’s $2.9 billion of a surplus. You had indicated to the

media that that surplus was wiped out.

How is it…? What information did you rely on in advising the media

that the surplus — which was close to $3 billion, or three thousand

million dollars — that it had somehow vanished?

For those of you listening at home, I think it’s important to note

that the minister has responsibility for overseeing the operations and

the full responsibility for WorkSafeBC.

I would expect that British Columbians would want to ensure and

have confidence that the minister would be fully up to speed and aware

of the financial ongoings of the operations of WorkSafeBC as well as the

fund that is set aside specifically to provide protection for

workers.

Again, not to belabour this point, but the error of

misunderstanding the true financial picture of the operations or the

accident fund within WorkSafeBC to the tune of three thousand million

dollars is a little bit more than just a small oversight.

I’m not going to look for a further response from that, but I

would like to carry on.

[2:05 p.m.]

With respect to the operations of WorkSafeBC, I just wonder if the

minister can share with us what the cost is to administer the workers

compensation system and programs. My understanding is that the accident

fund…. One of the allowable costs associated with the management of that

fund is the actual administration. I’m just wondering if you could set

out for us what the actual administrative costs were in fiscal 2019 for

administering the workers accident fund.

Hon. H. Bains: I could give you 2019 numbers, which are available. In 2019, the

WorkSafeBC goal was to maintain costs at or lower than the published

target of 0.461 percent of assessible payroll. The 2019 result was 0.445

percent. So the target was 0.461 percent of assessible payroll, and the

result, the actual, was 0.445 percent.

Now, if you put it into numbers, administration costs totalled

$506.6 million, which is exactly the same as budget. They were budgeted

for $506.5 million for that year.

G. Kyllo: Thank you, Minister, for that answer. Would the minister also be

able to share…? Has that number gone down, or has it remained constant

as a percentage of the total value of the accident fund over the last

two years?

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: As I said earlier in the previous question, the way the WCB

measures their administrative cost is it’s a percentage of the total of

the assessable payroll. So in 2019, the numbers that are available to

us, they were less than their target. Their actual was 0.445 percent of

the assessable payroll, and their target was 0.461 percent of their

assessable payroll.

G. Kyllo: Thanks for repeating the previous answer, Minister. However, what

I was looking for was what the costs were as a percentage of the

accident fund, both for fiscal 2018 and fiscal 2019. You had referenced

a percentage of the assessable payroll. I’m not sure what that number

is.

What I’m looking for is if you could maybe provide just what the

actual hard cost number was for the administration of WorkSafeBC for

fiscal 2018 and also for fiscal ’19. What I’m trying to look to see is

if that number has actually gone up or gone down. I think that British

Columbians would be interested to find out the efficiency of the

organization, what the total administrative cost is of the funds that

are being disbursed, and the programs and services delivered through

WorkSafeBC.

[2:15 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: The numbers I have are that in 2019, their target was 0.46 percent

of the assessable payroll, but their actual was 0.445 percent. They’re

expecting that at 2020, the administration budget would be a total of

$549.3 million, which would be a $42.8 million increase from the 2019

budget.

G. Kyllo: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. However, I was looking for

what the total cost was for fiscal 2018 and then, also, for 2019. What

I’m trying to find out is if the total cost of administration at

WorkSafeBC has gone up or if that has gone down. Also, if the minister

would be able to provide what the total amount of expenditure for

WorkSafeBC was, in those two fiscals.

For a bit of clarity, what I’m trying to find out is if the

percentage or the cost of administration of the total funds and

expenditures by WorkSafeBC is going up or if it is going

down.

[2:20 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: We will get you the 2018 numbers. We don’t have that available

here. But I gave you the 2019 numbers, and that was $506.6 million. In

2020, the expectation is it will be $549.3 million.

Partly the reason for the cost increase, as we talked about, is

there has been an increase in claims over the last three, four years,

year over year. Also, the mental health disorder claims add to that

equation as well. So I think when you took it overall….

We’re trying to improve the WorkSafe system to make sure that the

confidence of the employer and the workers is increased, so that workers

feel that their claims are dealt with in a timely fashion and the

employers feel that they are getting the service that they need.

Therefore, there were some added resources to the system. I think it’s

all going towards the service to the injured workers and to help the

employers.

G. Kyllo: I would appreciate receiving those numbers.

Minister, I’d also asked…. Thank you for providing the $506.6

million administrative cost. What was the total expenditure of

WorkSafeBC in fiscal 2019 which reflects that $506 million

administrative fee?

[2:25 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: In 2019, the total cost for claims was $2.7 billion, and about

$300 million was administration costs to deal with the claims. Then

there was another $200-some million that is non-claims-related

administration costs.

G. Kyllo: Okay, just so I’m clear, $2.7 billion in total claims costs paid

out in fiscal 2019. Of that, there was $506 million in total

administration costs, of which $300 million was for direct

administration, but a total of $506 million. Thank you for that. I

certainly would appreciate if you could provide me follow-up information

with respect to, also, the performance of 2018 as well.

Now, just while we’re talking about the administrative costs….

It’s a significant amount of money, over $500 million, certainly much

larger than the minister’s labour budget. Can the minister share with me

what initiatives have been undertaken in recent years to help reduce the

overall administrative costs associated with managing the workers

accident fund?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, WorkSafeBC works very hard to be as efficient as they can

be, because the money that they are working with is paid by the

employer. As you know, in the great compromise of 1917, workers gave up

their right to sue the employer if they got injured at the workplace,

and an employer, on the other side, agreed look after those workers’

health and safety in the workplace — when they’re injured or become ill,

to look after them, provide them the care that they need so that they

are ready to go back to their pre-injury job if possible.

When you talk about administration cost, it is all about service

to the workers: how we process those claims in a timely fashion, how we

provide rehab to the workers and how we communicate with the employer to

serve their needs. So anytime you’re talking about administration costs,

it is to provide those services to employers and to the workers and to

ensure that the health and safety of the workers at workplaces is

maintained and enforced.

[2:30 p.m.]

I think at WorkSafeBC, the number one priority is the health and

safety of workers and also to look after those workers who are injured

or become ill at the workplace. I think that we need to put all of that

in relation and reflect all that when we are talking about

administration costs — the claim costs being the largest, as I have

mentioned.

Administration is there to support those claims when a claim comes

their way. Administration is there to support the health and safety of

workers at workplaces, to support employers, support their safety

associations. There are about ten or 11 of them around the province,

sector-specific. I think it all comes as a cost to run their operation,

so I think we’ve got to be careful what we are talking about when we are

comparing costs of administration.

Of course, it is expected of WorkSafe that they must be efficient,

must be prudent, and that money is well spent. But the core reason that

they’re there is to maintain the health and safety of the workplaces,

prevent injuries and illnesses at workplaces, look after those workers

if they become ill or injured, and provide support to the employer

through a number of those health and safety associations and direct

help. So there’s a lot of work that goes on between WorkSafe and the

employer and the workers.

G. Kyllo: Thank you, Minister, for your remarks. How­ever, what I was

looking for was whether you were aware of any initiatives that are being

undertaken within WorkSafeBC. You are the minister responsible for

labour and responsible for WorkSafeBC. I was just wondering if you had

any knowledge of any initiatives that are being undertaken within

WorkSafeBC to help streamline operations and increase administrative

efficiency in order to ensure that a larger percentage of funds would go

back to the direct benefit of workers.

In any event, I’m going to move on, if I can. I’m actually just

going to go back to the accident fund. Can the minister share with us —

as of last year-end, March 31 of this year, of 2020 — what the financial

picture will be and what WorkSafeBC will be reporting as far as

financial losses?

Hon. H. Bains: So that the member knows, WorkSafeBC is not on our fiscal year.

They are on a calendar year, and our government, as you know, is on an

end-of-March fiscal year. So they go by the year.

[2:35 p.m.]

I think they are monitoring the situation, and we will know…. We

have the numbers for 2019, at the end of the year, and we know what the

numbers are now, as you asked before — at 145 percent. Moving forward

depends on the market fluctuations and market. We are hoping the economy

will pick up. We’re hoping that health and safety, as the WCB has taken

very seriously, is improved. Then we will know the real numbers by the

end of this calendar year.

G. Kyllo: Thank you, Minister, for that information. So the most recent

information we have, then, is as of May 31, in which case it shows

approximately a $1 billion loss in the accident investment

fund.

Is the minister aware…? Is there a board-approved financial

strategy for WorkSafeBC with respect to how they’re investing this

accident worker fund?

Hon. H. Bains: Members should know that the way the investment is made through

BCI, as I said before, has not changed over a number of years, whether

it was our government or the previous government. And, yes, the board

approves…. The BCI comes to the board investment committee and the

investment committee advises the board, and the board approves the

investment strategy.

G. Kyllo: Thank you for that, Minister. Then just one follow-up question.

Are you familiar with the investment strategy, or are you briefed with

respect to the risk tolerance level, on how the workers accident fund is

actually invested? Are you part of those discussions, or is the

information just simply provided to you for information only?

Hon. H. Bains: As I said before, the board operates at arm’s length from the

minister and the government. But they have a built-in system, no

different than it was four or five years ago under the previous

government. They have an investment committee. They advise the board.

They work very closely with BCI, and I get reports on a regular basis

through the chair.

I have been advised over the last three years that WorkSafeBC has

been very strong on their finances. Their results speak for themselves.

And their mandate is to ensure that the accident fund is maintained at

130 percent, but they’ve been well over that because of the growth in

the economy in the last two or three years and a good investment

return.

[2:40 p.m.]

That is the result. That’s what I’m interested in. The results are

clear. They are before us. And although there was…. As you know, we are

just going through COVID-19, and the market took big hits in the spring,

but we are still sitting at 145 percent. We took a hit, but we are

improving, and it is at 145 percent as of June 1.

I think we are in really good shape. They have a very strong

checks and balances system in place, and, as you know, the board is a

professional board as well. They understand what their role is, and they

work very closely with each other and the investment committee. The

results are there.

Now, the member may also want to take a look at the WorkSafeBC

2019 annual report. There are a number of areas in there that the member

may be interested in. Their performance targets and what their results

are at a glance — I think pages 34-35 — would be beneficial to the

member about initiatives that they take to make sure that they are

efficient, they’re meeting their targets, their costs are under control

and they’re maintaining the administration at a very efficient

level.

G. Kyllo: The point that British Columbians, I believe, would be concerned

about and wanting to know is: why is it that the worker accident fund

has lost $1 billion — that’s one thousand million dollars — since

December 31, 2019? That’s a thousand million dollars that have been

lost.

I speak to my financial adviser at least once a month. I get

regular updates on the value of my investments — certainly nowhere near

the value to which the minister has responsibility for overseeing

through WorkSafeBC. I’m happy to report that although there were

certainly some declines in the market through March and April, my

investments are back on track with where they were at the end of the

year.

How is it that personal financial advisers can somehow steer

investments of individuals to not see any fiscal loss over the COVID

period, yet when we’re talking about the investment of $20.5 billion, $1

billion was lost?

I appreciate that the minister is wanting to continue to stick

with the 145 percent, but I don’t care how you determine the percentage.

There has been a $1 billion loss, and that is funds that are not going

to be available to provide supports for workers in the

future.

With that, I’m going to quickly just segue over to paid sick

leave. I know there’s been lots of conversation — certainly by our

Premier as well as our Prime Minister — with respect to the potential

for providing paid sick leave for workers. I wonder if the minister

would be able to share with us what his thoughts are around the

provision of paid sick leave for workers, especially in light of COVID,

and if he has a plan at this point in time for how that would be

funded.

Hon. H. Bains: Thank you, Member, for the question. He may not have been on

earlier on when another member asked the question…. I answered that

question, but, anyway, I will repeat that.

[2:45 p.m.]

As you know, during COVID-19, this issue became very clear — that

people were going to work sick and they were transmitting the virus to

other workers, resulting in the operation to be shut down. That’s not

good for workers. That’s not good for operations. So our Premier was

very, very forceful, when he was meeting with the federal government and

his counterparts from the other jurisdictions, that there should be sick

leave provisions.

Members who are sick, or they’re showing signs that are flu-like,

should stay home. They probably want to stay home, but an economic hit

is one that they can’t take. Loss of income would be a huge problem for

them because they still have to pay rent. They still have to pay for

mortgages and other expenses to run the family.

We were pushing the federal government that there should be

provisions available to workers so that when they’re sick, they stay

home. They don’t go to work, especially during the pandemic.

We also said it very clear. The Premier was very clear that we

don’t want to add additional burdens onto employers, who are already

hurting. I think, thankfully, the federal government listened, and other

jurisdictions joined in with our Premier. The federal government

announced a $14 billion aid package.

Part of that would be paid sick leave. And now it is left between

the federal government and provinces to come up with the details of how

to deliver that. I think it will be a federal program, fully funded by

the federal government. My advice is that it will probably work just

like CERB, but no details have been worked out. It is a federal program,

paid by federal…. But employees will have paid sick leave available to

them when they’re sick so that we can stop the spread and transmission

of the virus by going to work sick.

I think it’s also good that we are standing on the side of the

employer by not burdening them with the cost.

G. Kyllo: Thank you, Minister, for that clarification. My apologies. I was

not on when the member from Cowichan asked the question earlier. So I

certainly appreciate you reiterating your answer.

I would agree that businesses in B.C. cannot afford to have any

further cost burden put on their backs. There’s been enough burden put

on the backs of B.C. businesses under this current administration with

the employer health tax, increases in the corporate tax, significant

increases in minimum wage, so I am very happy to hear the minister

finally, finally agree that businesses can no longer afford to

continually be burdened by additional costs by this current

government.

With that, I will turn it back to our critic, my colleague the MLA

for Chilliwack.

J. Martin: Thank you to my colleague from Shuswap. We’re going to be shifting

the order a little bit just to accommodate different members wanting to

ask questions of different ministers in different houses, as we become

more and more familiar with this innovative format to conduct the

estimates. I believe that right now my colleague from Cariboo North has

some questions.

C. Oakes: A couple of my questions that I do have for the minister…. I

really thank…. I appreciate the opportunity to ask these questions. Over

the last three months, I’ve had the opportunity to have over 17 small

business round tables across the province, and I’ve heard from small

businesses on concerns and what’s on their mind and where they feel that

there are opportunities that we can look at. I have a couple of

questions that emerged from some of these small business round-table

sessions that I had the opportunity to listen to.

[2:50 p.m.]

The first few will align around WorkSafe. I guess an overall

comment. I really appreciate the work that the WorkSafe staff have done.

It’s a very challenging and difficult job. I want to acknowledge that,

and I want to recognize that. I know that here in Cariboo North, they’re

working diligently. They’re working really hard to work with small

businesses to support them getting back open and giving them a clear

direction.

I have heard now, in many different communities, that there still

continues to be some discrepancy through different WorkSafe staff that

are giving different directions to small businesses. Perhaps the

minister could help me identify or understand the process that is being

managed to make sure everyone has the same and equal

information.

Hon. H. Bains: I agree with the member that we are all going through some very

challenging times, as you know — the service providers…. Then you look

at the Ministry of Health, the public health authorities, WorkSafeBC.

They’re all put through some really grinding work during COVID-19 so

that our businesses stay safe. Then, when we restart the economy, there

is guidance, and there is some help available to them to restart

safely.

As Dr. Bonnie Henry has always said, we don’t want to be in a

position to reopen the economy and then have to shut it down again. So

how we succeed going forward from one phase to another depends on how we

act and react and conduct ourselves during each of those phases of

reopening our economy.

I share the comments made by the member that small businesses make

up the vast majority of employers in this province. They can face unique

challenges in meeting their occupational health and safety obligations.

Small businesses may lack knowledge sometimes because they don’t have

spare staff to guide them, and they just work from morning till evening

and concentrate on how to run their business and serve their customers.

They don’t have a huge HR department.

I understand that, and WCB understands that. They understand that

they have unique and challenging needs. That’s why part of that

five-year strategic plan that WCB has is to expand its reach into the

small business community to assist them in improving occupational health

and safety. WorkSafe is also working to identify new ways of

communication with small business, enhancing its approach to inspectors,

education and consultation and continuing to leverage small business

industry groups and associations to engage these employers.

I think I mentioned before, but I’ll mention this again. There are

a number of industry health and safety associations across the province

that are sector specific. They are full of resources to guide their

members and the businesses in that industry.

[2:55 p.m.]

My suggestion would be to reach out to them. WorkSafeBC is doing

everything that they can to come up with new ways of communication with

them. Then there’s the employers advisers office available to them to

help them to navigate some of the challenges that the businesses may

have. That’s a free service.

We added another $3 million when we formed government to both the

workers adviser and to the employers adviser offices so they would have

resources. I could give you a breakdown — the number of education

seminars they do all across the province to help the employer on how

they can actually improve their health and safety and get the help that

they need from WorkSafeBC.

The help is available. I agree with you. Sometimes the

communication isn’t there, and the small businesses worry and wonder who

is there to help them. I think WCB is there. They’re doing everything

that they can, as you said. But communication can improve, certainly. I

agree.

C. Oakes: I certainly acknowledge that the sector associations have been a

valuable resource for many of our small businesses in the province. I do

want to identify that so many of our small businesses in the province of

British Columbia really are not a part of certain sector organizations.

I just want to acknowledge that so that when we’re looking at

communication and we’re looking at next steps, we also recognize that

there is a substantial portion of our small businesses that do not have

that access. And I will also acknowledge it’s that same group of small

businesses that have had such a difficult time accessing any of the

federal support programs that are set up to assist our small

businesses.

If we lose these small businesses in our communities and our

neighbourhoods, it will have a significant impact. So I want to be a

champion of theirs and make sure that we find a reasonable solution to

reach out to them.

I recognize that communication is a critical component of this. I

have also heard specifically in some of the more remote rural

communities that it’s difficult to get access to PPEs. That’s twofold. I

have two questions on this. The first is I recognize that work has been

done for people to be able to look at where you can access PPEs. What I

can offer to the minister…. Some of the supply chains that we

experienced in the north or rural remote communities create difficulties

for us to access some of those PPE opportunities.

The second piece of the question is just the cost for these small

businesses that have not been able to access any of the federal

programs. You know, the cash flow is a significant challenge. To the

minister: would you consider setting up some kind of funds to support

these small businesses? Even if we’re looking at employers under ten or

those small businesses that have not been able to access any of the

additional programs that have been identified.

[3:00 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: I want to thank and appreciate the member’s concern on behalf of

small businesses. We always say that they are the backbone of our

economy. The majority of jobs are with the small businesses. They need

support, you know, when they need it. I fully understand, especially

during COVID-19, that they are going through tough times.

As far as the supply of PPE, I think there is a supply hub

available through which they can actually reach out to get the PPE. It

is run through emergency management B.C. The second piece, I would

suggest, is…. The Small Business B.C. website has a site on it to guide

the small businesses and to help them with whatever help they

need.

The other thing that I could say is that the federal government

programs are federal government programs. We raise those issues whenever

our ministers meet with their counterparts federally. Our Premier always

raises those issues because we believe that we need to support

businesses if we are to have a good economy. He always says that people

are our economy, and our economy is people.

That’s why we acted very, very early and swiftly when we knew that

COVID-19 was hitting us. Businesses were getting hit. Right away, I

think, the B.C. government came up with $5 billion to support families

and businesses. So $1.8 billion, Member, as you know, for businesses,

with the tax deferrals and tax breaks.

I might add that if you break that down, the property tax break,

25 percent, amounts to $700 million, one of the largest tax cuts in

history. We do understand that these are unprecedented times and that we

need to make those moves to help the businesses to stay. We work hard

with the federal government. We were able to get help with the 75

percent emergency wage supplement.

The WCB is also stepping up. They gave premium deferrals for six

months. Also, for certain employers who qualify for the federal

emergency wage subsidy, they waived their premiums. So I think everyone

is playing their part.

In the provincial government, certainly, we are alive to the

challenges that our small businesses, especially, are facing. We are

there. I think there’s $1.5 billion also set aside by this government to

help restart the economy.

That discussion takes place at the economic recovery task force ,

which meets regularly. They have representatives of businesses there,

and those issues are discussed there. How do we use the $1.5 billion to

help businesses, especially small businesses, and, also, the hardest-hit

economy sectors like the hospitality and restaurant industries? I think

government is very, very alive to the area and to the challenges faced

by the businesses.

I appreciate the member raising that concern, and I share those

concerns. We’re doing all we can. I can say we have demonstrated,

through our actions, that this is a government that listens. Then we

respond to deal with the concerns that are brought to us. Especially, we

are very, very concerned about the challenges faced by the small

businesses.

C. Oakes: Thank you to the minister. Thank you very much for your concern. I

know it’s sincere. I appreciate that, and I appreciate that you have

identified some of the programs that are available.

Again, what we are hearing…. We still have gaps of small

businesses that are not able to access any of these programs. Some of

the concerns that I have are that if you have no cash flow to even

purchase your PPEs, to even get your business open….

[3:05 p.m.]

It’s not about tax deferrals. It’s not about looking three months

ahead, that you can look at paying taxes and do your deferrals and your

property tax and all of those pieces. Quite frankly, if we can’t get

these businesses open safely and open so that they can start getting

some cash flow into them, the reality is they’re going to become

insolvent, and the consequences on workers in this province are going to

be significant.

I recognize there is $1.5 billion. I recognize that the economic

recovery task force is out there looking at a survey, for the next six

weeks, to take in ideas. I am pleading with the minister to consider

some type of fund or grant that could be provided to small businesses

immediately — for those that just have fallen through the cracks, that

need access right now to cash to get their doors open so that they can

bring their workers back.

Again, I know that the member mentioned the wage subsidy program

and some of the wage supplement pieces. Many of these small businesses

have not been able to qualify for these programs.

Will the minister at least commit to raising the concern that

there needs to be some thought, by this economic recovery task force, to

have some cash provided to small businesses to get access to PPEs so

that they can open their doors?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, again, I want to appreciate the concerns that you’re

raising. We share those concerns, as I said before. Those are real. We

need to do everything we can.

We have, like I said, demonstrated through our actions in the last

three or four months that we want to be on the side of the businesses.

We want to make sure that the workers’ rights and their benefits are

protected. They’re struggling as well. Businesses are

struggling.

I think everyone understands the concerns that are being raised

here. My suggestion would be…. The economic recovery task force is the

right place. These issues are discussed there. The representatives of

businesses are at that table. The representatives of labour are there.

NGOs are there. First Nations are there. Also, I gave some pathways on

how to reach out to get the PPE.

Again, I think this issue probably best rests with the Minister of

Finance and the economic recovery task force. My suggestion also would

be to participate in the survey that is being conducted right now. How

do we utilize that $1.5 billion? My suggestion would be to reach out to

the survey and to make those suggestions. I’d encourage those small

businesses to make those recommendations so that their voices are heard

and so that the outcome is there that they are looking for.

C. Oakes: I do want to acknowledge that we have submitted multiple letters.

Andrew Wilkinson has, of course, submitted that letter to the Premier,

and I know chambers of commerce have recognized this as well.

I have a question here from the Prince George Chamber of Commerce

specifically, and it sort of ties into what we’re hearing very clearly

in the north.

[3:10 p.m.]

WorkSafe has created rules around individual verticals. However,

these regulations do not add up when you cannot visit a small business

and pick up a product to determine purchase, but this can be done in big

businesses. How can we create a level playing field?

Hon. H. Bains: I think for clarity…. I would like the member to clarify exactly

what she’s asking when she talks about how they have created individual

verticals, and then how the comparisons are done between the small

business and large businesses. So can you elaborate what, exactly, you

are asking?

C. Oakes: As we rolled out with WorkSafe and the requirements that have been

required for businesses in general, in many of our smaller communities,

where many of us are industry towns, sometimes the same requirements

that have been outlined and necessary to get open for large businesses

are also applied to some of the smaller businesses, and they are

completely different.

What we’re saying is, if there could be a review…. I mean, now

we’re in phase 3. I recognize that these questions were submitted —

these specifically — over the last few weeks. As we head into phase 3, I

think that will work through the system.

We want to acknowledge that many of the businesses we’ve heard are

wanting to make sure, and provide solid feedback to the government, that

if we find ourselves going back into another unfortunate situation,

where we have a relapse, and we find ourselves back in the situation,

that there’s some kind of recognition that small businesses are much

different than large businesses — if that can be acknowledged when we’re

looking at rolling out the different phases.

Hon. H. Bains: I think if I get it correctly…. The member will correct me if I’m

not going into the area that you’re asking me to go. You’re asking about

the reopening of the economy and going through different phases — we

were in phase 2, and now we’re going into phase 3 — and then the large

businesses and how they reopen, based on WCB-created guidelines,

compared to small, mom-and-pop operations. They are different. There

should be flexibility.

[3:15 p.m.]

I’m advised that there is that flexibility that exists currently.

For example, the WCB will create guidelines that are sector specific.

They’re also advised that within those sectors, each business is unique

and different. They’re large. They’re small. Within those guidelines —

which, by the way, are created with the help of the provincial health

office — each business will create their own safety plan, working with

their employees to make sure that they have a safety plan within the WCB

guidelines that suits their business.

At the end of the day, Member, you would agree with me that people

are fearful to go back to the businesses, fearful to go into the stores

and patronize the places they used to go because of COVID-19 and the

risk of health and safety. So my advice and my suggestion to all

businesses — and I know the Premier and Dr. Henry have been very clear —

that it is up to us.

It is up to the businesses to have a really sound safety plan that

suits their needs for that business within the guidelines of the WCB,

but then also to win the trust and confidence of the customers who need

to be confident that when they patronize those businesses, their health

and safety is protected. Then they will go there and they will do

business there. And their workers will go to work as well, knowing that

their health and safety is looked after.

We encourage them to post that so that people can see it. It’s

transparency. I think we need to win those people back into the

businesses. That’s the only way we’re going to succeed. We’re all in it

together. And if small businesses…. If you have some real, specific

issues, then bring it over to us, and we’ll see what we can do to

help.

C. Oakes: Two specific examples — and I just ask that perhaps you look into

that. In the oil and gas sector, we heard right across the board that

there was some significant challenges around travel to and from

worksites and what that looked like. So there was…. We are, again,

getting some mixed messages from WorkSafe on what that looks like.

Hopefully, that’s been resolved, but I wanted to recognize that, because

I acknowledged that I would raise it.

The second piece actually came from three separate municipalities

in my region. It’s around their public works yards that three different

communities have been given different information on how they manage

getting to and from worksites. There are three communities in the

Cariboo. So again, one WorkSafe person will say one thing, and you go

down to the next city, and they’re given different direction.

It’s just creating a lot of uncertainty, and, quite frankly, in

the oil and gas sector, for example, it’s really driving up costs. We’re

seeing major projects in our communities have a significant economic

impact because of some of the WorkSafe rules that have been put in place

that I’m not so sure…. It’s a not a brick-and-mortar business. These

are….

Often when you look at the type of contractors, self-employed

individuals and major projects that are in process, we’re driving up the

costs. They’re just asking us to look at having some flexibility, and

they just haven’t felt that they’ve had that to this point.

[3:20 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Yes, Member. I think that there’s nothing normal anymore, as you

know, with the challenges that we all face. So one thing that we did

was…. I mean, there were some hiccups about the orders between the

provincial health office and then the WCB — the jurisdictional issues,

who was to enforce which rules. That has been ironed out.

Also, in general terms, Member, that the example that you have

used…. WorkSafeBC — what they have done is, in conjunction with the

provincial health office, created sector-specific guidelines. They are

on their website. Each industry or each business within those sectors is

advised to take those guidelines, create their own and modify them if

they have to — but as long as they follow those guidelines — to suit

their needs. I think that’s the general way of approaching this. Those

guidelines are on the WorkSafeBC website.

Again, I think all of that…. We need to, I think, come back to one

thing. We need to make sure that as we move from one phase to another,

it is all to curb the spread of this virus. And then we go to the next

phase only when we are successful in the first phase. I think that’s how

we’re going to reach the final destination of opening up our

economy.

I understand that there are challenges for businesses. There are

challenges for WorkSafeBC. There are challenges for municipalities and

others. But we’re working as we can to deal with those issues as we go

through. So I think the best thing to do would be for those

municipalities and those businesses to reach out to WorkSafeBC. The

information is on the website. If they still need to contact someone at

WorkSafeBC….

Take a look at the guidelines, make sure that your individual

safety plan falls within those guidelines and how you actually are

complying with them — that you’re able to justify it to the provincial

health office and WorkSafe that those guidelines are being

met.

C. Oakes: If there are discrepancies, what is the process? If somebody has

gone through the safety plan and they’ve completed that and they’ve gone

through their WorkSafe officer and they followed everything that was set

out to do and they’re still having challenges and they are struggling

between the health authorities and WorkSafe and they’re trying to

navigate all of this — you know, the bureaucracy — where can they go?

What is the next step? Is there somebody else that they can talk to, to

resolve any discrepancy?

[3:25 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Member, there is a process in place in any event. First of all, I

think we encourage all businesses and their employees to follow

WorkSafeBC guidelines and the provincial health officer’s guidelines. If

they are sure that they are doing everything that is asked of them under

those guidelines and then they have some dispute or disagreement with

the WorkSafeBC officer, they can go to that officer’s manager. If

they’re not satisfied there, they can go to the senior level of

management to deal with those issues.

I think we encourage them to solve them at the local level,

because at the end of the day, it’s not about just rules for the sake of

rules. It is about the health and safety of the workers. It is about the

health and safety of that operation.

As I said before, if we lapse, if we take shortcuts, then what

would happen is that there’s a risk of somebody bringing in the virus to

the workplace and transmitting that to other workers, and then the

entire operation is at risk. I think that we should not forget that. I

think that should be the guiding principle: how are we preventing the

transmission of this virus at the workplace?

Those guidelines are there to direct them, to help them, and

inspectors are there to guide them as well. Again, if there are

disputes, there’s that mechanism that I just mentioned.

C. Oakes: I’m now moving on to a second topic, which was, by far, the most

singular topic that was raised by all small businesses. It’s the concern

around the increase in the minimum wage at this time during

COVID-19.

I think we would all acknowledge that we want a healthy, robust

economy so that we can ensure that everyone has every access to be able

to benefit from all of the incredible blessings that we have in the

province of British Columbia. I went back and reviewed recently the Fair

Wages Commission to understand a little bit better about the analysis

that was made when the report was produced and the understandings that

were based on how the economic analysis would support us looking at the

increases in minimum wage.

I’m going to open with saying that I had the opportunity to sit

the last time when we were the minister and looking at impacts around

increasing small business, and we made those decisions. We clearly heard

from the small business community what their views are. But we also

listened to people and wanted to make sure that there weren’t unintended

consequences.

I read in your report again that the modelling, the analysis and

the research…. There was an acknowledgement in the report early on, in

2018, that no public policy exists without some unintended negative

consequences and that the attempt of government, of course, is to

minimize those negative consequences.

[3:30 p.m.]

The Fair Wages Commission was based on modelling that we had a

very strong economy, that we were looking at it remaining stable and

well able to support higher wages with little or the possibility of no

negative employment effects. When you look at the economy from 2018 and

you look at where we are today, my question is: what analysis and

modelling was done in response to the situation that we are in with

COVID-19 to make the decision to acknowledge that there will be

unintended consequences with increasing minimum wage during COVID-19?

Could you report to us what that analysis showed?

Hon. H. Bains: Again, important question, Member.

I am glad the member acknowledged that when we first came in, we

appointed a Fair Wages Commission. There was the business community on

it. There was a workers’ representative on it and a professor from UBC.

They went around the province, listened to businesses, especially small

businesses — the economists, the experts, the workers. They came back

with those recommendations. It was very clear in their report that what

they heard from small businesses was certainty. They would like to have

a system where there are gradual, predictable increases so that they

know what their costs are going to be so they could start to budget

accordingly.

I think they laid out a four-year plan for us. If you read their

report also, they said the economy was good. That’s why they were

recommending that. I understand that part. They also said that the

increase could even go higher in the last year, if the economy was

better. But I think we’ve seen the COVID-19 hit us very hard.

Again, I want to say that the lowest-paid workers in this province

need support now more than ever. I think small businesses need our

support. That’s why there are programs to support the businesses, and

there are programs to support the individuals and the workers. I

mentioned before. The first thing that we did was we lowered the small

business tax when we came in, and we also took PST on the

non-residential electric yields.

There are a whole host of other programs that we brought in to

help the businesses to send a clear message that the businesses are

important. We want to create a business environment where businesses

want to invest in B.C., grow their businesses and with the expectation

of good return.

[3:35 p.m.]

On the other side, the expectation is that the workers also share

that growing economy and that they are paid fairly as well.

Now, when we talk about the lowest-paid workers and how we provide

certainty to these small businesses, this is the way to do it — have

gradual predictable increases as we are going forward. Businesses, as I

said before, because of COVID-19, have serious challenges, of course.

The workers. I think: “Who are these workers that we are talking about?”

These are the front-line workers right now. Many of them are not even

working. Others are working as grocery store clerks and in health care.

So they need support right now as well.

Businesses need support. That’s why we came up with the $5 billion

plan — originally, out of that, $1.8 billion to give tax deferral and

tax breaks to businesses to support them in a timely fashion. Like I

said before, $700 million in tax cuts in property. That’s one of the

highest levels of tax cuts to businesses in the history of this

province. So I think government very seriously supports the businesses.

At the same time, the lowest-paid workers in this province also need

support.

Now, also understand, these are the workers that, with any

increase in their wages, will invest in their own community and the

businesses in those communities. So businesses will benefit, and they

will have a few extra dollars to have a better life to pay for

essentials to run their household. I think we’re all in it together, and

everyone needs support. Businesses need support. We’re providing it to

them. Individuals need support. We are standing on their side as

well.

The federal government and the provincial government are working

together to provide those supports in addition to what we are doing. We

came in with the $5 billion to fill the gaps that the federal government

may have left and the area that they didn’t cover. So I think, you know,

we are all moving in the right direction — working with the businesses,

working with the workers. It’s not one or the other. I think we all need

to move in the same direction.

I think that’s the goal of this government — to have a balanced

approach. I think that $1.5 billion, again, is available just to help

business to restart their businesses and to start them safely and as

soon as possible. I think we’re working hard, working with businesses.

As we said, the economic recovery task force discussed those issues

there. If we take a balanced approach and help each other out, I think

we will get out of this much, much safer.

C. Oakes: Well, I hope the $1.5 billion is allocated to small businesses. I

think it would certainly be a strong step in helping small business’

recovery, but as we know, that money has not been allocated at this

point. It’s a survey that’s being sent out across the province over the

next six weeks. People will be looking at ways that that fund will be

spent.

My specific question around minimum wage is that analysis and

modelling is done with the Fair Wages Commission. It identified that in

the report — that there will be unintended consequences. There is

research that has been done across the country, and it’s

not….

Look. I’m not saying this is my view. I really wish…. From a

philosophical perspective, Minister, I understand that championing need.

The reality is that when you are in government, there are policies that

you put in place that have consequences.

I am wondering: did you base the minimum wage increase on

analysis? Because that analysis will demonstrate that it will

significantly hurt young people. I don’t want to see young people have

unintended consequences and be deeply impacted. The report identified

that that was a risk we needed to look at. I know from research I have

done when I was a minister and looked at that and talked to many people

and looked at all the research.

There are three areas of concerns when you look at increasing

minimum wage. They are that young people get impacted, women get

impacted, and vulnerable populations get impacted. I am certain that

there are either two answers. First, that the minister made the decision

to increase the minimum wage, understanding that there are unintended

consequences.

[3:40 p.m.]

You should be clear on that — that you understand there will be

consequences, and that’s something that you’re willing to accept; or

that a decision wasn’t made based on any type of analysis or modelling,

that it was just moved forward because of timing. Either it was based on

thorough analysis and modelling, which has traditionally been how the

ministry manages these types of decisions, or no analysis was done, so

which one was it?

The Chair: While the minister is considering his answer, talking to his

advisers, I’ll just say for the benefit of the public that we are,

right now, reviewing the budget and spending of each ministry. We

were working on Education this morning. This is now the Labour

Minister who’s answering questions from the opposition.

It goes slowly because the answers are considered. But if you

are finding this as gripping as we are, you can tune in again

starting July 9. Every Thursday and Friday, all of July, you can

watch government in action.

The other thing I’ll say while I’ve interrupted is just a

reminder to members to keep the word “you” out of both your

questions and responses and to direct your questions through the

Chair.

Hon. H. Bains: Member, as you know…. You have read the report from the Fair Wages

Commission. They did the analysis, and they looked at the consequences

of raising the minimum wage — what the consequences would be. There’s

always acknowledgment that there may be some consequences, but take a

look. Since we implemented their recommendations, you see, if anything,

an increase in employment in British Columbia. I think you see the

economy continue to grow in British Columbia — it led the country — and

the lowest unemployment in the country.

What the analysis has also done…. What the businesses want is

certainty. They need predictable, gradual increases every year so that

they can adapt to the additional costs. Again, we made the decision that

during COVID-19, businesses need support, so we provided them support,

as I mentioned before. We also understand that individuals need support,

so we are working on that area as well. One of them is to continue to

raise the minimum wage to keep with the recommendation of the Fair Wages

Commission and also to understand that the needs of the lowest-paid

workers also are there.

This debate, if you go back years…. This debate is always there —

what impact raising the minimum wage has on employment and on the

economy. You’ll have an economic report that says it’s devastating.

You’ll have economic reports that say it’s had an insignificant impact.

In fact, when we were considering the report at that time, 50 very

renowned economists put a letter together, all across Canada. Seven of

those economists were from three very key universities in B.C. They all

put a letter together. They said in their letter that there’s no

relation to job losses and business closure with raising the minimum

wage.

[3:45 p.m.]

I think there are analyses available. This particular time or

challenging time…. These are unprecedented times, and I think decisions

are being made based on the current needs. We’re supporting businesses

so that they can restart their businesses, get back to close to normal,

as they were. All that support is there, $1.5 million, in addition to

what we have already done. At the same time, workers and individuals

also need support. I think that’s how we made those

decisions.

C. Oakes: The minister acknowledges that decisions were made in 2018 under

much different economic circumstances. My question was clearly what

modelling the minister has done, over the last two months, to understand

the consequences of the decisions that he has made.

What are you going to say to the young person, that woman who is

vulnerable, or that vulnerable population who now finds themselves in a

situation where they no longer have a job? I recognize that there are

programs right now for workers that might last a few months, but what

happens next? What happens after these programs run out? What are people

to do?

I’m speaking on behalf of the workers. I’m pleading on behalf of

our young people who are out there, who desperately want to make sure

they have a job to go back to. The minister has heard, through multiple

letters…. Multiple information has been provided through both the

minister, the economic councils, about the challenges that will happen.

If small businesses become insolvent, then the deepest cuts will happen

to young people, to women and to people in vulnerable

situations.

I heard the minister earlier acknowledge the fact that the

hospitality sector, the retail sector, the accommodation sector are

significantly challenged right now. He mentioned it. He mentioned that

small businesses are impacted right now.

What I am trying to understand is what analysis was done so that

he clearly can articulate — or at least, be honest to British Columbians

— that he knew full well that there would be unintended consequences for

young people, for women and vulnerable persons if they move forward with

the increase of minimum wage?

Hon. H. Bains: As I said before, I think we canvassed this thing for quite some

time already. But let me say this again. The relation to job loss,

economic growth and minimum wage increase, as I said, was canvassed and

analyzed by the Fair Wages Commission. They came back with a

recommendation based on what they heard and also their own research —

came back with recommendations. I think it’s the right path to continue

on, to go with gradual, predictable increases for businesses to give

them the certainty that they need, that they asked for. That’s why we’re

doing it.

[3:50 p.m.]

Even now, if you take a look, we are trying to help the businesses

to stand on their feet again, to restart the economy, restart their

businesses by coming up with all those different programs that I

mentioned. At the same time, people need money in their pockets so that

they can invest in those businesses. If people don’t have money in their

pockets, businesses cannot rely on the investment from people. I think

we need to seriously look at where we are going with this.

The member will know that some of the lowest-paid workers are

grocery store workers. Their employer agreed to pay them additional

money during COVID-19. The federal government came in and also paid the

front-line workers more money.

Also, when you take a look at the CERB money that is given to

people, it’s all to put money in peoples’ pockets so that they can make

a living and, at the same time, invest that money in their local

businesses that are operating and which will be starting to operate so

that they can buy their product and buy their services. I think we need

to enable those people to make sure that they’re able to cater to those

businesses.

That’s why we’re going with this. I think it’s the right thing to

do. The lowest-paid workers need support now, just like businesses and

others do. I think it’s a balanced approach, and I think it’s the right

approach.

C. Oakes: To the minister: I do thank you for your answer. Again, I’ve seen

the analysis. I know that you keep going back to 2018, but I also

recognize that the research was based on strong economic times. I’ve

also seen research, when we were looking at this. So we, as a

government, when we were going through this, could clearly understand

unintended consequences on decisions that we made, on the policies that

we were making.

We understood, again, and the minister has acknowledged, that

there are unintended consequences to decisions that governments make.

Based on the fact that we know that young people are going to be very

much hurt right now by COVID-19…. We know that women are going to be

impacted very much right now by COVID-19, and people who are

vulnerable.

The mass majority of small businesses in the province of British

Columbia, over 400,000, are under five employees. If they have the

opportunity to reopen…. We canvassed this earlier. Many small businesses

do not have the cash to reopen. They have not been able to access any of

the programs that have been allocated by the provincial or federal

government. They need cash in order to get the PPEs up, in order that

they can open the doors, so that they can have their staff back in. If

they become insolvent and they go bankrupt, then, again, that’s going to

desperately hurt a significant portion of the workers that you’ve

recognized.

I guess my last question…. The minister knows what the unintended

consequences are. I’m going to continue to fight for the workers who are

in that category, whether they’re young people, whether they’re women,

whether they’re people who are vulnerable, because I think it’s our job

to be doing that. I’m going to continue do that, because I worry that

there will be unintended consequences, based on information when the

economies go poor.

The second thing. I’m going to fight for small businesses, because

if we do not have funds and cash that we can provide to small businesses

— taxpayers, job creators in the province of British Columbia…. If they

can’t reopen, our communities are going to be changed forever, because

then it becomes a whole different conversation from government. How are

you going to support all these sports teams now that the community used

to support? How are you going to support all of the search and rescue,

the fire rescue, the volunteer fire departments and all of those

organizations that the small business sector used to support?

Unless we get this right, unless we figure out how we can have a

mix…. I recognize that $1.5 billion was put forward, and I appreciate

the fact that the minister keeps raising that. We’ve not heard clearly

how that money has the possibility of helping both small businesses and

those people who have fallen through the cracks, to make sure that there

is a small business open that that young person can go back to, that

that woman can go back to that small business, that that vulnerable

individual can go back to that business.

Will the minister consider creating a small business resiliency

fund to assist during the recovery, to make sure our small businesses

have cash in hand so that they can make sure that they are able to bring

back their workers who are most vulnerable?

[3:55 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Member, I just want to say this. We are going through some

unprecedented times. We all acknowledge that. At least I know in my

lifetime that I’ve never seen the situation that we’re going through

right now, and I was born a long time ago. I can tell you that I think

even if I go to my parents’ generation, you probably wouldn’t see a

significant impact on humans and on the economy as we’re going through

today, even in their lifetime. So I think in a long time….

We are going through some really challenging times, and we all

understand that. That’s why everyone is working together — the

government, the businesses, the workers and ordinary folks out there,

retirees and NGOs. They’re all working together to help each other so

that we can get out of this together and be better when we get out of

this.

Challenging times right now? Of course. But more challenging times

are coming, going forward. Dr. Henry has explained to us very clearly

that history will tell you that when there are pandemics like this, the

higher chances are that there will be a second wave. We need to prepare

ourselves for that.

I think when we are talking about supporting each other, it’s not

supporting one on the back of the other. I think we are a government

that listens. That’s why we are consulting again on that $1.5 billion.

Then we will see what the needs are of the businesses and of the

families. Then we can put those programs together. The workers need

protection as well. People need money in their pocket. So we are doing

all those things.

Having said that, of course more needs to be done. Everyone — our

ministry, WorkSafeBC, the employment standards branch and others — is

working together to help us help the workers, help the businesses to

navigate through this tough time.

Now, the member asked to put together a model based on resiliency,

a task force. My suggestion is that that isn’t part of my ministry or a

mandate that I can fulfil. The member should take this up with the

Ministry of Finance, because I think a lot of decisions are coming on

that $1.4 billion.

I know your side, Member, and others have said that sometimes we

consult too much. But this is a government that listens. We listen, and

then we respond in a timely fashion, because we believe that’s the right

model of governance. We’re going to continue on that path — listen,

consult and then develop policies, put people in the middle to develop

policies, Member, because people are the economy, as the Premier always

said, and the economy is people. I think both of them have to be part of

that equation for success, and that’s the direction we’re

going.

J. Martin: Thank you to my colleague from Cariboo North, and thank you to the

minister for his responses.

I’m just going to carry on in a similar vein for a few more

questions before we return to issues around workers compensation. But

while we’re on the topic, can the minister provide us with any further

updates on the work of the Fair Wages Commission?

The Chair: Thank you, Member.

We’re going to have a ten-minute recess. We’ll see you back

here shortly.

The committee recessed from 4 p.m. to 4:11 p.m.

[R. Kahlon in the chair.]

Hon. H. Bains: I think it has gone very smoothly up until now, and we’re

expecting nothing less. I have high hopes.

A question was asked: what is the update on the Fair Wages

Commission? We gave them a mandate at that time to come up with a

recommendation on how we increase minimum wage in this province. The

second piece was for them to come up with a recommendation on how we

deal with the discrepancy between the minimum wage and the living wage.

The Fair Wages Commission still is continuing on that part of the task.

We will get their report, hopefully, later this year. Once that

recommendation comes, then we will make that public.

J. Martin: I appreciate that, Minister. You’ve already answered the next

follow-up question that I was prepared for.

In previous years, the minister has emphasized the importance of

consultation regarding the minimum wage. But in light of these

extraordinary times, were further consultations made before the

government eventually did decide to follow through with the scheduled

June 1 increase?

Hon. H. Bains: As the member full well knows, this question has been extensively

canvassed by the member for Cariboo North. I think I would repeat some

of the answer that I gave. When the Fair Wages Commission was

consulting, they did a very thorough job. They listened to economists.

They listened to workers and small businesses and did their own

research. As I’ve said, there were very esteemed members on that

board.

They came back with their recommendations. What they advised us

was that what businesses, especially small businesses, wanted was

certainty — that there is a gradual increase so that they can predict

what their cost is going to be. I think that’s why those recommendations

were made — to gradually increase the minimum wage to $15.20 over four

years. Year after year, we’ve been implementing those.

For now, yes, we are going through some challenging times due to

COVID-19. I have said this before and explained this before, that we

were very quick to react after listening to businesses. That’s why the

$5 billion package was brought in to give support to families and to

businesses.

[4:15 p.m.]

Out of that, $1.8 billion was for businesses, in tax deferrals,

tax cuts and, working with the federal government, the wage subsidy, 75

percent. Then we take a look at the WCB, in supporting premium deferrals

and waiving premiums for certain employers. We also extended the

temporary layoff, first to 16 weeks, now to August 30. We’re doing

everything we can to support local businesses.

At the same time, we do realize — I know that our federal

counterparts understand as well — that we need to put money in people’s

pockets during these tough times. It’s money that they will be investing

in businesses in their own communities, money that they will be using to

get by on, for the daily needs of their families, their

children.

We are taking a balanced approach. Yes, we heard from the

businesses. Some were saying: “Postpone the mini­mum wage by six

months.” Others were saying: “Don’t increase minimum wage.” But we heard

also that we should continue to provide this certainty to the employers

and to the businesses and that the workers need. Especially the

lowest-paid workers in B.C. need the support now more than ever. These

are people that will be spending, almost entirely, all of their increase

in wages in businesses in their own communities.

I think it’s a win-win situation. We’re all in it together. This

virus does not differentiate between the worker and the business; it

hits them both. Workers are losing jobs; their friends are losing jobs.

Their families are not working, and they’re worried about the health and

safety of their members. They are worried about…. Some of them actually

have seen deaths in their families.

Businesses also are hurting. When you look at it from both sides,

we listen and we hear them. We thought this was the right decision to

make: that we support the lowest-paid workers and, at the same time,

that we provide support to the businesses — which we’ve done. I have

listed all those different areas of support for businesses.

J. Martin: At this point, I welcome my colleague from Vancouver-Langara to

the conversation.

M. Lee: I would like to take our line of questioning back to WorkSafe. We

were looking before at the principles around…. Certainly, when we have

employees who get sick on the job, we all agree that we need to ensure

that there is appropriate compensation for those employees.

I’d just like to ask the minister to comment on what leadership

the minister and the Premier have taken in respect to the COVID-19

presumption.

Hon. H. Bains: As the member full well knows, WorkSafeBC works at arm’s length

and is independent of the minister and the government, under the act

that is enacted by the government. Their main mandate is to protect the

health and safety of the workers and to have sufficient funds to make

sure that past, current and future claims are paid, that there are

sufficient funds in there.

From time to time, they make decisions. At this particular time,

they made a decision, due to the pandemic that we’re all facing and that

the workers are facing. They also heard of cases where workers were

going to work sick and transmitting the virus to other workers. That was

a threat to the health and safety of workers at the

workplace.

They decided that they want to turn this into a presumptive

approach. For workers who become sick at the workplace, their claims are

processed in a timely fashion so that they don’t have to go through the

process of proving that it’s work-related — it is presumed to be

work-related — and that they get the support that they need.

[4:20 p.m.]

They stay home during the time that they are recovering. The

workers at the workplace — the other workers — are protected, and these

workers’ claims are taken care of in a timely fashion.

The Chair: Member for Vancouver-Langara, do you have another

question?

M. Lee: Yes, I do. Mr. Chair, I do have a series of questions here just on

this particular topic.

Minister, were there discussions between yourself and the Premier

about what WorkSafeBC potentially could do in terms of a COVID-19

presumption?

Hon. H. Bains: Yes, we had discussions about this issue.

M. Lee: When did those discussions take place?

Hon. H. Bains: As the member knows, COVID-19 hit us early this year. There were

always concerns about the health and safety of government employees and

the health and safety of workplaces. WorkSafeBC was doing their own

things in order to be proactive, to provide help and support to the

workers who were becoming sick at workplaces due to this COVID. They

started to put a process together to fast-track those claims.

M. Lee: I just wanted to walk back to one of your previous responses in

terms of the appropriate nature of the minister’s role and WorkSafeBC

and their board. Can you just describe the arm’s-length nature that you

maintain with that board?

[4:25 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Member, first, my role is to appoint…. It’s my responsibility to

appoint the board at WorkSafe. The board works within the confines of

the Workers Compensation Act, which is enacted by legislation. Annually,

they develop a service plan and annual report, and they give you a

high-level report of their working. And that’s my relationship with

them.

M. Lee: Thank you for that response. How often would the minister be

meeting with that board?

Hon. H. Bains: Since I was appointed minister, I’ve had two meetings with the

full board. And I do get quarterly updates through the chair of the

board.

M. Lee: Thank you. I’m just trying to get an understanding, of course, and

I appreciate the responses. I understand that the minister…. Presumably,

he has some recollection of this.

On April 29, there was a Surrey Board of Trade event, a town hall,

and you made statements at the town hall regarding the following. I can

read the quote out to you, just because it gives the context for this

discussion:

“The Premier and I met with, along with my deputy minister…. We met

with WCB to see how they can help us in this particular area. If someone

acquired, you know, COVID out of work, what is WCB’s response to do

that?

“So the WCB board met, and they prioritized the situation and said:

‘Look, if they are impacted by COVID-19 at work, they file a claim, and

then we will look at it. If we can make it as a presumptive, you know,

they don’t have to prove going to the doctor, getting a note, and then

the claim will be accepted.’”

Minister, I believe that’s consistent with your understanding as

to the board’s response and putting priority on COVID presumption. Is

that your understanding in terms of your meeting with the board, with

the Premier and your deputy?

[4:30 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Yes, we had discussions with the board. I must tell you that the

board advised me on April 20 that they are initiating this initiative to

consider the COVID-19 illness as presumptive. We also wanted, as we were

talking about reopening the economy, to see what role WCB can play in

helping us in creating the guidelines for the industry.

At the same time, what are we doing? COVID-19 hit us from nowhere,

and we wanted to know what is going on with the workers who are becoming

ill at the workplace and also workers who go to work sick and transmit

the virus to other workers. As you know, in a couple of cases, factories

had to shut down as a result of that.

We were all concerned about what’s going on. That discussion took

place with the CEO and the chair of the board, and we got the update

from them. In the meantime, they were already working on the presumptive

clause to include COVID-19 as presumptive.

M. Lee: So your discussion, then, with the Premier and the deputy minister

present with the CEO and the board chair, took place before or after

April 20?

Hon. H. Bains: I believe our meeting was April 22. That was after the board

advised us that they were moving ahead on COVID presumption to deal with

the pandemic that we are facing at workplaces. So that discussion and a

number of other issues were discussed. How are we going to help each

other? What role can WCB play? We needed to make sure that we’re all

moving in the right direction and that in the areas that are of concern

to move and restart the economy, all the pieces are there. We just

wanted to get the information on what every one of us [audio

interrupted].

M. Lee: Just in terms of this meeting…. I appreciate that we’re hearing

from the minister that there’s obviously lots of concern in terms of

worker safety. We all understand the importance of that in the face of

COVID-19. What level of preparatory work was done by the minister and

the Premier and the deputy in terms of other initiatives, let’s say,

that the board could be taking in this time?

[4:35 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: We were going through, as the member would appreciate, something

that we never experienced before, that our institution has never

experienced before. The provincial health officer and that office were

working on one side. How do we protect the health and safety of people

in this province, including the workplaces? WorkSafe also has a mandate

to make sure that the health and safety at workplaces of the workers is

a number one priority. So there are two jurisdictions.

We wanted to make sure that they’re working together to come up

with the safety guidelines for a reopening of the economy, that they can

work together. We just wanted to know how closely they’re working with

each other so that they could develop the guidelines, sector-specific,

which they did.

Then we were able to start the economy during phase 2, and now

we’re moving to phase 3, so I think that work continues. And I think

that’s what our major concern was — how WorkSafeBC and the provincial

health office can work together to provide us the guidelines that the

workers need and, in public, we need.

M. Lee: Thank you for that response. When did the minister get informed of

the decision by the board on April 20? When would the minister have been

informed of that decision?

[4:40 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Look, I can tell you this — that the board met on the 16th. They

made that decision at that meeting. Then later, they advised me, so I

came to know on the 20th that they are moving in that direction. Those

are the timelines.

M. Lee: I appreciate that these are unusual times and that government must

move quickly — with everything that the government had to deal with. I’m

just trying to gain a better understanding here in terms of this area of

great importance. So I appreciate that response.

If I could ask a few more questions in this area, Mr. Chair. Was

the board aware of any interest by the Premier or the minister in a

COVID-19 presumption before they made their decision on April

16?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, I think it’s important to understand that the board works

independent of the minister. In this particular case, they, again, made

a decision independent of the minister. As I said, on the 16th of April,

they decided on their own to deal with this pandemic that we were all

facing. How to protect the health and safety of the workers? They made

that decision on the 16th. Then they advised us that they are moving in

that direction.

I believe that they were proactive, and I think it was a timely

decision that they made. And I think many workers benefitted from

it.

M. Lee: Just to clarify, the minister is effectively saying that the board

made the decision on April 16 and then informed the minister on April

20. So the actual decision was made on the 16th. Is that

correct?

[4:45 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: The board made the decision on the 16th to proceed with that

approach. But on the 20th, they decided to fast-track it, because the

normal course takes time, and they wanted to deal with this in a timely

fashion because circumstances were changing. Workplaces were changing,

and people were getting sick. So they made that decision to fast-track

it, and that decision was made on the 20th.

M. Lee: Thank you for that clarification as well. Just one other point in

terms of what was happening in April. When we look back, so much, of

course, has happened since the start of this pandemic.

I understand that the B.C. Federation of Labour, in a news release

which was disseminated on April 8, indicated that they had written a

letter to the provincial government urging them to act quickly on a

COVID-19 presumption. Can the minister share with us more details or

elaborate further on that letter itself?

Hon. H. Bains: Yes, we received that letter, and they raised that issue in their

letter. But also their letter…. If you could look at the letter, it was

cc’d to the chair of the WCB board as well.

During these tough times, Member, as you know, we get

correspondence from all kinds of different stakeholders, different

people, businesses, workers and others who are concerned about COVID-19,

especially workplaces and the health and safety of workers. Individual

workers were reaching out, and many talked about paid sick leave. Many

talked about a number of other issues that were raised that were related

to COVID-19, and they were really worried. But on that particular

letter, coming back to your question, yes, they raised that issue with

us, but they also sent that letter to the chair of the board.

M. Lee: Thank you. I appreciate that response.

In receipt of that letter, was there any communication between the

minister or the government with the board?

Hon. H. Bains: In reference to that letter, no.

M. Lee: Thank you for that response. Were there any other stakeholders

that the government heard from about COVID presumption?

[4:50 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Yes, there was correspondence we received from individuals and

from organizations. Some were cc’d to us. What our response to all of

them was: that WorkSafe has taken this initiative on their own, and

they’re going through the consultative process. We directed them anytime

that we could to participate in the WCB process of

consultation.

M. Lee: Certainly, we will talk about the consultation process, as short

as it was. But just before we go on from this, I was looking, really,

for any confirmation of stakeholder communications, let’s say, to the

government about the need for putting in place a COVID-19 presumption

before the board made their decision on April 16.

Hon. H. Bains: Member, we received correspondence before the 16th and after the

16th advocating for presumption, then we also received correspondence

from some stakeholders suggesting that the board should not go through

the presumption.

I think we received letters from both sides, but we directed them

to the board. It was a board decision. They made it on their own to deal

with the pandemic and the emergency that we’re all facing. They heard

from the stakeholders. They also — after they made their decision — went

for consultation so that the stakeholders and others could have their

input as well.

M. Lee: Just one other question on this particular set of questions. Can I

ask…? The minister mentioned earlier that in some of the responses to

the stakeholders, there was an indication from government that the board

was looking and examining a COVID-19 presumption. Can the minister

inform us as to the minister’s knowledge when that consideration

began?

[4:55 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: The board made their decision on their own. After they made the

decision, then I was advised that that was the direction they were

going. They may have received correspondence and suggestions from

stakeholders. I have no idea. It was the board’s decision, and it was a

decision that they made and they believed was the right decision for

that particular time to deal with this emergency that everyone is

facing.

M. Lee: Am I to understand, then, that prior to April 16, before the board

made the decision, that the minister was not aware of any consideration

by the board of pursuing or evaluating a COVID-19

presumption?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, to the best of my recollection, I was not aware. Actually,

when I was advised that they were making that decision, that was news to

me. They had made a decision based on what they felt was the right thing

to do at that particular time to deal with the emergency that our

society was facing.

M. Lee: Just in terms of the nature of COVID-19, there is a review that

has been done and documentation by the board in terms of claims that

have been adjudicated or are under review by the board through the

COVID-19 pandemic. Can the minister describe for us the process for

which these claims are being adjudicated to date?

[5:00 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Member, claims submitted for potential COVID-19 contracted through

work-related exposure are adjudicated case by case right now. Claims are

allowed when there is sufficient evidence to establish that the worker

has COVID-19 and that the risk of contracting the disease in the

workplace was significantly higher than the risk to the public at

large.

Currently the presumption is not in place. They are processing

those claims on a case-by-case basis, just like any other workplace

injury or illness. I think right now they need to have evidence, and

based on evidence, the claims are processed.

I am advised that around 600 claims have been filed. I think the

acceptance rate is between 55 and 60 percent.

M. Lee: I see a

schedule on page 10 of the discussion paper which

WorkSafeBC has developed, dated May 29, 2020. It has a table which is

very consistent with the minister’s response. As at May 27, the number

of claims, in total, was 514.

I would like to ask the minister: since the beginning of the

COVID-19 pandemic, has the minister been receiving regular reporting on

the number of claims relating to COVID-19 that WorkSafeBC is

receiving?

Hon. H. Bains: The member, I think, will know that WorkSafe put the claims

received on their website. I get the update as well, similarly, through

my ministry.

M. Lee: With the regular updates, then, that the minister is receiving and

monitoring on the WorkSafeBC website, did the minister or his team have

any concern regarding the numbers of claims that were coming forward and

the ability of WorkSafeBC to process those claims?

[5:05 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: Of course. We were going through a pandemic. It was impacting

workplaces as well, and that, through WorkSafe, concerns me and the

government as well. We as a government, as an employer…. It is a concern

that our employees were also being impacted by COVID-19.

I never was concerned about WorkSafeBC’s capacity to handle these

claims in a timely fashion. I think they are fully equipped, as you can

see. They are even moving proactively to prepare themselves and to deal

with the pandemic that is before us.

I would say that, of course, I’m concerned but not concerned about

WorkSafeBC’s ability to process those claims in a timely

fashion.

M. Lee: Certainly, like my colleagues have acknowledged during this

estimates process, we do recognize the important role that WorkSafe and

WCB, and all of the staff, have been playing in all of this and in

dealing with this great challenge facing us all.

I hear in the minister’s response that, just to confirm…. Is there

any backlog in terms of how these claims are being dealt

with?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, there is no backlog, I’m advised. If there are some claims

that haven’t been finalized or processed, it is due to the fact that

they are waiting for more information to be received to finalize those

claims or process those claims to the next level.

M. Lee: This table, which I’m sure the minister is familiar with, gives

the various categories that the minister referred to, which includes

allowed, disallowed, no adjudication required, pending, rejected and

suspended. It breaks it out into the various sectors. So the data is

very important, certainly, in the way that it is being produced. To

acknowledge, of course, that….

When you look at the 339 occupations from which employees are

filing claims, many of them, of course…. We all recognize and support

the efforts of front-line workers. They include registered nurses;

nursing aides; social and community service workers; LPNs, licensed

practical nurses; firefighters; police officers; paramedics; respiratory

therapists; and the like.

I certainly recognize the importance of ensuring that their claims

are being dealt with in a timely and appropriate manner. Again, the

minister has confirmed a few times now that, in his view, that’s

occurring.

I recognize the complexity of COVID-19, the immediacy of the

ongoing challenge and how medical practitioners and experts all over the

world still do not have a full handle on the nature of this virulent

disease. With the adjudication process, what role does contact tracing

play in the way that these claims are being adjudicated?

[5:10 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: I think the guideline that WorkSafe uses is that any illness or

injury is compensable that is work-related and arises during the course

of employment. I think that’s what the worker will be able to provide —

that information, the evidence that they have that illness and that they

contracted it at a workplace. That’s how their claims are

processed.

M. Lee: I appreciate the complexity of that analysis that WorkSafe needs

to do on a case-by-case basis with each worker.

Just to ask the minister, in terms of what is…? Certainly for

claims that have been adjudicated to have occurred through exposure in

the workplace, those that have been awarded and allowed — at the time,

186 out of 514 as of the end of May — that was the case.

I would like to ask: what is the minister’s sense of the ability

to make that determination of COVID-19 transmission — whether it’s

through the community or through the workplace?

Hon. H. Bains: Member, looking at that chart, a number of claims were filed by

those members who felt that they contracted this disease at a workplace.

Some of them got accepted; others got rejected.

It’s all case by case, based on the evidence presented to the

board. They adjudicate those cases. That’s their mandate. It’s not the

minister’s role to participate in that process. That’s why WorkSafeBC

has a process in place, and they go claim by claim, as I said, based on

the evidence before them.

M. Lee: Thank you for that response, Minister.

The guiding test that the minister had given earlier in terms of

the determination…. I see it, below the table, repeated. Just to read

into the discussion here, to restate it, “Claims are allowed when there

is sufficient evidence to establish that the worker has COVID-19,” and

meets the policy requirement that “the risk in the workplace was

significantly higher than the ordinary exposure risk.”

Certainly, just going to the other column, for discussion purposes

with the minister, of the 514 claims that were made, 153 were

disallowed. To the minister, would it be the minister’s understanding

that these claims that were disallowed were on the assessment and

conclusion that the worker did not contract COVID-19 from the workplace

or exposure in the workplace?

[5:15 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: As I said, WorkSafe makes all those decisions on how they

adjudicate and what is considered based within the guidelines that they

have themselves. Now here is what I would give to the member: how the

claims are allowed and disallowed. Claims are typically disallowed when

there is insufficient evidence to establish that the worker has COVID-19

based on the testing or symptom clusters and/or a worker went off work

strictly as a preventative measure and did not develop

symptoms.

They have their own criteria of how they adjudicate and determine

whether it’s a work-related illness or it is not or there is sufficient

evidence to prove it’s work-related or not. That’s how they adjudicate

those claims, not only just with COVID-19 but other illnesses and

injuries as well.

M. Lee: I would like to ask one more question about adjudication to the

minister as to whether the minister agrees, then, that WorkSafeBC is

doing a good job in ensuring that those workers who should get coverage

are getting coverage because of COVID-19.

Hon. H. Bains: Member, the board constantly is looking at how they can improve

the service to the workers and to the employers and then how they can

deliver their mandate to ensure that the workers’ health and safety are

protected, employers are supported to run their operations safely and

the claims are processed in a timely fashion. I think that the same

thing is happening here. Just like other claims, people file claims, and

people file claims for COVID-19 illness, and they are processed on a

case-by-case basis, just like other claims, and decisions are

made.

WorkSafe is the place where they can…. We can actually say that,

overall, WorkSafeBC is doing a pretty good job when it comes to dealing

with claims filed by injured workers.

[5:20 p.m.]

M. Lee: Thank you for that response. Just to acknowledge, when the

minister gave his response to the previous question about those who are

not approved, certainly through this government and the federal

government, whether it’s unpaid sick leave or paid sick leave, there are

mechanisms in place and to be in place that would provide some coverage

for those workers who are denied coverage under this adjudication

process. Can the minister comment on whether the minister sees any gaps

in that coverage for those who are not being approved?

Hon. H. Bains: I think everyone recognized that a sick leave provision not

available to workers was considered to be a gap. That’s why our Premier

was very consistent in pushing the federal government to have some sort

of paid sick leave available to workers so they don’t go to work when

they show flu-like symptoms. I’m happy that the federal government

responded.

Now they’re working with the provincial governments to work out

details on how to implement their program. The Premier was very clear,

as well, that they don’t want to add another burden onto the employers,

who are already hurting. I think that was one part, and it’s being dealt

with.

On the other side, there are a number of other federal and

provincial programs to help not only people who are suffering from

COVID-19 but many other different people. WorkSafeBC also, I think

proactively — as we have canvassed this — looked at this particular

disease that the workers may contract at workplaces…. How do you process

those claims in an expedited manner or in a timely fashion?

I think when you’re looking at different places, there are

challenges. Any time when you’re looking at a new disease that is

introduced, for the workplace to consider that they believe is

work-related, they need to look at ways to consider the signs, to

consider the research, and then they make those decisions. But they make

those decisions on their own.

M. Lee: Thank you, again, to the minister for that response.

When the minister looks at the decision by WorkSafeBC to move

forward with the COVID-19 presumption, what is the minister’s

understanding as to the need to add COVID-19 to

schedule 1? Typically,

in view of our discussion today that WorkSafeBC is able to continue to

process, have the resources available to deal with the claims that have

come in to date, that there are other ways in which workers are being

supported — for example, in paid sick leave by the federal government —

where does the minister see the need for adding a COVID-19 presumption

to

schedule 1?

[5:25 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: I think we canvassed this before. My only response to that even

now is that WorkSafeBC, under their mandate, are looking at how to serve

the workers — those who are injured and who become ill at workplaces. At

any given time, they make decisions. They change policies and

regulations on their own to deal with the circumstances of the

day.

This particular time they believed that there were a number of

claims coming in this particular area. We were going through a pandemic

emergency. You know, I think I commend them for looking at it from a

proactive approach so that they were prepared in order to deal with this

pandemic.

So claims come. They are adjudicating them on a claim-by-claim

basis. I think that what the board…. You know, the consultations ended

June 12. What the board’s next steps are, based on the consultation…. I

think the board will make that decision.

M. Lee: There are a number of questions that stem out of that response. I

appreciate that.

First of all, in terms of…. And appreciate, to the minister, that

the reason why I’m asking these questions…. To date, in our discussion,

there’s been a lot of good acknowledgement for the efforts of WorkSafeBC

in this troubled time. But from a governance perspective, there are a

few points to consider.

One is that, as stated on page 12 of the May 29 discussion paper,

there is an indication at the bottom of that page that there is a policy

of the board that states: “The board of directors may add a disease to

schedule 1 along with the corresponding process or industry where

scientific and medical evidence establishes there is a substantially

greater incidence of a particular disease in a particular employment

than there is in the general population.” So that is what the minister

referred to earlier in terms of the board’s mandate and what WorkSafeBC

needs to operate within.

[5:30 p.m.]

Keeping in mind that that is the policy of the board — that in

order to add a disease to

schedule 1, there needs to be scientific and

medical evidence that establishes a substantially greater incidence of

that particular disease — to the minister’s knowledge, what scientific

and medical evidence has been established that that is the

case?

Hon. H. Bains: Once again, I want to go back to my earlier answer — that the

board decided, in their own wisdom, that we were going through a

pandemic, that there was a public emergency. Claims were coming from

workplaces, related to COVID-19.

As everyone else was caught off guard, everyone else was trying to

prepare for the worst as all different institutions and governments and

institutes within government were looking at how we deal with this. No

one knew where this was going to end up, how serious it was going to

be.

The board, I think to their credit, were looking at how to deal

with this issue. In case there were so many claims or a number of

claims, how do they deal with them? They decided to go this route, and

they are doing their due diligence. I expect them to do their due

diligence. Now they’re going through the consultation process, and based

on the consultation input that they receive, they will be making a

decision.

I think I will leave it up to the board to decide what the right

thing is to do, given the circumstances.

M. Lee: I’m just raising to the minister’s attention factors that I would

expect the minister would be considering in terms of the conduct and

governance activities of the WorkSafe board. When the minister speaks

about due diligence, in this report, it indicates that the policy,

regulation and research division, PRRD, was directed on April 20 to

amend

schedule 1 and to conduct what was an expedited basis review of

the underlying scientific research and medical research relating to

COVID-19.

That review, as I understand it, typically would take 18 to 24

months, and there would be a full review of the research, as well as an

understanding by WorkSafeBC as to the kinds of claims that it is seeing

from claimants and developing that institutional knowledge to evaluate

that. Well, that whole process was accelerated.

[5:35 p.m.]

Now, I appreciate, again, the challenge of COVID-19 and that we

all have to work fast in the response at all levels of government and in

our communities. But when we’re talking about making a change of this

nature, particularly when the adjudication process has been operating on

a case-by-case basis in the way the minister described, I need to

question why it is that the board decided to accelerate the review of

the medical research.

Perhaps I could first ask the minister, or next ask the minister,

as to whether he has any concern about the acceleration and the brief

nature of the review in which…. Rather than do a full review, that

group, that department, did a rapid review, which I’ll talk about

further in a moment.

Hon. H. Bains: Member, I just want to remind you: not only here in British

Columbia, not only just WorkSafeBC, all across the world, all levels of

governments are doing something that they’ve never done before. No one

knew what they were getting into — how hard this COVID-19 would hit

them, how to respond to that.

There are laws on the books that must be balanced, and books must

be balanced. But all that is being changed. Decisions are being made

based on what we have today. The industry, the economy and people are

impacted by COVID-19.

You know, WorkSafeBC is no different. They are reacting to ensure

that they are in a place to deal with the issues that come as a result

of COVID-19. They’re doing their level best to make sure that they are

equipped, that they can deal with this pandemic, especially

work-related, and that they could deal with this.

I’m going to leave it to the board that they will do their due

diligence. They know what their mandate is. They have gone through the

consultation process. I’m sure that what the member is bringing here,

they have been reminded of through the consultation process. They will

consider all of that, and then they’ll make their decision.

I don’t know what their decision is going to be at the end of the

day. So we’ll wait until they make that decision.

M. Lee: I appreciate that the understanding the minister is communicating

is that there is still some process to remain here in the way that

decisions have been made. But from the time that we spent here in

estimates going over the timeline, WorkSafeBC’s board has moved very

fast — faster than any other jurisdiction in Canada. No other

jurisdiction in Canada has gone to this step. There are some, as I

understand it, states in the U.S. that have put in place a COVID-19

presumption, but it’s not, from my understanding, as broad of an

approach that WorkSafeBC is currently mandating to its various

divisions.

I heard the minister’s response on timing, but perhaps I can just

go to the next item of concern. What is set out in the

summary on page 2

of this rapid review is a review based on “limited analytic research

currently available.”

I appreciate, again, because COVID-19 has hit the world in such a

rapid nature, that as I mentioned earlier, there is still more

understanding to come about the nature of the disease and how it affects

us all physiologically and otherwise. But the conclusion is, and I just

wanted to state it here, that “there is no strong evidence of a

consistent association between workers in a specific occupation and a

significantly greater risk of COVID-19, SARS and the H1N1

infection.”

[5:40 p.m.]

We can come back to the latter two in a moment. But this report

itself that went to the board communicates that there is no scientific

and medical evidence to suggest that there’s a greater risk or

association between workers and their specific occupations in the

workplace. So in the absence of that evidence, I fail to see how the

board could reach a decision that meets and adheres to its own policy

that that linkage must be demonstrated.

Again, does the minister have any concern in respect as to how

this board is determining moving forward with COVID-19 in the absence of

that scientific evidence?

Hon. H. Bains: Let me say this, Member. The board, as I said, makes decisions at

arm’s length from the minister. I expect them to continue to do that.

They made a decision to move in this direction, and they are following

their process. They will consider all the areas of concern that the

member is raising. They haven’t made a decision yet. They will be making

that decision once they have all that information.

I’m not concerned that the board is making decisions on their own

to deal with an emergency that our society is facing right now,

especially at workplaces. We have seen the COVID-19 outbreaks in certain

workplaces. You know that. They need to be prepared. They need to see

what’s the best way to deal with that pandemic right now that we are

facing. So I would allow the board to continue to work within their

mandate and see what kind of decision they make, based on the

consultation that they receive, as we mentioned before.

M. Lee: When the minister says that he will allow the board to continue

with its process, at what point would the minister step in if the

minister saw any concerns regarding the process that they are

conducting?

Hon. H. Bains: We want to make it clear. I do not interfere with the independent

working of WorkSafeBC.

[5:45 p.m.]

M. Lee: But ultimately, the minister is involved with the appointment of

who serves on that board. Is that correct?

Hon. H. Bains: [Audio interrupted] appoint board members.

M. Lee: So in that respect, these board members are ultimately accountable

to the minister.

The Chair: Member, do you have a question?

M. Lee: Is that correct?

Hon. H. Bains: The board is accountable to the LG, the Lieutenant-Governor, to

the Crown, and, with my recommendation, they are appointed. The WCA, the

Workers Compensation Act, is very clear on the role of the board and the

role of the minister. The day-to-day operation of the board is left

solely to the WorkSafe board, and I don’t interfere in their daily

work.

M. Lee: Is the minister concerned at all with the rushed nature of the

consultation, which I understand was about ten days, and the remaining

process on consultation, if any?

Hon. H. Bains: Again, the board makes those decisions without my input. I’m

advised that during that time they received 420 submissions. So, you

know, we can say all we want about how much time there was, but people

were engaged. Stakeholders were engaged. And 420 submissions came during

this time, I am advised. I think that they have consulted

well.

I expect them to do the work within their mandate — on their

day-to-day basis, how they make those decisions — and I think we’ll see

where they end up with the decisions that they make independent of

me.

M. Lee: Can you share with us any financial analysis on the potential for

cost of this COVID-19 presumption?

Hon. H. Bains: It’s hard to answer that question, Member, because we don’t know

what kind of presumption the board is looking at. Are they looking at

all workers? Are they looking at a certain sector of the economy? We

have no clue. It’s the board that will be dealing with that issue. And

once they make that decision, then maybe, perhaps, we will be in a

better position to answer those questions.

[5:50 p.m.]

M. Lee: Is there any expectation or requirement, though, that there needs

to be a financial cost analysis to be done in this important

change?

Hon. H. Bains: They know what their mandate is. They know to run the operation as

efficiently as possible, to maintain an accident fund that is sufficient

to pay for past, current and future claims, to protect workers’ health

and safety and to do their day-to-day operations. That’s their mandate.

They’re working within their mandate. I expect them to follow their

mandate and come up with a solution in this particular area that they’ve

deemed is within their mandate and how they have conducted

themselves.

Of course, you expect the board to work within the mandate that

they have, and they have decided that this is the route they want to go.

They’ve gone through the process. Part of that process…. I don’t even

know what anything else entails in that. It might as well be what you

are suggesting here. But as I said, I don’t sit at that table, and I

don’t get involved in their day-to-day affairs. They make those

decisions, and I expect them to make those decisions independent of me,

within their mandate.

M. Lee: Recognizing the potential impact of this decision, is the minister

concerned about any particular legal challenge that might arise in the

absence of scientific evidence?

Hon. H. Bains: I expect the board to consider all the eventualities about their

decision. There is a process in place for people to challenge, people to

appeal their decisions. So I expect that that process will work when and

if they make that decision.

J. Martin: Thank you very much to my colleague from Vancouver-Langara and to

the minister. A couple of other items I’d like to pursue in the time

that we do have remaining this evening.

Changing to another topic, can the minister provide an update on

the work completed to create a registry each for foreign worker

recruiters and employers of temporary foreign workers, hiring staff,

etc.?

[5:55 p.m.]

Hon. H. Bains: I think we canvassed this last year as well. I think everyone

recognized that these are some of the most vulnerable workers that

British Columbia has and that they were going through a tremendous

amount of abuse and exploitation. As a result, we decided to move. Other

jurisdictions also dealt with this. We decided that through

legislation…. We brought the Temporary Foreign Worker Protection Act.

With that, all the recruiters must be licensed and all the employers

must be registered.

We are going through that process. Effective October 2019, all

recruiters must be licensed in order to do the recruiting for British

Columbian employers. The second part of that was to have all the

employers who choose to use temporary foreign workers to be registered

with us. That process is ongoing. Due to COVID-19, it slowed down a bit,

but we expect that process to be completed as soon as we can.

J. Martin: Can the minister tell us how much of this year’s budget is being

allocated toward these registries?

Hon. H. Bains: The temporary foreign worker protection unit is part of the

overall employment standards branch budget. I can give you the numbers

of the employment standards. For 2019-20, it was $13.041 million. For

2020-21, it is $13.882 million. There’s a lift of about

$841,000.

It is part of the overall $4 million lift that we received, I

believe, for four years. Sorry, $14 million over three years. So it is

part of the overall employment standards branch budget.

J. Martin: Thank you once again. With COVID-19, with the border closure, with

the shutdown of much of the economy and slowly restarting some of it,

what does the ministry anticipate the number of temporary foreign

workers in B.C. is going to be this year