Second Session, 41st Parliament

(2017) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, September 18, 2017

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 18

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

Affordability

M. Elmore

J. Thornthwaite

Powering the future with Site C

D. Davies

J. Rice

Human rights

R. Kahlon

J. Yap

Eliminating bottlenecks

I. Paton

J. Brar

Private Members’ Motions

Motion 2 — Health and education services

L. Krog

S. Gibson

M. Dean

D. Barnett

B. D’Eith

T. Wat

R. Leonard

S. Bond

R. Singh

M. Bernier

N. Simons

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2017

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[10:05 a.m.]

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

AFFORDABILITY

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the statement on

affordability in British Columbia. It’s a great honour to be the

Parliamentary Secretary for Poverty Reduction.

[R Chouhan in the chair.]

We know that across our province British Columbians have been

experiencing crises of affordability, and that is why our government has

made it a priority to address affordability, to make life more

affordable for British Columbians, to improve services that people count

on and to build a strong and sustainable economy that benefits

everyone.

We know that B.C. is the only province or territory that does not

have a poverty reduction plan in the country. Certainly, we are the last

to join those ranks. Despite British Columbia being one of Canada’s

wealthiest provinces, B.C. has among the highest poverty rates in the

country.

When we think about what the experience of poverty is and what

that means to British Columbians, I think one of the common

misconceptions is that the poor are mostly on social assistance. We know

that is not the case. Nearly half of those living below the poverty line

are either the working poor or the children of the working poor, and

they are employed in the low-wage labour market. So folks can be working

hard at one, two or three jobs and still be below the poverty

line.

So when we see the face of poverty in our province, it’s complex.

It has many faces, and it cuts right across the continuum. We see

individuals and families and children living in poverty in all our

communities across the province. When we look at….

Poverty is a serious problem in British Columbia. Especially

troubling are the high number of children living in poverty due to….

They often experience long-term health and social impacts that severely

restrict their opportunity and their success later in life. We know that

1 in 5 of B.C.’s poor are under the age of 18 years old.

Poverty disproportionately impacts marginalized groups, including

Indigenous people, people with disabilities and mental illness, recent

immigrants, refugees, single mothers, single senior women and, also,

queer and transgender people. We have nearly half a million British

Columbians — so that’s a quarter of paid employees — that earn less than

$15 an hour. Most are working full-time, and most support an additional

household.

Poverty affects all of us, and we all pay for poverty. Not

investing in poverty has an impact on our economy. It’s estimated that

poverty costs British Columbia $8 billion to $9 billion a year in health

care and justice system costs and, particularly, in diminished

opportunities.

We’ve seen that the crisis of affordability squeezing individuals

and families in British Columbia — with the sky-high housing

affordability, the lack of access and expensive child care, the

increasing costs of MSP, B.C. Hydro and other services — has really

outstripped wage growth in our province. This is a situation 16 years in

the making, under the previous B.C. Liberal government.

That is why I’m very proud to work with my colleague Minister

Simpson to make a commitment and implement a poverty reduction strategy

and to have the support of government to undertake that. Our government

is moving quickly to put people first and to begin making life more

affordable for individuals and families.

[10:10 a.m.]

We’ve brought forward a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy

to lift children and families out of poverty. We have, in our province,

the unacceptable number of 700,000 British Columbians, and 120,000

children, in poverty, the highest poverty rate of any province. So we

need to fix that, and we’ve made the commitment.

Of course, it’s a complex issue, and there are many broad,

contributing factors to poverty — lack of affordable housing, high child

care costs, low wages, social programs that aren’t working for people.

So we need a number of initiatives and commitments to reduce poverty in

our communities.

It isn’t something that the Ministry of Social Development and

myself, as the Parliamentary Secretary for Poverty Reduction, can

achieve on our own. We’ll be working with other ministries across all

levels of government and in partnership with organizations in the

community to address this issue. It is an issue that impacts all of us

and is a concern. We will also be consulting and working in partnership

to solve this issue.

To date, we’ve made the commitment to move forward, and one of our

first acts of government was to increase income and disability

assistance by $100 a month. That takes effect shortly. That’s the first

increase in ten years, so a single person on income assistance will

receive $710 a month, and someone on disability assistance will receive

$1,133 a month. We’ve said that we will also, in the budget update, make

a commitment to increase earning exemptions by $200 a month for people

on assistance so people can keep more of the money that they earn and

remain connected to the workforce and better support themselves and

their families.

This is a first step — it’s a start — to reduce inequality and

poverty that is a scourge in our province and that really tears apart

the fabric of our society. We’ve made the commitment, as well, to

restore transit passes for people with disabilities, to restore access

forward for plans to address affordable housing, to work towards

increasing the minimum wage towards $15 an hour, implementing affordable

child care and a commitment to lower MSP premiums.

We know that these steps will make a real difference in the lives

of struggling families and kids throughout British Columbia, and we will

continue to work to end poverty in our province.

Deputy Speaker: I want to caution all members. When you speak, do not name any

members. Only address them by their constituency names,

please.

J. Thornthwaite: On behalf of my constituents in North Vancouver–Seymour, it is

with great pleasure that I rise in the House today to respond to the

member for Vancouver-Kensington. As I’ve said before, my riding of North

Vancouver–Seymour is one of the most beautiful places in the province,

yet it is becoming one of the least affordable, and people are finding

it difficult to live on the North Shore. A lack of affordable housing

options, coupled with a lack of transit options available to people

getting in and out of the North Shore, is creating serious concerns for

our community, something that I talked about last week in my response to

the budget.

Throughout the North Shore, employers are already struggling to

find workers to staff their businesses. We see it in our coffee shops,

our hospitals, our schools, our universities and our ports. This is

becoming an issue for small and big businesses alike.

At Capilano University, debt-saddled students who struggle to find

student housing are set to be further burdened after the NDP failed to

follow through on their election promise to eliminate student loan

interest.

My constituents want child care close to home or work. There

aren’t many options available. During the election, this government made

a lot of noise about their commitment to bring $10-a-day child care, and

I know that people voted because of this issue. But apparently, we found

out that it’s not even in the mandate letter of the minister

responsible.

We need to have a long-term, comprehensive plan in place, and so

far, we’ve seen a complete lack of leadership from this new government

on this issue. What I do know is what the economy looked like when this

government inherited it. The NDP inherited the best-performing economy

in the country. Our province boasted five consecutive balanced budgets,

a $2.7 billion budget surplus and a triple-A credit rating. More

importantly, we had a solid plan to keep taxes low, attract investment,

create jobs and further grow the economy. Now we face an NDP government

that is set to turn back time on this province’s years of historic

economic growth.

[10:15 a.m.]

We now have a government that has decided to cancel the Massey

Tunnel replacement, with thousands of jobs and contracts cancelled, let

alone 80,000 commuters stranded; a government that threatens Site C and

the thousands of jobs, let alone its commitment to clean energy

sources.

We have a government whose decision to scrap bridge tolls is

likely to cause a downgrade in the triple-A credit rating, debt that

will now be put on the government’s book, debt that will be passed on to

hard-working British Columbians.

But who is going to pay for all of these spending promises and no

job growth? The answer is: all of us, through the only approach the NDP

seems to know: by increasing our taxes.

First, the NDP will raise the personal income tax rate for

individuals earning $150,000, from 14.7 to 16.8. Next, the NDP is going

to raise the corporate tax rate from 11 to 12 percent. This will only

serve to penalize entrepreneurs and businesses and will force them to

pass their increased expenses on to consumers, just like the increase in

the minimum wage does. We know that it increased cost to consumers. It

will also make British Columbia less competitive regionally and a less

attractive place to invest.

But that’s not all when it comes to taxing hard-working British

Columbians. Shockingly, the NDP plans to increase the carbon tax and

abandon the revenue-neutral requirement that has been in place since its

inception.

Under our previous Liberal government, we were the first

jurisdiction in North America to introduce a broad-based,

revenue-neutral carbon tax. That meant that every penny raised through

the carbon tax was returned through tax cuts to directly support British

Columbians and B.C. businesses. But now, the government is set to

excessively raise the price at the pumps and the cost to heat our homes

across the board. People are now going to have to pay seven cents more

per litre of fuel.

This government has an ambitious spending plan, but it lacks a

plan to grow the economy and produce revenues so it can afford to pay

for it. After 16 years of strong fiscal management, we left B.C. leading

the country in economic performance. Where is the NDP’s plan to grow the

economy and continue our strong record on jobs?

We now have a government whose governing philosophy can be reduced

to spending and taxes. While it’s true that the issue of affordability

is a serious challenge with no solution, I fear that under this

government, life for British Columbians is set to become even more

unaffordable.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and conclude my remarks.

I’d like to thank the member for North Vancouver–Seymour for her

remarks. She mentioned the challenge and the squeeze of affordability

for folks on the North Shore in terms of the lack of affordable housing

and the need for improved transit and, indeed, the high cost of tuition.

I would just like to note that 16 years of B.C. Liberal government

priorities and choices have led to that crisis of affordability in her

community.

It’s a clear commitment of our government to address poverty. We

didn’t hear much, beyond a few opening remarks, about recognizing the

impact and scourge of poverty in our province. Our government has made a

clear planning commitment to implement a poverty reduction plan,

finally, so we’re not laggards in our country. We can join the rest of

Canada to bring an end to poverty across our province.

It’s been eight weeks, and I think that in terms of our

announcements that we’ve made, it’s been a good start in terms of a very

clear commitment around addressing how families and individuals are

impacted, with a $100-a-month increase to income assistance as well as

learning. We are also going to address the high cost…. Tuition fees have

doubled. They doubled under 16 years of the B.C. Liberals, so we have

taken clear steps and made commitments to move forward.

We are also going to implement a basic income pilot project, which

was an initiative brought forward by the Greens, to look at really

piloting that — look at an innovative way to address poverty — and look

at that as an opportunity and an effective way to reduce poverty,

improve health, housing and employment, particularly for vulnerable

individuals and families throughout the province. So that will come out.

We will lay that out in the coming months.

[10:20 a.m.]

We are committed to implementing a poverty reduction strategy. We

have taken clear steps. We will address these issues, going forward

every day, and we will ensure that we take steps to address the crisis

of affordability, that we build and strengthen public services for

British Columbians and that we ensure that there, fundamentally, is an

economy that benefits all British Columbians so that it’s not a low-wage

economy where nearly half a million British Columbians work but are

still below the poverty line. We are committed to that, and we will take

steps to work on behalf of British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: A caution to all members: these statements are supposed to be very

non-partisan. Please be careful when we talk about, make our comments.

So keep that in mind.

POWERING THE FUTURE WITH SITE C

D. Davies: The other day in the House my colleague the member for Skeena drew

attention to the fact that the May 9 election results were far more

revealing than just the number of seats won by any political party. If

you stand back and take a bird’s-eye view of the geographic results of

the election, it reveals a stark divide between rural and urban British

Columbia. With only a few seats scattered in the Interior and the north,

the seats won by the NDP were predominantly in the Lower Mainland and on

the Island. The same with the Green Party — they won their seats on the

southern tip of Vancouver Island.

On the other hand, the B.C. Liberals are the only party with

representation on the Island, the Lower Mainland, with the lion’s share

of seats in the Interior and north.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member, please keep your comments non-partisan.

D. Davies: One of the reasons is because our party doesn’t view the

environment and the economy as mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact,

we believe that the environment is best protected and preserved by the

economy that places a premium on reliable, renewable and clean sources

of energy. That pretty much defines hydroelectricity in this province.

Jurisdictions around the world envy British Columbia because we have an

abundance of hydroelectricity, especially since it doesn’t contribute to

greenhouse gas emissions. Yet for some reason, other people in the

province are adamantly opposed to Site C. Site C is a generational

opportunity. By building Site C, we will be passing a legacy on to our

future generations, a source of power that will reduce our carbon

footprint over the coming decades.

Hon. Speaker, 2017 marks the 50th anniversary of the W.A.C.

Bennett dam, and I encourage members of this House to tour up north, and

make sure that you put the Bennett dam on as part of your itinerary.

Today we are the benefactors of an abundant, reliable and renewable

source of power provided by the Bennett dam because a previous

government had the vision to look to the future, a vision to build a

legacy for the province of British Columbia.

Site C represents that same opportunity. While people talk about

Site C as our largest hydroelectric project, that simply isn’t true.

It’s actually the fourth largest in our system. The Bennett dam is the

largest, and it was a massive undertaking at the time. The Bennett dam

was built 50 years ago when the population of B.C. was only 1.8 million

people, compared to 4.7 million today. There was no talk, back in the

1960s, about how the dam would provide more electricity than what is

needed for the current demand. The Bennett dam was built for the future

generations and, importantly, to expand our economy.

Now it’s our turn to plan for the future. Site C opponents say

that the demand for electricity is not there right now. That’s like

saying — a farmer: “We have enough food on the table today. We’re not

going to plant crops for next year.” If you don’t believe me, let’s look

at what some of the independent people are saying. Dr. Mark Jaccard at

the School of Resource and Environmental Management at Simon Fraser

recently published a piece in the Vancouver Sun . This is what

Dr. Jaccard had to say. “Studies by us and others show that B.C.

electricity demand will be almost double today’s levels if we are to

reduce our emissions by 55 to 70 percent in just over three decades

while our population, economy, buildings and equipment grow

significantly.”

[10:25 a.m.]

Dr. Jaccard goes on to say: “In the case of our 2030 and 2050

greenhouse gas reduction targets, such evidence shows that we must

substantially increase our generation of dependable electricity. If the

Site C dam is built and if we are true to our climate goals, all of its

electricity will be used in B.C. soon after its completion.”

I was born and raised in Fort St. John, the largest city in my

riding. We’re home to a variety of industries — oil, gas, forestry,

agriculture, mining, tourism and hydroelectricity. These industries

provide well-paying, family-supporting jobs to hard-working British

Columbians and are integral to our northern way of life. We are the

first ones to know that if you fail to adapt or plan for your future,

you will quickly lose your economy.

Today 2,600 people are employed at the Site C project, many in my

community, whom I represent. It’s 2,600 people who face unemployment if

members opposite have their way and this project is cancelled. This

project is extremely vital to our communities in the Peace region and

throughout the province. Thousands of families and businesses are

relying on the work and the opportunities that this project is

providing.

We need to mend the gap between rural and urban British Columbia.

We need to build a future and a green economy for our future generations

and our children, and that future depends on Site C.

J. Rice: I appreciate the opportunity to rise to respond to the statement

here by the member for Peace River North. I’d actually prefer to pass

this on to my colleague to my right here, but I can’t do such a thing

today, so I will respond much less succinctly as could be,

possibly.

One of our first acts as government was to ask the British

Columbia Utilities Commission to review the Site C project to ensure

that this project is in the public interest and to keep hydro rates

affordable. This is something that should have been done from the

get-go. A responsible government with the best interests of British

Columbians in mind would have sent this project to the BCUC before

spending a penny of taxpayers’ money.

In fact, that is what is always supposed to happen. That is the

job of the independent commission. Instead, the former B.C. Liberal

government exempted this project from independent oversight for their

own political purposes. In fact, the former B.C. Liberal Premier,

Christy Clark, stated that no matter what the cost to the people of

B.C., it was her goal to get it past the point of no return. Is that the

vision the member opposite is speaking about? That was wrong. The B.C.

Liberal government was looking out for their own best interests, not the

people of British Columbia. That’s why we’ve sent this project to the

BCUC…

Deputy Speaker: Member.

J. Rice: …to ensure that we make the right decision for British

Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: Member, be careful in your comments, please.

J. Rice: Ratepayers could be on the hook for billions of dollars for power

we might not actually need and paying for it in jacked-up electricity

prices for years to come. That is what the Utilities Commission will

look at. This was a political project of the former Premier, and our

government has done the responsible thing by sending it to the BCUC for

independent review.

No matter what, energy policy needs to be in the best interests of

the people of British Columbia. That’s why our government will drive

innovation, expand energy efficiency and conservation programs, generate

new energy responsibly and sustainably and create lasting jobs across

the province, not just in the northeast corner of the

province.

B.C.’s public buildings need upgrading. We will create thousands

of jobs across the province retrofitting public buildings, such as

schools and hospitals, as well as industrial and commercial buildings

and private homes. Retrofits will save the taxpayer millions of dollars

by reducing the energy needs of our schools and hospitals, as well as

reducing the amount of carbon offsets they need to purchase. Retrofits

will also save businesses and individuals money on their energy bills

and increase property values.

Conserving energy is the most efficient way to meet B.C.’s energy

needs. Energy-efficient retrofits create twice as many jobs as building

a new dam, and the jobs are long-lasting, good-paying and close to home

in every community across B.C.

[10:30 a.m.]

B.C. can become a world leader in clean energy by investing in

wind, solar and other renewable energy sources. These technologies are

becoming cheaper and more efficient every year, and wind and solar

projects are providing an ever-increasing amount of power in

jurisdictions around the world. The previous Liberal government made

B.C. so unfriendly for investment in these kinds of green energy

projects that the Renewable Energy Association of B.C. left

B.C.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member, be cautioned, please.

J. Rice: We need to think big, look to the future and allow B.C. Hydro the

flexibility to pursue these projects to meet our energy needs in

partnership with First Nations and clean energy providers. We will

position British Columbia as a clean energy champion and a world leader

in new and emerging technologies by boosting investments in

groundbreaking new energy technologies and climate change

solutions.

This is the kind of forward-thinking leadership that has been

missing in this province, and that’s what the people of British Columbia

voted for last May.

D. Davies: I’d like to thank the member for her contributions to this

debate.

I talked about the environmental and economic benefits earlier in

the debate, but what is often overlooked are the social benefits of Site

C. The construction and operation of the Site C clean energy project

will provide lasting benefits for communities and residents in the Peace

region and throughout the province. Within the Peace region, some of

these include regional legacy benefits, community agreements,

infrastructure improvements, agriculture funding, support for community

services, recreation and tourism opportunities, and affordable

housing.

For example, in June 2013, B.C. Hydro and the Peace River regional

district reached an agreement for regional legacy benefits associated

with the operation of Site C. B.C. Hydro will provide an annual payment

of $2.4 million to the regional districts and its member communities for

a period of 70 years once Site C is operational — an index to

inflation.

In April 2016, B.C. Hydro and the city of Fort St. John concluded

a community measures agreement for Site C. These measures include $1

million per year to the city of Fort St. John during construction,

increased by 3.5 percent each year. This is in recognition of the city’s

unique position as a regional service centre for the North Peace

Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities and the proximity of the dam

to our community, which is only seven kilometres.

Working with B.C. Housing to build a total of 50 new rental

housing units in Fort St. John, with ten offered as affordable housing

during Site C and all 50 offered once the project is completed.

Providing 37 new daycare spaces in Fort St. John and area to support

families. Providing more than $1 million to support regional non-profit

organizations during the construction.

By delaying the construction or cancelling Site C outright, the

NDP and the Green Party are saying no to the people of Peace River

North…

Deputy Speaker: Member.

D. Davies: …and no to the thousands of others…. The member across mentioned

that this is only jobs in the northeast, but it is the entire province —

thousands of other workers that are working on this project throughout

the province of British Columbia.

I therefore hope that this House takes into consideration and

plans for the future of British Columbia. And that future includes Site

HUMAN RIGHTS

R. Kahlon: It is my honour to speak today about human rights in B.C. Before I

do that, I would like to acknowledge that we are gathering on unceded

Coast Salish territory, represented today by the Esquimalt and Songhees

Nations. They’ve been custodians of this land for thousands of years,

and I would like to pay my respects to both the elders past and

present.

I want to thank all of the members for their statements today.

It’s my first opportunity to hear statements. I think it’s an important

part of debate and will help move issues along in this

province.

The Attorney General and the Premier have tasked me with the

responsibility to lead a consultation on human rights in B.C. They

requested that I write a report, with recommendations, on the B.C. Human

Rights Commission in B.C. and what it would look like. When I was tasked

with the responsibility, I decided to start my research by going back to

the origins of human rights. Hon. Speaker, you’re a champion of human

rights, so you’ll appreciate this.

[10:35 a.m.]

My initial research led me to the story of a man named King

Ashoka. Throughout the history of India and in Buddhist folklore was

repeated a story about a cruel king that discovered Buddhism and changed

his ways — King Ashoka, who led a crusade in which thousands of innocent

people were killed. It was violent and bloody. The story goes that he

saw the horrors of war, and he committed to create a more humane

society.

For the longest time, it was assumed that these stories of the

merciful king were just fables — until the early 1800s, when scholars

discovered large stone pillars with etchings. For many years,

archaeologists tried to decipher the script in order to place this

history. In 1837, James Prinsep succeeded in deciphering the

inscription, and years later, it was traced back to King Ashoka. After

700 years, scholars had found the teachings of one of the world’s

greatest leaders.

Known today as Ashoka’s Edicts, these scriptures spoke of rules,

orders to achieve state, private and individual morality. King Ashoka’s

administration wanted to create a society that was more just and more

spiritually inclined, a society that promoted peaceful coexistence.

These early forms of human rights were etched into giant rocks

throughout the country.

Ashoka envisioned a society that promoted the welfare of its

people and wildlife. Its Edicts protected all religions and promoted

harmony between religions. Its Edicts encouraged respect towards

parents, elders, teachers, friends, servants and so on. It’s really

fascinating history. It struck me that this leader used education as a

tool to create this just and equitable society. It’s a great history

that should guide us today as we make progress on creating a new body

that will be tasked with promoting similar shared values.

B.C. is the only province in Canada that does not have a

commission that proactively works to address discrimination in our

society. Human rights legislation was first introduced in Canada during

the 1960s and ’70s. It recognized that discrimination is an offence

against shared public values of equality and fairness to all individuals

and groups. The B.C. human rights code protects persons from

discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics including sex,

race, religion, family status, disability, place of origin, sexual

orientation and, most recently, gender identity or expression in the

areas such as tenancy, services available to the public and

employment.

The Human Rights Commission had been the stewards of human rights

with a responsibility to the public interest by working to eliminate all

forms of discrimination. In 2002, the government scrapped the Human

Rights Commission for a Human Rights Tribunal. The tribunal was seen as

a more efficient model to hear cases in which people have their rights

infringed. Although the direct model has some benefits, it does not work

proactively to address discrimination before it happens.

Our economy and our society are changing faster and faster. Human

rights play an important role in that change. For example, rapid

progress is being made by researchers and scientists, and it’s having

huge impacts on human rights. A term called “bioethics” has been coined

to capture this predicament as it relates to the study of genes. In

particular, the advancements in DNA research and cloning possess new

challenges. Questions that once seemed academic and futuristic are now

part of the public debate. The need to balance advancement and protect

individuals from discrimination is becoming more challenging.

Drug researchers are creating drugs that target specific gene

makeups. This will lead to dramatic improvements in health outcomes. But

when it happens — when insurance wants to cover only people’s specific

gene makeups — that leads to new challenges. Thanks to advancements in

technology and research, we are heading into uncharted territory when it

comes to human rights.

It’s not limited to genes. In 2015, a study was conducted by a

Carnegie Mellon group, in which they discovered popular search engines

were more likely to advertise executive-level salaried positions only to

men. It wasn’t the company’s intention to do so, I’m sure. The

algorithms re-enacted the societal trend. Artificial intelligence comes

with significant challenges. How do we prevent these programs from

amplifying the inequalities of our past and affecting the most

vulnerable people in our society?

[10:40 a.m.]

Human rights have come a long way since King Ashoka, but the

general concepts remain the same. We all want to live in an inclusive

and equal society. Human rights are a key to that society.

I want to thank the members for giving me their time today, and I

look forward to hearing from the member opposite regarding human

rights.

J. Yap: I’d like to thank the member for Delta North for his opening

remarks and say that I’m very proud to rise in the House today to speak

on this important matter of human rights in our most diverse province of

British Columbia. In fact, we can call our province the most ethnically

diverse province in all of Canada. We know that every year 40,000 new

immigrants are welcomed into B.C., and when they move here, we proudly

tell them that they can continue to practise their religious beliefs and

their cultural traditions without fear.

I’m proud to say that my home community of Richmond-Steveston — in

fact, all of Richmond — is an incredibly diverse area. It’s something

that our local residents and businesses take a great deal of pride in.

With this in mind, it’s important that we nurture concepts of

understanding, inclusiveness and respect for one another.

B.C.’s Multiculturalism Act enshrines these values. Its purpose is

to recognize that all our lives are greatly enriched by the diversity

found in our province. It encourages respect for the multicultural

heritage of British Columbia and promotes racial harmony, cross-cultural

understanding and respect, and the development of a community that is

united and at peace with itself.

Furthermore, British Columbians are protected under the human

rights code if they are subject to discrimination. In B.C., it’s against

the law to discriminate against or harass others because of their race,

colour, ancestry, place of origin, political belief, religion, marital

status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual

orientation, gender identity and expression, age over 19, unrelated

criminal conviction and lawful source of income.

The code applies to all businesses, agencies and services in B.C.

except those regulated by the federal government. It protects British

Columbians from discrimination at work, in a store or restaurant or

between a landlord and tenant. And it works to ensure everyone can

participate equally in the economic, social, political and cultural life

of British Columbia. I know that’s something we all hold dear, because

when we see all members of our diverse cultures engaged in our

community, it builds a strong and vibrant social and economic future for

British Columbia.

But while we never wish it to happen, there may be times when some

members of our diverse communities feel that their personal human rights

are being threatened. That’s where the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal comes

in. It’s an independent, quasi-judicial body created by the B.C. human

rights code. The tribunal is responsible for accepting, screening,

mediating and adjudicating human rights complaints. The tribunal offers

the parties the opportunity to try to resolve the complaint through

mediation. If the parties do not resolve a complaint and the complaint

is not dismissed, the tribunal holds a hearing.

The Human Rights Tribunal is recognized as a leader in the

protection of human rights. The tribunal provides British Columbians

with an accessible, speedy and cost-effective alternative to the Supreme

Court of B.C. More than 1,100 British Columbians receive dispute

resolution services, including mediation and adjudications, from the

tribunal each year.

B.C. is a diverse province built on a spirit of openness, and we

can take a lot of pride in that, but we always need to be vigilant and

look out for one another. The human rights code makes clear that there’s

no tolerance for discrimination for any reason. I think that all of us

in this House and the diverse peoples in our communities can agree on

the tremendous importance of protecting human rights.

By working together and by sharing our stories, we can ensure B.C.

continues to be a welcoming place for years to come. It’s up to all of

us to ensure that our multicultural society is supported today and for

future generations.

[10:45 a.m.]

R. Kahlon: As I stated earlier, B.C. is the only province in Canada that does

not have a human rights commission, and it is seen as the weakest

province when it comes to fostering human rights awareness. Without the

capacity to review legislation, conduct research, educate the public or

investigate systematic discrimination, B.C. is failing to address the

needs of residents and, at the same time, to live up to the

international standards established by the United Nations. We have some

serious issues and attentions for a human rights commission.

B.C. was given a D grade recently by the Conference Board of

Canada for its gender wage gap. The report found that B.C. has the

highest gap between men and women in this country. The report stated:

“Eliminating the wage gap between men and women is critical to achieving

inclusive, cohesive society and to sustaining economies. Women’s work

should not be undervalued; nor should women’s skills be

underutilized.”

It’s not about just being vigilant. These issues need to be

proactively dealt with by a commission. Yes, it’s 2017, and these gaps

are larger than ever. We need a commission to look at these gaps,

suggest policies to governments and to the private sector.

A few years ago there was a study done, and it was titled: Why

Do Some Employers Prefer to Interview Matthew but Not Samir? The researcher sent out 7,000 hypothetical resumés to hiring managers.

were 40 percent more likely to get a callback, despite having the exact

same resumés.

These biases do exist. They are affecting people and they’re

affecting the economy throughout the province. Stories like these happen

to people with disabilities, the LGBQT community, Indigenous communities

especially.

I would just like to close by saying that the need to address

human rights proactively is critical for the success of our province.

I’m sure all members of this House would agree with that. So when a

human rights consultation is launched, I encourage all MLAs to

participate, to help shape the work of a commission, because it will end

up benefiting all of our constituents and the province as a

whole.

So with that, I’ll end. Thank you, hon. Speaker, and thank you to

the member for Richmond-Steveston.

ELIMINATING BOTTLENECKS

I. Paton: Thank you to my fellow member for Delta North for his statement

this morning.

I rise in the House today to speak on the subject of eliminating

bottlenecks, a subject I’m well-versed in as a long-time resident of

Delta South.

Back when I was a kid, it was called the Deas Island Tunnel, but

we now know it as the George Massey Tunnel. It was a frightening

experience in 1960 for me to go through that tunnel, and it’s a

frightening experience even today to go through the tunnel. It opened in

1959, and unfortunately, its age is showing. We also know that it is

B.C.’s worst bottleneck, the largest parking lot in the province. The

level of traffic congestion that we see on a day-to-day basis has a huge

impact on people’s lives and on our provincial economy.

Most of us are familiar with how the counterflow lanes work at the

George Massey Tunnel. This system allows operators to change the

direction of traffic in one or more lanes to create more efficient

traffic flow, especially during peak periods. Well, I can you that the

way it works in the Massey Tunnel is far from efficient. Five lanes of

traffic try to jam into one lane to go north in the George Massey Tunnel

in the late afternoon. It is particularly bad in the morning as

well.

You’ve got massive commercial trucks heading south to the U.S.

border in the morning or over to Tilbury Industrial Park or to the south

Surrey industrial parks, to the B.C. ferries or to Deltaport container

terminal —18-wheel trucks spewing diesel into the air every morning,

lined up all the way back to Westminster Highway to get through one lane

of the George Massey Tunnel heading south. They’re idling in the

traffic, putting diesel fumes into the air and not getting their goods

to market as fast as they would like.

Can you imagine our U.S. friends coming up from Washington state,

from California, from Oregon to the gateway to Vancouver? It’s the

gateway to the most beautiful tourist area in the province, perhaps —

Whistler. They come through the Blaine border crossing.

[10:50 a.m.]

This is the gateway highway to the tourist industry in British

Columbia. They get to the George Massey Tunnel, and they sit there for

an hour and a half at times, going: “Is this your answer to getting to

the tourist industry — to Vancouver, to Whistler?” It’s actually

embarrassing.

I’ve been stuck in it myself. I could tell countless stories of

people trapped in the traffic gridlock and missing medical appointments,

ferry trips — even something as simple as enjoying dinner with their

family after a long day’s work. These are all inconveniences, and when

it happens once or twice, it’s probably manageable. But it’s not

manageable when you are stuck in that traffic every day, a situation

80,000 people find themselves in. It becomes absolutely unacceptable

when you are seriously ill or clinging to life in an ambulance. If

there’s a fender-bender in the tunnel and those emergency vehicles hit

gridlock and they have a patient that needs to get to Vancouver General

Hospital or to St. Paul’s, they just can’t get through in an

ambulance.

The folks I’ve talked to at our local fire department…. They’re

also very concerned about things like fires in the tunnel. If there’s a

big accident involving multiple vehicles in the tunnel, fire departments

can’t get their trucks in there. And that means they have to go in on

foot, which means oftentimes they’re walking into a toxic situation with

fumes from burning vehicles. Meanwhile everyone driving through the

tunnel is on edge because of another threat: earthquakes. If a major

earthquake strikes — and we keep hearing the warnings that the big one

is coming — we know that anything over a magnitude of 7.0 would likely

make the crossing unusable and cut off its lifeline during an emergency

and for months or years after.

So with all this in mind — the traffic congestion, the delays in

moving goods, the concern of emergency services, safety, risk to the

public — the previous government made a commitment to construct a new

bridge on the existing Highway 99 corridor. This project saw a

multi-stage planning and consultation process, incorporating technical

analysis and broad-based public input from First Nations; local

businesses, including farmers; and individuals from our community. Over

five years there were more than 250 meetings held within the

municipalities of Richmond and Delta, and more than 50 meetings with

Metro Vancouver to discuss topics like traffic, land use, transit and

air quality.

What’s more, there were more than 14,000 pages of information on

the Transportation Ministry’s own website. But that wasn’t good enough.

The new NDP government decided that more study was needed and pulled the

funds for this project, effectively cancelling it.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: The publicized costs associated with the decision — $66 million

for advanced construction work, $25 million for B.C. Hydro work, and

millions of dollars in cancellation costs to proponents. And who knows

how much hasn’t yet been publicized?

That choice to cancel the projects was reflected in last week’s

budget, with no funds allocated to help relieve the traffic bottleneck

and protect public safety. If that wasn’t bad enough, we find an

internal document that shows they have zero intention of helping these

commuters. The document is clear. It says: “Platform prep, 2017. This is

what bold looks like. We will build the Vancouver and Surrey rapid

transit projects.”

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: “Rapid buses across the North Shore from Port Coquitlam to Maple

Ridge…”

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member for Delta South.

I. Paton: “…and through Vancouver along Hastings Street, and 41st and 49th

avenues.”

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: That is: “We will implement the Mayors Council vision. We’ll pay

for these instead of replacing the Massey Tunnel.”

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: Yes?

Deputy Speaker: When the Chair calls, please listen. Be careful.

I. Paton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

The hidden agenda has been revealed, and they had always planned

to kill the project. It means folks in Delta, south Langley, South

Surrey, White Rock, Richmond and those regularly crossing the border

were misled into believing that a solution was coming. The people in

these communities are profoundly disappointed, and they want answers.

More importantly, they want a solution to B.C.’s worst

bottleneck.

J. Brar: What I would like to say, before I start reading from my script,

is that after 16 years of neglect, the solution is coming.

Deputy Speaker: Member, let’s stick with your script.

J. Brar: Okay. Thank you, hon. Speaker.

I’m very pleased to respond to the private member’s statement made

by the member for Delta South. I would like to start by saying that

after 16 years of neglect by the previous outgoing government, the

solutions are coming.

[10:55 a.m.]

There’s no doubt that eliminating the bottleneck in B.C. is an

issue. The member in his statement made a strong case for addressing the

bottleneck, saying that it’s a very urgent issue and also demanding

solutions without offering any comprehensive plan that will work for the

people of British Columbia.

All members of this House agree that we need to take action to

address bottlenecks, but I would like to point out that the bottleneck

the member is referring to is, of course, the outcome of the actions

taken by the previous government, or the neglect during the last 16

years. I agree that there’s a lot of work that needs to be done. The

previous government has repeatedly refused to fund, as we know, to

increase the provincial share of funding from 33 percent to 40 percent

to support the Mayors Council’s ten-year plan for the Metro Vancouver

transportation system.

We all know that in 2013, the then Premier Clark demanded a

referendum to fix the problem but did not herself endorse or campaign

for it, which wasted almost two years. That referendum was a huge blow

to the project timeline of the Surrey LRT, and the people of Surrey are

still paying the price in big lineups, as the member indicated, because

of the delay that took place because of the referendum. On the other

hand, our new government is now fully committed to finding the best

solution to address the bottleneck and take action. In the short few

weeks after taking power, our government has taken critical steps to

build a better transportation system for the people of British

Columbia.

First, as of September 1, our government has eliminated tolls on

the Port Mann and Golden Ears bridges. This is fantastic news for

commuters and commercial drivers who will benefit from this change. The

member sitting to the left of me, the member for Delta North, is telling

me the community in his riding is already very excited, and they see the

impact of those elimination of tolls. The elimination of tolls will also

clear congestion on other routes.

Second, replacing the Pattullo Bridge also remains a major

priority for our government. Third, our government fully supports the

Mayors Council’s ten-year plan for Metro Vancouver transportation. We

are committed to fund 40 percent — I’m saying 40 percent — of the

capital costs of every phase of the plan, including the Pattullo Bridge

replacement, which the previous government refused to fund during 16

long years.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

On the Lower Mainland, the member is talking about the issue with

safety and congestion of Highway 99 at the George Massey Tunnel and the

roadblocks to the efficient movement of people and goods in the region.

We can all agree that the congestion at the tunnel needs to be taken

care of, but finding the best solution is a serious point of

debate.

There have been concerns raised by the Metro Vancouver mayors and

many residents about the idea of building a ten-lane bridge, as well as

over the cost of such a project. We have heard those concerns and think

it’s important to explore all options available for the crossing and to

make sure that we are making a decision that is best for the region, a

decision that is best for the people of British Columbia and a decision

that’s best for future generations.

That’s why our government is proceeding with an independent

technical review of the George Massey Tunnel crossing. Generally

speaking, the review will focus on what level of improvement is needed,

as well as on what options would be best for the crossing — be it the

proposed ten-lane bridge, a smaller bridge or a tunnel.

I would like to conclude by saying we are looking forward to the

recommendations brought forward through this independent technical

review, and our Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure is working

with Metro Vancouver mayors, including the mayor of Delta, to find the

right solution. The solution we find must work for the entire region and

for the people of British Columbia.

[11:00 a.m.]

I. Paton: What I’m hearing on the issue of the Massey Tunnel is nothing more

than excuses to hide a hidden agenda to kill this replacement project.

The fact of the matter is they have no plan and no money to fix it.

Their internal document clearly states that they have no intention of

easing traffic congestion for 80,000 commuters a day.

They don’t seem to be fazed by the public safety risk posed by

this aging tunnel or the fact that emergency services struggle to get in

and out of it or worry about the fires inside the tunnel. By cancelling

this project and reiterating the lack of support in their budget, they

are telling people in my riding and throughout Delta, Richmond, Surrey

and Langley that their safety and quality of life aren’t really a high

priority.

What’s more, they’re telling commercial truckers that they don’t

see a problem with them idling in traffic instead of getting their goods

to market. Maybe that’s not a huge surprise, because we know that a plan

to grow the economy and grow jobs is sorely lacking in this budget. In

fact, the move to kill the George Massey Tunnel replacement project is

going to kill thousands of jobs. Not only saying no to congestion and

seismic safety issues, they are saying no to 9,000 construction jobs and

to 4,500 to 5,000 additional permanent jobs created by 2045.

We could have a solution to this problem: a bridge that, we just

learned, could have been built for $2.6 billion — a full $900 million

less than they originally estimated, if only we had gone ahead with the

procurement process. But instead, taxpayers were told that more study

was needed and more consultation was needed after five years and 14,000

pages of information on the subject.

Yet one little page produced internally shows it was just an

excuse to cover the fact that they have no real intention of solving the

problem.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, this House will come to order.

I. Paton: Hon. Speaker, the people that use the tunnel deserve better than

that. They deserve quicker access to their destinations and more time

spent with the ones they love, instead of idling in B.C.’s worst

bottleneck.

Deputy Speaker: Government House Leader.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thank you, Hon. Speaker.

Interjection.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Member.

Before I call the motion up for debate, I think I’d like to remind

both sides of the House that two-minute statements are non-partisan.

Member statements are non-partisan, not as much as two-minute

statements, and I think we demonstrated here today why that

is.

Motions, which we are going to call next, can be partisan and will

be partisan. With that, I call the motion on the order paper in the name

of the member for Nanaimo.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 2 — HEALTH AND

EDUCATION

SERVICES

L. Krog: Goodness gracious, I’m glad we got to this stage in proceedings

this morning. The partisan political pots are bubbling over on both

sides of the House this morning, members anxious to express their

opinions on various matters. That’s why I’m so delighted that I get

first kick at the cat with my motion which reads:

[Be it resolved that this House call on the Government to improve

key services, such as health and education.]

Now, that’s a broad topic, and I’m going to speak somewhat

broadly, but I want to start very specifically. This morning I had

occasion, setting out early from Nanaimo, to stop at my constituency

office, which is right downtown across from the Salvation Army, which

has a shelter. There to greet me were three fellows sitting on the steps

of my office, several others huddled under blankets and an old sleeping

bag just in the sheltered area where they’d obviously spent the

night.

Hon. Speaker, what does that tell you? What does that tell you

about the need to improve key services? What it tells you and what the

members opposite really don’t wish to acknowledge is that they made

choices for 16 years, and now, hopefully, this side of the House will

get to make some different choices for British Columbia.

I appreciate the frustration. Having spent as long a time as I did

in opposition, I assure the members opposite that the frustration they

may be feeling this morning, reflected in their remarks, is felt over

here as well. But the difference is that the people of British Columbia

have spoken, and now it’s our turn to play with the trains.

[11:05 a.m.]

In fairness to the Leader of the Opposition, the member for

Langley East, I used to thank him publicly for any money that came into

my constituency to support housing. But I have to tell you, hon.

Speaker, I’m informed…. And I have every reason to believe it’s

accurate. Our city social planner, the RCMP bike cops downtown and

others in our community who care about social issues and housing tell me

that, essentially, we are back to where we were in 2004-2005 in terms of

the crisis on the streets of Nanaimo.

I could go on about the opioid crisis, but I’m not going to talk

about that this morning. I will talk a little bit more about housing. By

every standard in the world, in a wealthy society, after 16 years…. It

is repugnant to me as a member of this assembly that when I go to my

office at quarter to seven in the morning, there are people sleeping

outside my very office.

Now, I’m not going to blame it all on the previous government. The

reality is that people make choices in their lives. People suffer from

mental illness. People have addiction issues. There are all kinds of

reasons that put people on the streets. But surely, it is our collective

responsibility to ensure that they have an opportunity to be housed and

fed and cared for in a reasonable way. Sleeping in the doorway of your

local MLA’s office is not reasonable care. It is not

acceptable.

Government, as it formerly existed, has to take some

responsibility for those circumstances. They devoted themselves to

bragging about tax increases, to eliminating the surtax on the

wealthiest British Columbians, to ensuring corporate profits were high.

There is a price to be paid, and the price was not paid by the members

of this assembly. It was not paid by the wealthiest 2 percent of British

Columbians. The need to improve key services such as health and

education, as I say in the motion, exists because this government chose

to benefit the few at the expense of the many.

The greatest burden has been borne by the most vulnerable in our

society — the very people I spoke to this morning. It is those people

that will see the benefits of a new government that is going to give

priority to caring for its vulnerable citizens, whether it be with a new

Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions, whether it be in addressing

social assistance rates or the need for public housing. Those are the

kinds of improvements that are needed in British Columbia. That is what

this government should have been doing for the last 16 years, but that

government chose not to make that their priority.

The times, as they said in the ’60s, are a-changing. The times are

a-changing, and I’m proud to be on this side of the House, not that side

of the House.

S. Gibson: It’s a pleasure to be here again today, dealing with the motion

regarding improvements to our health and education systems.

Health care and education are probably the two most important

services for our citizens. We all agree with that, and as the speaker

noted, they’re priorities for all governments. Ensuring these services

are top quality and affordable is a priority for everyone in this

room.

British Columbia was rated No. 1 in Canada for health care,

according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

That’s an A. Our province spends more on health care than any other

service in the budget. And rightfully so. It’s that critical to the

well-being of our residents. The cost of providing world-class health

care rises every year, and I am proud that our former government

committed to keeping those expenses as affordable as

possible.

I was glad to see this new government keep our commitment to

reduce MSP premiums by 50 percent, eventually eliminating them

completely. Our health care system is among the best in Canada. Here in

British Columbia, our residents have the highest life expectancy, a

testament to the quality of our health care system and the medical

professionals — and, of course, not to mention, the healthy

lifestyle.

[11:10 a.m.]

Our citizens have some of the lowest rates of smoking in Canada

and many other key indicators. This ensures the sustainability that our

system is paramount…. However, government needs to manage these

expenditures very carefully so that other essential services like

education can continue to receive the necessary funding to remain

successful.

Education is something that is very personal for me. I was an

instructor at the University of the Fraser Valley for many years and a

professor at Trinity Western University. I’m a grad of both SFU and

UVic, so I value education very much. I was so fortunate to see the

success of many of my young students — bright, motivated and talented —

as they pursued their career aspirations. I might add that my wife Joy

was an elementary school teacher for her entire working career, teaching

primary kids in the Abbotsford school district.

I’ve recently heard government members criticizing our education

system, suggesting our students are falling behind and failing. The fact

is: our province has some of the best-performing students not only in

Canada but in the entire world. Our previous government’s budget

commitment to $2 billion over the next three years to maintain and

replace schools, with a focus on growing communities such as Surrey,

which we know has a significant growth rate, and seismically upgrading

schools….

I want to see British Columbia continue to be in the top of the

economy in our country so we can keep investing in those very best

services for our residents. I don’t want to see our credit rating

downgraded so we can’t keep building schools and hospitals at the same

pace. I don’t want to see our British Columbians becoming so heavily

taxed that it’s impossible to attract the best teachers, doctors, nurses

and other health professionals.

The good thing is we don’t have that problem in British Columbia

right now. The recent release of public accounts shows that our finances

are in exceptional shape, so we can keep prioritizing spending on key

services like health and education. Our former government’s budget

invested $4.2 billion in health care spending over the next three years,

and the total education budget for 2017-18 was planned to be $5.9

billion. We were able to spend that much because of five consecutive

balanced budgets and disciplined money management.

I believe British Columbians will continue to expect their

government to properly manage their tax dollars. It’s our duty as the

official opposition of this province to hold the government responsible

for every decision they make, especially when it comes to investing in

our children, young people and families. I look forward to ensuring this

government’s decisions are in the very best interests of British

Columbians.

M. Dean: I am very proud to rise in the House today to talk in support of

this motion. In fact, I have wanted to have this message heard at the

highest level for many, many years. In my constituency of

Esquimalt-Metchosin, there has been a chronic and now urgent need to

improve key services, especially in the area of mental health. My

constituency is one of the fastest-growing communities in the province.

The community is full of families, many the working poor. They’ve

experienced ever-increasing hardship over the last 16 years, and those

with mental health concerns have struggled even more.

In spite of the growing population, the community did not

experience an increase in services to match the growing need. Indeed,

the community experienced cutbacks to community social services. In West

Shore, child and youth mental health services has a wait-list of over 12

months. Would that be acceptable if these youth had a physical injury?

Indeed, the wait-list is such a barrier that local professionals and

families no longer bother to refer to the service.

[11:15 a.m.]

So then, they’re referred to the only local community social

service organization, which ends up with 50 youth waiting for service,

which is overwhelming for a small non-profit. In the end, these youth

fall through the cracks.

Further, the West Shore adult mental health community service,

which for years had offered community-based clinical individual service

to over 100 individuals a year, was eliminated. In the three years that

followed, the West Shore RCMP reported an increase of incidents related

to mental health by 50 percent — effectively resulting in the near

criminalization of these people in the community because the service was

cut, and people who needed and wanted help could not get it.

A young woman in my constituency suffered through her childhood,

and as an early teen, her mom was murdered by her dad, who then killed

himself. In spite of being a victim of such tragedy, she built her life

with resilience. She stood up against domestic violence, she resisted

drugs, and eventually, she took her daughter to live with her

alone.

As a young adult and single mom, she recognized that her trauma

continued to have an impact on her life. She needed support. She needed

help to recover, and she approached a local counselling agency. She was

entitled to fully paid counselling. She was ready to attend counselling

sessions. She would organize her life to fit this in, and she was ready

for the journey of healing from her trauma. Yet she could not find

resources.

Our community had experienced such cutbacks that local counselling

services had not been able to survive. Those who had were under such

demand, their wait-list was so long, it was not even ethical to be

taking personal details.

This young woman sought counselling in that moment, and nothing

was available. She is now hopeful. She’s hopeful that there will be more

investment with our new government in services that promote the health

and well-being of people like herself, that will enable her to achieve

her potential as an individual, keep her job and be the best mom that

she wants to be.

She needs improved services — services that are locally

accessible, services that are convenient for her, services that meet her

need when she’s ready, when she actually can take the initiative herself

and organize her life to take advantage of services and to recover and

to improve her own health and well-being. She needs services that fulfil

the pledge of “ask once; get help fast.” She needs to know from her

government that help is on the way.

That is the promise of this new government. That is why I totally

support this motion.

D. Barnett: I want to thank the government side for the opportunity to join

this debate about improved key services like health care and education.

I want to bring a rural and northern perspective to this debate, because

the delivery of services in my part of the province is much different

than in urban British Columbia, where most of the population

resides.

In the context of the worst wildfire season in the province’s

history, people who have been forced to flee these fires quickly learned

what it is like to have your normal life turned upside down. Evacuees no

longer had access to health care services, as they normally would. For

those with pre-existing medical conditions, seniors and people with

disabilities, they were especially hit hard. This includes those who had

difficulty obtaining medication because they were cut off. Some schools

are not yet fully opened because of the delays caused by

wildfires.

The point being that we often take services, like health care and

education, for granted until you are cut off from them. Then we realize

just how important these services really are.

It is no secret that we have difficulty attracting doctors and

nurses to rural British Columbia. There are a number of factors which

contribute to the shortage, which is a reason why it is necessary, in a

province like British Columbia, that we have specialized rural

programs.

[11:20 a.m.]

In the field of health care, the rural practice program works with

health authorities and other partners to address issues specific to

rural regions like the Cariboo. This includes a rural retention program

that pays retention benefits to physicians to help keep them in our

communities. It also supports the rural education plan that supports and

facilitates the training of physicians in rural practice. All three of

these programs are vital to communities like mine.

The same applies to the education sector. Our last Minister of

Education, the hon. member for Peace River South, comes from rural B.C.,

and he understood the challenges we face in rural B.C. to provide the

same opportunities that students in urban parts of the province have

access to. It is one of the reasons why we made it a priority to keep

rural schools open through the rural enhancement fund.

As a government, we took it upon ourselves to conduct a full study

of rural education funding because we recognized the economic impact

that single schools have in small communities. In fact, I was hoping to

see something on rural education and rural health care services in last

week’s budget. But the only thing I did see was a very expensive wish

list of new social programming that will probably compete for funding

with existing programs.

As a matter of fact, I was especially disappointed that nothing

was mentioned about what was happening with the rural advisory council

and the B.C. rural dividend. Both the council and the $100 million rural

dividend program are vital to helping with the delivery of health care

and education services in places like the Cariboo.

Since there were so many government MLAs elected in the Interior

and the north of this province, I am deeply concerned that we are going

to find ourselves in a widening gap between rural and urban British

Columbia. I, therefore, call on this government to pay close attention

to the rural communities of this province and make sure we are not

forgotten.

B. D’Eith: “Education is not a filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire.”

That’s from one of our great literary figures, the Irish poet William

Butler Yeats. Education is the great equalizer. From education comes

hope and opportunity, not only to contribute to society but a chance to

build a life for yourself and your family.

For 14 years, the B.C. Liberals fought the B.C. school system in

the courts. The former Premier ripped up the collective bargaining

agreement and proceeded to fight with teachers, whose only desire was to

make life better for our young people. All they wanted was smaller

classroom sizes and more help for special needs kids. Only after the

Supreme Court ruled that the B.C. government had erred — and it only

took 15 minutes — did the former government honour the original

agreement and start to reinvest in our school system.

For 16 years, my children and their friends went to underfunded

schools in Maple Ridge. In fact, they’ve never known a properly funded

school system. They’ve never known what it looks like. Children have

suffered due to overcrowded classrooms and inadequate support for all

children needing that extra attention, including children with special

needs and gifted children.

Our B.C. NDP government will provide $681 million over three years

to help our kids get the education they deserve, with smaller classroom

sizes, more resources and the supports they need to succeed, including

hiring more than 3,000 teachers.

The children in Maple Ridge and Mission have been educated in an

ever-growing number of portables. In fact, in one year at Albion

Elementary, there were so many portables that they put one over the

track field, so they couldn’t have sports at all. While the B.C.

Liberals did announce, finally, an elementary school in east Maple

Ridge, in the year of the election, it came ten years too late for my

community.

Our NDP government will provide $50 million to ensure that space

requirements for kids go back into schools and that these issues are

addressed. We will invest in public schools and school infrastructure,

not because the Supreme Court of Canada ordered us to but because it’s

the right thing to do for our children and the future of this

province.

As Yeats said, education is lighting a fire. Now, I experienced

that in the 1980s at Carson Graham in North Vancouver. They had the most

incredible public school music program. It lit a fire in me that

continued throughout my post-secondary years and throughout my career in

the arts.

[11:25 a.m.]

It’s a shame that so much of my time as an advocate for music in

British Columbia was fighting the B.C. Liberal cuts to arts and to music

in our schools in British Columbia, that so many young people over the

past decade have not had the same experience, that same life-changing

enrichment, as I did, in schools is simply tragic.

Now, I’ve had the opportunity to continue my education as far as I

wanted, but so many students are unable to due to tuition costs, housing

and other hurdles in their life. In fact, in my opinion, no group of

young people have been left behind more by the B.C. Liberals than the

youth aging out of foster care. They’re often a subject of difficult

lives, and they lead to a disproportionate number of them on the

streets. Education is one possible way to give them hope — a trade, a

profession, a passion. The NDP government has announced that young

adults leaving foster care will now have access to free tuition to all

25 of British Columbia’s post-secondary institutions. This will, quite

simply, save lives.

For those people who didn’t make it through public school or

decided to make their lives harder by imposing tuition fees for adult

dropped 35 percent. Our NDP government has eliminated tuition fees for

province. As our Premier said: “We can’t afford to leave these people

behind.” As a new government, we want to make sure that people

participate in our economy. This is only the beginning.

As our new government moves forward, we will work with schools,

with teachers, with students, with private schools, with public schools,

with post-secondary institutions to put students first and ensure that

our students obtain the best education that they can so they can succeed

in life, contribute to our economy and become more powerful

citizens.

We have to remember what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said about

education: “Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their

choices are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy,

therefore, is education.”

T. Wat: On behalf of my constituents in Richmond North Centre, I’m pleased

to rise in the House today to respond to the private member’s motion

calling on the government to improve key services, such as education and

health. I agree with the member for Nanaimo that these are issues of

huge concern, especially to my community of Richmond North

Centre.

Richmond has been growing and changing rapidly for some time, and

in some ways that’s not a surprise. It’s a wonderful city to call home.

It is a culturally diverse, welcoming and vibrant community that I’m

proud to be a part of. It is an important economic centre, given that

it’s home to Vancouver International Airport, Canada’s second-busiest

airport. We are close to the U.S. border. Our Canada Line quickly

connects people in Richmond to Vancouver for employment opportunities,

attractions and other activities. With all this in mind, it is no wonder

that many people are choosing to move into our community.

But with growth and success come challenges as well. On the

education front, families in our community were looking to see a

commitment in the NDP budget to seismically upgrade 25 Richmond schools.

After all, the NDP platform did commit to accelerating the seismic

upgrade program, but sadly, there was no mention of this in the NDP

budget. This is our first disappointment.

Our second disappointment is in the area of health care. Richmond

Hospital has been offering high-quality care to local residents for just

over 50 years. But this facility is aging and seismically unsafe.

Upgrades and improvements are needed to ensure the level of care can

continue.

The doctors, nurses, administrators and other staff have been

doing a tremendous job with the tools and equipment they have. They have

been vocal in advocating for a new acute care tower for some time now.

Noting this need, the previous government supported the development of a

business plan for the new tower. But things are in a state of

uncertainty now, because there is no mention of the project in the NDP’s

recent budget.

It’s odd, because back in February the member from Juan de Fuca

and current Premier was publicly supporting the new tower with some of

his candidates. They even put out a news release to proclaim their

support. But now the folks at Richmond Hospital and the Richmond

Hospital Foundation, as well as local residents, are left wondering what

has happened to that commitment.

[11:30 a.m.]

Speaking of the foundation, I want to applaud them for the hard

work they are doing as we speak. Throughout the month of September,

during Community Cares Month, they are actively reaching out to the

community to raise funds for the new acute care tower. I think we should

be supporting their efforts, instead of ignoring them. I also think we

should be supporting our local emergency services personnel, whose job

it is to respond to health care emergencies and transport injured

patients to hospital.

The NDP’s cancellation of the George Massey Tunnel replacement

project does nothing to help them. If there’s a big traffic accident in

the tunnel, those emergency vehicles cannot get through, and the

frequent traffic congestion causes delays in getting patients to

hospital in Richmond and Vancouver. So the cancellation of this

transportation project becomes a health and safety concern for my

constituents. It’s just another promise made by the NDP that seems to

have gone up into thin air.

When it comes to education and health care in Richmond, I — and my

constituents that I represent — will indeed be pressing this government

for more attention and more resources.

R. Leonard: In support of the motion from the member for Nanaimo, I would like

to highlight the opioid crisis, with the growing number of British

Columbians who are suffering and dying and their families who are drawn

into this nightmare.

There’s a prevailing notion amongst British Columbians that the

opioid crisis is centred on the streets of the Downtown Eastside. In

actual fact, we heard this past week that Kelowna has had the most

overdose deaths in the province. The problem has been growing long

enough that it can be categorically stated that this crisis can and does

come to any door.

Our new government has recognized this. We are reshaping how we

approach this crisis by establishing a dedicated ministry that will

provide strategic leadership in developing a seamless, coordinated

mental health and addictions system. Public education needs to focus on

breaking down the stigma that surrounds mental health and substance use

so that doors are opened for people to unashamedly recognize trouble and

seek help earlier. It’s time to cast aside cultural attitudes of shame

and blame.

My heart goes out to two families in my community of

Courtenay-Comox. They’ve stepped forward to seek improved services for

those living the nightmare of the opioid crisis. One is a single mother,

a successful businesswoman with a fast-paced, demanding job, who cares

for an elderly parent and now lives every minute of every day with a

threat of her young adult son dying from a drug overdose.

This young fellow suffers from a mental health issue and chronic

pain, both from an ongoing and curable condition as well as from

injuries. He has turned to street drugs after the public health system

has failed him. This mother has been told to check his pulse before

dialing 911, and she lives in dread of every parent’s worst

nightmare.

There are too many mothers and fathers across British Columbia who

feel just as helpless, just as terrified, not knowing where to turn for

help. This family’s lived experience is a health system that suffers

from not enough supports, with too few treatment beds in our region and

certainly too few affordable treatment centres anywhere.

Another family in my community is living that nightmare, after

their 27-year-old son died from an overdose in April of this year. He

had a bright future. He was healthy and athletic, and he was learning a

trade, but his life took a bitter turn. After years of struggle with his

addiction, and even a time of time of hope after he spent many months in

supportive recovery, he overdosed alone at his new worksite.

[11:35 a.m.]

This family’s lived experience is a health system that lacks local

detox beds, with long waits for an appointment with a detox nurse and

nowhere to go. This young man had no safe place to turn when he needed

help the most.

This one is a hard one for me to talk about because he was the

same age as my son, and he shared the same first name. And he came from

my community. I want to acknowledge the bravery that this family has

shown in reaching out to the broader community. They’ve taken action

already, working through the pain of their loss to reduce the stigma I

spoke of earlier. They did this by organizing the first International

Overdose Awareness Day event in Courtenay at the end of

August.

People are anxious to get on with making change. I’m sure I’m not

alone in hearing such stories. They’re everywhere.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

The history of adult mental health and addictions services is

varied. My husband spent his career as an outpatient addictions

counsellor, being shuffled between ministries — including the years when

it was inexplicably under the Ministry of Labour. I admire the

dedication of those who work in the field, especially those who are

saving lives today with naloxone kits.

It is beyond time to support these workers and tackle mental

health and addictions with all the force we can muster. This is what our

new government will do. Sixteen years of neglect by the former B.C.

Liberal government of the growing mental health and addictions crisis in

B.C. cannot be reversed overnight. We will put in much-needed services.

We will put people first and make life better for people and families

everywhere in British Columbia.

S. Bond: I always appreciate the member for Nanaimo and his energetic

approach to his comments in the House. It was good to hear him begin the

debate this morning.

I want to start by perhaps disagreeing, just for a minute, with

the Minister of Public Safety, especially on this particular motion,

because he said that this part of the work we do in the Legislature is

more partisan. I can tell you that I think that when you have a motion

that talks about calling on government to improve key services such as

health and education, that’s hardly a partisan issue.

We’ve heard a lot of really poignant stories, and I appreciate the

member previous to me speaking about the families who are deeply

impacted. I was with her right to the part about 16 years of neglect.

Every single government — at least ones that are successful — makes

education and health care spending and investment and attention a

priority. As the member for Nanaimo said earlier, it is about

choices.

No person in this Legislature — no MLA, no government member, no

opposition member — has a monopoly on caring. All of us have people in

our communities that have been facing the situations that have been

reflected on here today. But to suggest, for example, that poverty and

homelessness didn’t exist before the previous government…. And the

member for Nanaimo is smiling. He knows that would simply be

ridiculous.

Poverty and homelessness have existed for decades, for

generations, in both British Columbia and Canada. And it is incumbent on

members in this House to work together to find ways to solve those

problems.

If we were to bring a room full of British Columbians together and

ask them what services they value most, probably health care and

education would rank, certainly, amongst their highest priorities —

perhaps right at the top of the list. Both of them are important, and in

fact, they’re vital. But maybe from a financial perspective — because it

does matter how we balance the needs that we have in British Columbia —

every jurisdiction is grappling with spending, with choices, what models

to use for the opioid crisis.

If British Columbia alone was facing those circumstances, then I

think it would be a little more fair to be pointing fingers at a

particular government. Health care represents the single largest program

expenditure in the provincial budget of British Columbia, and it

continues to grow, as we all know.

[11:40 a.m.]

Let’s look back for just a moment. In 2000-2001, the budget for

health care in British Columbia was $8.3 billion. In 2001, when the

budget was tabled by then member Paul Ramsey, someone who comes from

where I live in British Columbia, his budget document noted that 52

percent of new program spending would be for health care. His budget was

$9.2 billion. When we look at the budget update for 2017-2018, we’re

spending over $18 billion on health care services in British Columbia.

So no one needs to question whether or not there’s been investment. It’s

how we invest in those programs.

As the member for Nanaimo so rightly said, it is about how you

make the choices in the days ahead. As we look at the issues that have

been reflected on here today — things like class size, when we’re

talking about education; things like the opioid crisis; and all of the

other issues that have been raised — it will be essential that we look

at balance. The demands will be enormous. People will be looking to the

government, as will the opposition members, for the kinds of choices

that today they’ve stood in this House and talked about in a very

passionate and very moving way, in many cases.

We should be clear. There have been significant investments in

both education and health care over the last 16 years. We look forward,

on this side of the House, to seeing those investments continue. I can

assure the members opposite that we’re going to do the job that our

constituents sent us here to do: to ask the tough questions about the

how.

So to the member for Nanaimo: we agree. Government should continue

to invest in important services, key programs in both health care and

education, and we look forward to seeing the kinds of choices that they

will now make as members of the new government.

R. Singh: It is my honour to stand in favour of this motion. While

door-knocking, I heard a number of stories from the residents of Surrey.

The stories resonated: the worry, anxiety and frustration with

overcrowded classrooms, lack of resources for special needs children and

long wait times at the Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency

room.

Surrey is the fastest-growing city in British Columbia. More than

1,000 people move to Surrey every month. Unfortunately, services like

education and health care have not kept pace with the growing population

of Surrey.

Parents are frustrated with the overcrowded classrooms and lack of

resources for their children. The special needs kids suffer even more. I

remember talking to a mother whose child requires speech therapy and was

on the waiting list for more than six months. A speech-language

pathologist from the Surrey school district told me that it takes her at

least six months to a year to see a student with speech issues. Many of

her students won’t ever get direct service from her, only consultative

service. A full-time language pathologist in the district is assigned to

a school population of 2,400 students.

For 16 years, B.C. Liberals were busy fighting with the teachers.

As a result, a whole generation of students have gone through the

underfunded education system. I’m glad that our government is making

education a priority and putting $681 million into the system, which

will improve the services. As well, we will be hiring more than 3,000

new teachers.

[11:45 a.m.]

There have been so many stories about overcrowding at Surrey

Memorial Hospital emergency room. Almost every household I talked to had

a story about long waits in the emergency department. One such story was

of Karen Sidhu. Earlier this year, Ms. Sidhu went to the Surrey Memorial

Hospital emergency. She had to wait for six and a half hours before she

was admitted. After admission, she was shocked that she was going to be

stationed in a hallway with about 35 other patients. With strangers

walking back and forth constantly, she never felt safe, and she felt

that performing medical care in the hallway exposed her private,

personal information to anyone within earshot.

The Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency department is one of the

busiest in British Columbia. When in need of health care after hours,

Surrey residents don’t have any option but to go to the emergency

department. I’m very glad that our government is making health care in

British Columbia, and especially in Surrey, a priority. They will be

putting more investment in services like urgent care centres.

M. Bernier: Thanks to the member for Nanaimo for putting this motion forward.

As was mentioned by my colleague from Prince George–Valemount, this is

an important issue. It’s an important topic. One of the things I just

want to say is that families expect us to be having this discussion.

They expect us to be talking about how we make health care better, how

we make education better, in the province of British Columbia, for them

and for their families.

One of the things I was hoping to hear from government, though,

more investments and government working on education and health care. I

haven’t heard one member from government actually stand up and say that

that’s what they’re going to do. All the accusations have been on what

hasn’t been done. In fact, some of the things I really want to talk

about are what’s happened over the time while we were in

government.

It’s quite appalling when I hear the member for Maple

Ridge–Mission stand up and basically say that he received a better

education than the students that we have right now. That is absolutely

crazy, and it’s actually insulting to the teachers that we have in our

system. In fact, he also stood up just a moment ago, when the member for

Prince George–Valemount was speaking. Totally contradictory to his

speech, he turned around and said it’s not about the money. Yet his

whole speech was on underfunding, underfunding.

What we should be talking about are outcomes and results. We have

the best health outcomes in Canada. We have some of the best educational

outcomes across every sector globally. Our teachers are doing an amazing

job in our schools. That’s why I’m proud of the time that I spent as

Minister of Education, travelling around the province, seeing those

investments, seeing the money that’s being spent on the students, which

is resulting in great educational outcomes right across all our

sectors.

When you look at our Aboriginal students, their completion rates

have almost doubled in the last 16 years. Students with special needs

have gone up 180 percent over the last 16 years. In fact, we invest

almost $1 billion in helping students with special needs.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. The Chair will hear the standing member’s

statement.

M. Bernier: You know, this is actually where it’s a fun time, where we get to

actually talk to the members opposite. You should read the budget that

they put forward. The budget that they’ve tabled around health care and

around education almost mirrors….

Interjections.

M. Bernier: Oh, the members opposite say: “Wait for another day.”

Today is about what the people of British Columbia expect. They

expect what this government is going to put forward. When you look at

the fact that the Education budget has gone up almost double, and 60

percent…. Guess what. You’re right. It’s not about the money. It’s about

what we do with those funds.

I think the members opposite also have to remember…. When they

stand up and say, “We need to be investing more,” one thing they don’t

talk about is where that money is going to be coming from. That is

something that they have to put forward, because right now, there’s been

no plan from the members opposite. In fact, they talk about all this

investment they’re putting forward in health care and in education. I

challenge the members opposite — any of them, just one of them — to

stand up and say how much they’re investing that’s different than we

already announced in February. They’re not doing that. Every

announcement and every discussion they’re putting forward right now is

just reiterating and echoing what we already put forward in

February.

I’m hoping that maybe the last speaker will stand up and say that

all these billions of dollars that are in the budget that they’re

talking about as going into education, all these billions of dollars

that are going into health care…. In fact, those were already announced

by the B.C. Liberal government in February. If they’d like to stand up

and contradict that, I’d look forward to hearing that, because I haven’t

heard or seen one thing. Other than them talking about it, I haven’t

seen them doing anything about it.

[11:50 a.m.]

The families of British Columbia expect it. That’s why we’d been

making those investments, and more investments need to be made. They do

need to be made. People expect that as well.

What we need to make sure, though, is that the members opposite….

If they’re going to be putting forward a motion saying that they have to

increase operations in health care and funding in education, they should

be standing in the House and actually saying what they’re going to

do.

Name one hospital that was built when the NDP were in government.

Name one school that was seismically upgraded when the NDP were in

government. In fact, it was the B.C. Liberal government that seismically

upgraded schools. We are the ones that put forward a plan. We are the

ones that actually made sure that there were billions of dollars put

forward. The NDP actually cut the seismic program. Why? In the 1990s,

they said they did not have enough money in government to do

it.

It wasn’t until we built a strong economy in the province of

British Columbia that we actually had the funds to make those

investments.

Again, I hope the members opposite can stand up and actually

contradict anything I said.

N. Simons: Revisionist history written eight weeks after this government

finally relinquished — their fingernails were white from clinging to

power as long as they could — 16 years of neglect. It takes a while to

reinvest in the programs and services that have seen a steady decline in

their funding proportionate to the need of this province.

We know that we have work to do. We have a lot of work to do, and

we have a plan to do it. We start by investing in education to make up

for the years of fighting with teachers. We have $681 million that is

going to go into schools to help the K-to-12 system, help the kids, help

the teachers, help the families that have been in an underfunded system

that the Supreme Court has reiterated to the government of the

day.

Now it’s our responsibility, and it’s our desire to invest in

education because it’s the right thing to do — not because the courts

have ordered us to do so. I think that the investments that we’re going

to be making in education and health are going to be the appropriate

investments — investments that are needed. We’ve been waiting a long

time for them.

It’s kind of interesting to hear members of the former government

stand up and talk about: “Name this. Name one school, one building.”

Sixteen years ago. There were a lot of things that happened before the

previous government came into being. And 16 years later we still have to

make up for the deficits they’ve created.

We have a social deficit in this province. We talk about the

opioid crisis. The opioid crisis was not sudden, and it’s not new. It

came out of a long list of government decisions that were made in the

early 2000s. First of all, the getting rid of our ability to pay for the

programs that we needed to pay for. What treatment beds have opened

since the opioid crisis began? What access to treatment was available?

What supports to families? What preventative services? We need to invest

in this — because we need to protect families in this province from the

scourge of addiction — and mental health and all the areas that have

been neglected.

This government was part of an all-party committee. The previous

government was a member of that all-party committee that called for a

poverty reduction strategy, that called for a comprehensive plan to

address poverty. They didn’t do it. It took us coming in to this side of

the House to finally act on recommendations that were made by people in

this province.

We have no lessons to learn from the previous government. We’re on

a strong path to fill the gaps that have been created over the last 16

years. I’m proud to do that from this side of the House.

N. Simons moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:54 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2017: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada