Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament

(2023) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Thursday, March 2, 2023

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 280

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Statements

Jane Shin and family

K. Chen

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 11 — Election Amendment Act, 2023

Hon. N. Sharma

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Avalanche at Panorama Mountain in Columbia Valley

D. Clovechok

Mentorship and message of appreciation

K. Chen

Wildlife

T. Shypitka

Festival of Holi

A. Singh

Newman Farm and Farmlands Trust Society

A. Olsen

Habitat for Humanity

M. Babchuk

Oral Questions

Drug decriminalization program and role of businesses in drug supply

K. Falcon

Hon. M. Farnworth

E. Sturko

Standards of care for addiction treatment and recovery services

A. Olsen

Hon. A. Dix

Mental health services

A. Olsen

Hon. A. Dix

Government action on issues in health care system

J. Rustad

Hon. A. Dix

Provision of Ukrainian-language written driver’s test

T. Shypitka

Hon. M. Farnworth

Government action on issues in health care system

D. Davies

Hon. A. Dix

Orders of the Day

Committee of Supply

Supplementary Estimates: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General

Hon. M. Farnworth

E. Sturko

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Supplementary Estimates: Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation (continued)

M. Lee

Hon. M. Rankin

THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2023

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: R. Merrifield.

[10:05 a.m.]

Statements

JANE SHIN AND FAMILY

K. Chen: Today I would like to give my best wishes and congratulations to

an outstanding woman leader, my predecessor for Burnaby-Lougheed and the

first and only Korean Canadian elected to this Legislature, Jane

Shin.

I had the honour of joining her newborn child’s 100th day

celebration last week. It was so incredible to see Jane, her partner,

Steven Su, and their baby boy, River Lee Su, together with so much love

and blessings from their family and friends.

River is such a handsome and healthy baby boy, who I’m sure will

benefit from the ChildCareBC plan. I believe he will grow up being so

proud of his mom, who has paved the way for so many women of colour,

like me, to join politics and make positive changes, like the $10-a-day

child care, possible.

I also want to take this opportunity to thank Jane for giving me

her trust to run for this seat six years ago. Her trust has changed my

life, and I’m so grateful to have had the opportunity to represent

Burnaby-Lougheed in the Legislature.

So thank you, and congratulations, Jane, Steven and River. All the

best wishes to your beautiful family.

Introductions by Members

T. Stone: I wanted to take this opportunity in introductions to formally welcome

the interns who have agreed to work with our caucus for the balance of this

spring session. We’ve gotten to know them over the last few weeks. They’re

all very keen, well qualified, eager to dive right in. In fact, that’s

exactly what they’ve done.

I will take this opportunity to welcome to our communications team

Sarah Ash and Kevin Franceschini, and to our research team, Kaitlyn Lu,

Tristen McCartney and Parnian Taheri.

I’d ask that the House please make these interns feel very

welcome.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 11 — ELECTION

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. N. Sharma presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Election Amendment Act,

Hon. N. Sharma: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time

now.

I’m pleased to introduce the Election Amendment Act. This bill

implements recommendations for legislative change to the Election Act

from the Chief Electoral Officer’s May 2020 report to the Legislative

Assembly, Digital Communications, Disinformation and Democracy ,

and from the May 2022 report on recommendations for legislative

change.

The key amendments include restrictions on making specified types

of false statements and misrepresentations in relation to an election,

requiring digital platforms that publish election advertising to remove

non-compliant advertising within a specific time frame and improving

These amendments will ensure that British Columbians can continue

to have confidence in our election process by enhancing the

the high degree of integrity and transparency.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is the first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

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

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 11, Election Amendment Act, 2023, introduced, read a first time

and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next

sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

AVALANCHE AT PANORAMA

MOUNTAIN IN COLUMBIA

VALLEY

D. Clovechok: I rise solemnly today after a heartbreaking tragedy in my riding

yesterday. An avalanche came down about 30 kilometres southwest of

Invermere, killing three skiers and injuring four others who were skiing

in a group of ten, all from out of Canada.

[10:10 a.m.]

Four were injured, including the guide. They were part of

international visitors skiing at Panorama Mountain resort. Panorama ski

patrol and local search and rescue crews carried out the effort to

locate and free the victims and worked with B.C. emergency services to

get the injured to hospital.

A dozen people have died in avalanches in our province this year,

making it one of the worst seasons in decades. I want to thank Avalanche

Canada for all the work that they do and the efforts that they make to

try to prevent these things.

When these tragedies occur, it shakes the entire community. That’s

the Columbia Valley, which includes Canal Flats, of course, Invermere,

all the way up to Radium. They’re tight knit. I know right now there’s

deep sadness. Our hearts go out to the victims and their loved ones and

those who survived the frightening event and incident. We wish them a

quick recovery.

I want to thank the heli-skiing company. They are just consummate

professionals. The general manager worked for me at Princess Cruises.

He’s just an amazing young man.

SAR, the Panorama ski resort, the RCMP and the B.C. Ambulance

Service all did a phenomenal job yesterday. I wish them all the very

best today. I wish I could be there.

I also want to recognize the director of area F, the regional

district of East Kootenay, for her leadership, who happens to be my

wife, Susan, and the mayor of Invermere.

Today actually marks Search and Rescue Volunteer Memorial Day. It

happens on March 2 every year to remember those rescuers who lost their

lives in the line of duty and to recognize the volunteers who continue

to serve.

I’ll note that just last month we lost a search and rescue

volunteer to an avalanche. She was killed alongside another skier in the

Chilcotin region, not on the job but enjoying the back country that she

loved. It was her teammates with Cariboo Search and Rescue that had to

carry her out on the recovery mission.

Even the most experienced back-country skier can encounter

trouble. It’s vital that people check the warnings, carry the right gear

and be mindful of the dangers that come out there.

I’d ask this House to send their prayers to these people

today.

MENTORSHIP AND

MESSAGE OF

APPRECIATION

K. Chen: Today I would like to talk about the importance of mentorship. I

find one of the most rewarding parts about being an MLA or being in a

political movement is the amount of things we can learn every single day

— the stories we hear, the places we go and the people we meet and

sometimes become close with for life. If you’re lucky, like me, to have

a mentor in this world who believes in you and supports you

unconditionally, your life could be changed forever, like

mine.

Today I want to thank a mentor, a chosen family and someone I had

the fortune to have met when I first joined the NDP in my early

twenties. I’d just graduated from university and was a foreign worker

here on my own. This person believed in me and gave me the opportunity

to work with him and learn from him. He has taught me so much with the

work he’s done for our community, and he has taught me to be a good MLA

with his kindness and compassion.

Mentorship can be a voice to listen to, a brain to pick or a push

for us to go towards the right direction. That’s exactly what this

person has done for me and many others. He trusted me when I didn’t even

trust myself. He’s always there to listen, to give me his honest opinion

and his trust. He has supported me fully, even when I don’t follow his

advice. He knows I’m the rebellious daughter he cannot get rid

of.

I’m so grateful for his unconditional mentorship and support

during the past 17 years. I hope he knows that no matter where I go in

life, he’s like a father to me forever, and he’s stuck with this

rebellious daughter for life.

Thank you. I love you and respect you so much. I also want to wish

you a very happy birthday, with many amazing years to come, with all the

happiness, good health and great looking hair too.

All the best wishes to the hon. Speaker of the

Legislature.

WILDLIFE

T. Shypitka: I have two favourite days in the Legislature each year, one being

Mining Day and the second one being Wildlife Day, which happens to be

tomorrow.

[10:15 a.m.]

Lots of things we can celebrate about wildlife and the diversity

in this province. Sadly, we’re seeing a rapid decline in our wildlife

populations in every corner of the province.

There are lots of factors to this. There’s disease — Movi virus

for the sheep and goat populations, chronic wasting disease for our

ungulate populations — and also land use, industry, habitat loss,

climate change and predation, which is a major contributor and needs to

be seriously managed.

We need science-based decision-making and up-to-date data

collection. We need local First Nation and local stakeholder input on

how we manage our populations. We need legislation that puts wildlife

first. That is why last year I brought forward a private member’s bill

that was to introduce an independent funding model to give revenue to

manage this effort that we all need to take to restore our habitat and

wildlife populations.

We’ve seen some great private members’ bills as well. The member

of the Green Party just reintroduced a wildlife amendment act to restore

bear denning in trees and stumps and to protect those habitats that we

most desperately need to retain our wildlife populations.

For today, I just want to celebrate Wildlife Day, respect and

celebrate the diversity of our province and our wildlife populations and

make tomorrow a great day for all wildlife in British

Columbia.

FESTIVAL OF HOLI

A. Singh: Next Wednesday, March 8, as well as commemorating International

Women’s Day, over one billion people the world over, mainly in India but

also across the diaspora, including British Columbia, will celebrate the

Hindu festival of Holi. Culturally, the festival has its roots in the

celebration of the eternal and divine Lord Krishna and Radha, beloved

through….

Mirabai, a devotee of Lord Krishna, wrote some prolific poetry.

I’ll read some.

Unbreakable, O Lord,

Is the love

That binds me to

you.

Like a diamond,

It breaks the hammer that strikes

it.

My heart goes into you

As the polish goes into the

gold.

As the lotus lives in its water,

I live in you.

Like

the bird

That gazes all night

At the passing moon,

I have

lost myself dwelling in you.

O my beloved, return.

The day also signifies the triumph of good over evil. It

commemorates the victory of the god Vishnu as Narasimha Narayana over

Hiranyakashipu.

Holi is a time to celebrate renewal as winter gives way to spring

and the earth comes to life with a multitude of colours. It lasts for a

night and a day, starting on the evening of the Purnima, the full moon,

and falling in the Hindu calendar month of Phalguna, usually around mid

March. The first evening is also known as Holika Dahan, or Chhoti Holi,

and the following day is Holi.

Holi celebrations are also known as the festival of colours. I’m

sure you’ve all seen those vivid images. On the day of Holi, people

celebrate by decorating, throwing coloured powder on each other,

drenching each other with colours. Water guns and water-filled balloons

are often used to play and colour each other, with anyone and any place

being considered fair game. Devotees travel from place to place, singing

and dancing.

In Richmond, Holi will be celebrated at the Vedic Cultural Society

of B.C. on No. 5 Road, on the Highway to Heaven.

I encourage my constituents and all of you to reach out to the

society and participate in the celebrations.

NEWMAN FARM AND

FARMLANDS TRUST

SOCIETY

A. Olsen: Last fall I visited Newman Farm in Central Saanich, where I met

with Don and Natasha Caverley and farm manager Bert James to get a

tour.

The land was donated to the district by the Newman family. When I

was on council in Central Saanich, we partnered with the Farmlands Trust

to farm it. There was a condition. They couldn’t compete with commercial

farms. What they created from that was amazing.

The Farmlands Trust Society is a recognized model for sustainable

farming and food redistribution in the greater Victoria region utilizing

national, award-winning, certified pollinator-friendly farm practices.

From 2013 to the present, the Farmlands Trust Society has led the field

to plate initiative, where they grow, harvest and freely donate fresh,

local produce to vulnerable populations. The primary recipient of the

FLT Society’s field to plate initiative is Our Place Society.

[10:20 a.m.]

FLT produces apples, herbs, squash, beets, cabbage, carrots,

cucumbers, garlic, kale, leeks, lettuce, onions, pears and turnips. Last

year the Farmlands Trust produced and donated 12,912 pounds, $75,000

worth, of food. From 2014, the initiative has delivered 102,685 pounds,

$315,000 worth, of fresh, local food.

Like many not-for-profits, volunteers are the backbone of the FLT,

and today I’d like to recognize Ms. Victoria Lord. She’s an 86-year-old

resident from Sidney who has been diligently volunteering her time and

her gardening skills at Newman Farm for the past several years. She

epitomizes in her actions the importance of giving back to the community

at a local and regional level.

My thanks and sincere appreciation to the Farmlands Trust Society

patron, founder, board of directors: Bert James, Victoria Lord, Natasha

and Don Caverley, and all the other valuable volunteers and team members

who continue to make positive contributions as a charity helping

charity, linking food production to aid in relieving poverty and

mitigating food insecurity.

HABITAT FOR HUMANITY

M. Babchuk: After going through a divorce, Sean found himself with no other

choice than to move himself and his sons in with his parents. While he

was grateful for the temporary living situation and made it work, it was

cramped and not sustainable. At the same time, he was dealing with the

pressures of being a new single parent and just trying to set an example

for his children.

Feeling desperate, Sean sought help. “I don’t even remember what I

typed into the computer,” he said. Something to do with “housing” and

“help me.” And the Habitat for Humanity website came up.

He honestly didn’t believe that this type of program existed in

this world. A hand up, not a handout, is exactly what Sean was looking

for, and the Habitat program, which involves 500 hours of volunteer

work, helped him rebuild his confidence. He formed strong bonds with the

Habitat staff, volunteers and fellow homeowners and particularly enjoyed

being on the build site.

Sean described the Habitat program as a snowball of positivity

that got bigger and bigger with each step that he went down his path. He

said: “It’s been my belief, and now it’s confirmed, that programs and

groups of people like this are really what hold this world

together.”

Sean completed his 500 hours of volunteerism and moved into his

Habitat home with his sons in December of 2022, but he isn’t finished.

He wants to give back to the community. “Now that I’ve gotten myself out

of this jam, I intend to take a page out of the Habitat book and start

helping more people who need it. It’s amazing the confidence you can

pass on just by doing something that was handed to you.”

I couldn’t be more proud, as Sean is my son, and he has worked so

hard to better his life and the lives of my grandchildren Owen and

Jason.

Also, I am so grateful to be acquainted with an organization that

provides entry-level, affordable family home ownership through a

collaborative non-profit model, and I’m honoured to now be part of the

Habitat for Humanity family that not only provides housing but also

lifelong skills and a sense of community to the people that it

serves.

Oral Questions

DRUG DECRIMINALIZATION PROGRAM AND

ROLE OF BUSINESSES

IN DRUG SUPPLY

K. Falcon: Adastra Holdings is a cannabis company that supplies products to

1,400 retailers. Last week the Langley-based company issued a press

release announcing its plans to possess, produce, sell and distribute

cocaine in British Columbia.

The release describes Adastra as poised to be a leader in drug

development for emerging sectors and at the forefront of the NDP’s

decriminalization program. The statement further reveals that Adastra

intends to “evaluate how the commercialization of cocaine fits within

the company’s business model.”

To the Premier, what on earth is going on here?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. As the member knows, both

sides of the House have supported decriminalization….

Interjections.

Hon. M. Farnworth: You have. You can change your position. If you’re changing

your….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members, let’s not have….

Hon. M. Farnworth: If you’re changing your position, then I think it would be an

important thing to announce.

[10:25 a.m.]

But we have decriminalization now in the province for small

amounts of drugs. That has been put in place by working with the federal

government, by working with police and health officials in terms of how

to do that to deal with the toxic opioid crisis that we have been facing

in this province.

What the member has been talking about…. I would want to ensure

that, first off, it has to be done under the guidance of Health Canada.

There are Criminal Code rules around drugs and the amounts that are

there.

I suspect, hon. Member, that what you’re talking about is probably

something that has been put in place under the aegis of Health

Canada.

K. Falcon: Let’s be really clear. The NDP’s plunge headlong into

decriminalization without the proper guardrails that even the federal

government insisted should be in place is absolutely not something that

we’re going to support on this side of the House.

That answer explains exactly the problem that we have. The NDP’s

sole focus, as I’ve said repeatedly, is on the public supply of

addictive drugs, ignoring the important emphasis that should be on

actually helping people get off of their addictions and be proper,

functioning members of society again.

Let me read what Adastra Holdings stated in their press release.

“This news release…includes statements regarding…the intention to

evaluate how the commercialization of cocaine fits within the company’s

business model.”

Now, since the NDP decriminalized hard drugs like cocaine,

fentanyl and methamphetamine, this company’s stock price has doubled.

But let’s be really clear here. Cocaine isn’t prescribed. It isn’t safe,

and this is wrong. Commercializing cocaine as a business opportunity

amounts to legalizing cocaine trafficking — full stop.

Why has this Premier allowed for the commercialization of

cocaine?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question. What I can assure the member

is that the decriminalization process that’s taken place in this

province is done in concert with the federal government on the

guidelines that have been put in place by Health Canada. That’s the only

way that decriminalization will work in….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The minister will continue.

Hon. M. Farnworth: The member asked a serious question. I’m trying to give him a

serious answer, which is, as I’ve said, where decriminalization is in

the province of British Columbia and the rules and guidelines that have

been put in place by the federal government for this process to

work.

What I can tell you is that no, we would absolutely not be

supporting the development and the wholesale distribution and

legalization of cocaine in the province of British Columbia.

What we have is a….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. M. Farnworth: What we have is a policy in place that has been developed through

a considerable amount of work with Health Canada, with addiction

specialists, with health professionals and with chiefs of police to

ensure that we can have safer supply for those who are addicted. This is

not and never has been about legalizing cocaine or encouraging it for

commercial distribution, despite whatever the member is reading from his

press release.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.

E. Sturko: Although the commercialization of cocaine typically brings to mind

cartels, it’s corporations cashing in under the current NDP government.

Drug trafficking is illegal….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.

Members, order. Members, enough.

Please, let’s hear the question.

E. Sturko: I heard someone — I’m not sure who — saying that I’m

fearmongering. But people should be afraid, because trafficking cocaine

will cause significant harm in the province of British

Columbia.

[10:30 a.m.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

E. Sturko: Drug trafficking is illegal, but a retail store has already opened

in Vancouver, run by Dana Larsen, and they’re doing it in plain sight.

Larsen is also supporting another private proposal to open a

brick-and-mortar store to sell heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine.

Commercialization of cocaine poses a significant threat to health and

safety, all being done right now under the guise of

compassion.

My question to the Premier is, why is he condoning and enabling

the commercialization of cocaine in British Columbia?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. It’s just nonsense that we

are enabling….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: One of the things that we have learned….

Interjections.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Really?

Interjections.

[Mr. Speaker rose.]

Mr. Speaker: Members, please. Shhh.

I asked the other side, when the question was being asked, to show

courtesy to listen to the question. I expect the same thing….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Please don’t, member for Skeena. I know what’s going on here,

okay?

Let’s listen to the answer. The minister will continue.

[Mr. Speaker resumed his seat.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: There are two points to the member’s question I want to make

clear. First off, in regard to the stores in Vancouver, we didn’t issue

them a business licence. They shouldn’t have a business licence. The

city of Vancouver should revoke that business licence. They should be

shut down. I have made that clear on a number of points. The police can

enforce that…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: …because what they’re doing is illegal. The police can enforce

them, and the police can shut that down.

They also have a business licence, a business licence granted by

the city of Vancouver, and it….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, what…?

Really?

Hon. M. Farnworth: You want it shut down. It can be shut down by the police. In

pulling the business licence, it could be shut down today.

Second point, what I’ve learned from the Liberals is that when it

comes to their press releases, they’re often very selective. I’d like to

go back to exactly what is taking place with this issue that they

raised. It is a cannabis company. They have received approval from

Health Canada to possess 250 grams to do testing in terms of this

substance. The licence is issued by Health Canada. It is not done with

consultation with the province.

I can tell you this. Cocaine is an illegal substance. It continues

to be an illegal substance. It is regulated by Health Canada. That is

what we support. We do not support the legalization of cocaine for

commercial distribution.

Mr. Speaker: Surrey South, supplemental.

E. Sturko: I’d point out that also in the press release, it says that not

only can they possess 250 milligrams of cocaine, but they can also now

import coca leaves and manufacture cocaine for the future distribution

of cocaine in British Columbia.

The commercialization of cocaine and other illegal drugs isn’t an

act of compassion. It’s legalized drug trafficking, which is going to

pose a significant threat to health and safety in B.C. We should be

telling people, especially children and youth, that drugs are harmful,

addictive and deadly and that the effects of illicit drugs — such as

crystal meth, fentanyl, heroin and cocaine — are harmful.

This government is ignoring the federal letter of requirements and

pressing forward with decriminalization with no thought to consequences,

no protections, no enforcement and no plan for public safety. This is

doomed to fail badly.

My question. Why has the Premier encouraged, supported and allowed

the commercialization of cocaine?

[10:35 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: That is just nonsense. We do not support the commercialization of

cocaine in British Columbia or in the country. If the federal government

has granted a licence, then they should be taking it up with the federal

government. They’re the ones who made that licence.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: What I also want to let the House know is that when she says that

we are not concerned about trafficking, we most certainly are. That’s

why our budget has $462 million this year for public safety. That’s why

we announced the largest investment in policing, in terms of the RCMP in

this province, of $230 million. That’s why there’s more than $83 million

for special teams to…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: …particularly go after repeat violent offenders.

It’s also why we have made dealing with drug traffickers, and with

those who profit, a priority for our government. Whether it’s bringing

in the witness protection program, to be able to build strong cases to

bust criminal gangs that traffic…. We take it seriously, our budget

takes it seriously, and it’s unfortunate that that side of the House

doesn’t realize it.

Mr. Speaker: It’s really interesting to see today, when a question is being

asked, if there’s any amount of heckling from the government side, the

opposition side is very quick to point it out, to stop it. When the

answer is provided, the heckling happens; they just ignore

that.

Please, let’s apply the same rule to both sides. Heckling is okay,

but at least have the courtesy to listen to each other. Thank

you.

STANDARDS OF CARE FOR ADDICTION

TREATMENT AND RECOVERY

SERVICES

A. Olsen: For weeks, we’ve been hearing the government and opposition

fighting about addiction treatment beds — treatment we desperately need,

to support recovery for British Columbians. Basically, the debate has

been framed around who’s worse at letting people die, attempting to

score political points off the trauma of British Columbians. It’s

theatre. Neither side of this House is taking accountability for their

failure to regulate the treatment industry.

Private industries are profiting from the drug poisoning crisis.

The industry has a vested interest in having clients, and that means

more harm. Both sides offer billions but without setting industry

standards, making vulnerable people more vulnerable to potential

predators. Addictions treatment and recovery options are greatly needed.

However, in British Columbia, there is no standard of care.

Additionally, this government doesn’t even collect data on the

number of beds, who’s in them and how many are needed. One would think

that the government would start by understanding the scope of the

problem and then ensuring that the options they’re creating are

safe.

My question is to the Premier. When will he set standards for the

treatment industry in British Columbia?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, thank you to the member for his question. As the member will

know, previously, under the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions,

Judy Darcy, the government re-regulated an area that had been

deregulated, which is recovery houses in B.C. It was a significant

action that reflected exactly what he’s talking about in the

community.

We have, this week, before the House, a budget that invests

unprecedented amounts in treatment and that adds treatment beds in our

province, publicly funded treatment beds, supporting groups in the

community, as well, such as the Canadian Mental Health Association, that

do just that. We have moved on these questions.

On the issue of data, you’ll see, in the Minister of Mental Health

and Addictions service plan, new measurements of data to do exactly what

the member is asking. In other words, we have a serious, thoughtful and,

frankly, action-oriented response to what is a public health emergency

that affects everybody.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Saanich North and the Islands, supplemental.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

A. Olsen: I appreciate the response from the Minister of Health. We have

seen and heard from the coroner, suggesting that anyone can put up a

sign and call themselves a treatment centre.

[10:40 a.m.]

In the coming weeks, we will definitely be asking further

questions with respect to the response that the minster gave in budget

estimates and beyond.

Yesterday the Finance Minister was quick to quote Jonny Morris

from the Canadian Mental Health Association in B.C., but only the good

parts. I agree with Jonny that the $1 billion investment in mental

health and addictions care is a remarkable investment, but the Finance

Minister failed to mention that Jonny also raised concerns about the

lack of funding for mental illnesses beyond substance use disorder. It

appears only $61 million is going to support those illnesses in Budget

I’ve heard many stories of families desperately seeking care for

their loved ones being turned away or discharged less than 24 hours

after suicide attempts or self-harm. Our mental health care system is

deeply broken. One in five British Columbians, 900,000 British

Columbians, will develop a mental illness over their lifetime. Some of

those may be related to addictions, but many will not be. Of the $1

billion, there is little for those with schizophrenia, with eating

disorders, with dementia. This government currently is failing

them.

My question is to the Premier. When will he fix the broken system

of mental health care for all the people in British Columbia who depend

on it?

Hon. A. Dix: Thank you again to the member for his question. Investment in

mental health and addictions, since 2017, has gone up more than any

other area of health care — more than ambulance paramedics, more than

surgery, more than any other. The system was not in place, I think we

can all acknowledge that, to provide people the care that they

need.

We have taken systematic steps to address that in a number of ways

— 45,000 visits to counselling services not funded before, primary care

networks that have added more than 200 full-time-equivalents to support

family doctors and nurse practitioners in providing mental health

services, building out a system of care for the very issues the member

raises.

He’s quite right. There are many people in British Columbia who

are not dealing with a dual diagnosis, are not dealing with addictions

issues but are dealing with serious mental health issues. Even mild

mental health issues have increased, clearly — we all know this, and we

all feel this — during the pandemic. So he’s quite right.

We have to build that out in every aspect of care. In child and

youth mental health, you’ve seen it in the Pathway to Hope initiatives

that have taken place. In primary care, you’ve seen it in the major

investment in primary care networks. You’ve seen it in the actions of

successive Ministers of Mental Health and Addictions, in adding

counselling services.

We have to continue to do that work. It’s essential, I think, in

British Columbia — I think this is where the member and I would entirely

agree — that we provide mental health services in the same way that we

provide services for a broken leg or a seriously twisted ankle or any

other ailment. That’s what we’re seeking to do.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON ISSUES

IN HEALTH CARE

SYSTEM

J. Rustad: Six people die every day in B.C. from illicit drugs, but at the

same time, almost six people die every day waiting for diagnostic

services or surgeries in B.C. This is a visible and unacceptable failure

of B.C.’s health care system and should alarm everyone.

When will this minister admit the failure of B.C.’s health care

system and take steps to develop a new model?

Hon. A. Dix: The last week — it was recorded information — we set a record for

February for the number of surgeries completed. A record. We did in

January. We did in December. The all-time record was set in the middle

of December in the midst of very significant challenges for our system

with respect to respiratory illness.

We have reduced wait times for surgery in a pandemic, which is not

an extraordinary achievement for me but for doctors and for surgical

nurses. We have added 300 net new surgical nurses to the system to do

that. We’ve put in place a surgical renewal commitment that’s had real

impact for people, reducing wait times in key areas of care.

On diagnostic care, the member represents a constituency in the

Northern Health Authority. He’ll know that that authority, in 2017, had

the lowest level of MRI of any equivalent region in the country — No.

10. Well, really No. 13. We have changed that. We have more than doubled

the number of MRIs so people in the Northern Health Authority get the

same access to diagnostic care that everyone else in the country has and

everyone else in the province has.

[10:45 a.m.]

Mr. Speaker: Member for Nechako Lakes, supple­mental.

J. Rustad: Those numbers were a record high for the province for last year.

But you know what? In addition to that, B.C. has 6,800 licensed family

doctors in this province, yet only 3,200 are actually providing

services. What on earth is the matter with this minister’s approach to

health care that is keeping these health care workers from actually

being in the system?

Instead of focusing on urgent and primary care — which costs

approximately three times as much per visit, with far fewer visits per

doctor than a family doctor — why isn’t this minister focusing on

getting these registered family doctors back into the system? When will

this minister put the needs of patients ahead of a broken system, which

he is responsible for, and actually focus on a positive environment that

will attract these doctors back into B.C.?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes, there are 6,800 family doctors. Yes, that’s 600 more than

there were when I became Minister of Health. All of them are working in

B.C.

What he’s referring to, I think, is those who are delivering

longitudinal family practice, which is higher than what he said but in

the range of that — closer to 4,000 than to 3,200. All of those doctors

are working. Many of them, for example, are family doctors working as

hospitalists, providing care for people in the province now. He’ll know

that there are more than 10,000 people in hospitals today. That’s

significant.

What have we done? We developed, with Doctors of B.C., a new

payment model. In the first month, 1,975 doctors have joined that

payment model, including 167 that weren’t practising last year, in

longitudinal family practice — in a month. We have added, through our

new-to-practice contracts, a program that used to have 20 to 30 doctors,

116 new doctors to that program, because we worked with Resident Doctors

of B.C. and Doctors of B.C. to make that effective and to make that

work. We’ve tripled the number of nurse practitioners in B.C.

Those actions in primary care are working because we developed

them with the workforce in primary care.

PROVISION OF UKRAINIAN-LANGUAGE

WRITTEN DRIVER’S

TEST

T. Shypitka: Families who have fled war-torn Ukraine require a driver’s licence

to integrate into Canada and rebuild their lives. However, ICBC has

failed to provide the written driver’s test in Ukrainian, despite the

significant and increasing number of Ukrainian-speaking people in

British Columbia.

They’re coming in by the thousands every day. The government and

ICBC have cited cost as the reason for rejecting the addition of

Ukrainian and, instead, suggest using phone translation services, which

are very cumbersome and disjointed, or taking the written test in

Russian. I don’t think I have to tell anyone in this chamber that

requiring Ukrainians to take the written driver’s test in Russian is not

only traumatic but also insulting for those who have fled Russian

aggression.

Will the Premier see the indignity that this represents, when so

many families are fleeing Russian oppression, and please allow Ukrainian

as an additional language option?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question, and I would agree with the

challenges being faced by Ukrainians fleeing Russia’s illegal invasion

of Ukraine. I can tell you that yes, there is the telecommunication

language option on there, in terms of that translation. I also know that

there have been, depending on certain parts of the province, access to

to be able to write that test, to assist with that.

I most certainly will take back the issue of being able to write

the test in Ukrainian. I completely agree that asking to write in

Russian is just completely unacceptable.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Kootenay East, supplemental.

T. Shypitka: Well, thank you to the minister for that moment of clarity. We’ve

written the minister on this, and, as the minister knows, the letter

that I got back was citing costs. Perhaps now the minister has

reconsidered, and I would certainly appreciate that going

forward.

There is a solution, as the minister knows. We have a group.

Fortunately, we have a group, in Cranbrook, of volunteers. We’ve heard

ministerial statements last week, talking about the support that all

sides of the House want to give these refugees from Russian

aggression.

[10:50 a.m.]

We’ve heard the member for Prince George–​Vale­mount

talk about her support group in her community. They’re across the

province. We have a group in Cranbrook that has stepped forward to cover

costs and organize the written translation for the Ukrainian test

option, which I informed the minister about probably a couple of weeks

ago now.

The communities are stepping up. The organizations are stepping

up. The people are stepping up. Will the Premier please step up, do the

right thing, accept the community proposal from Al MacBean and our

volunteers in Cranbrook and translate the ICBC driver’s test into

Ukrainian?

Hon. M. Farnworth: As I said, I will be ensuring that ICBC is able to provide the

test for people in Ukrainian. Don’t worry. It will be done.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON ISSUES

IN HEALTH CARE

SYSTEM

D. Davies: It’s sad that day after day we bring up example after example of

the failures in our health care system, which seem to continue to be

downplayed by this government.

I give another example of that. Morris is a senior from Fort St.

John with a wife and family. A year ago he was diagnosed with an

intestinal blockage and placed on a surgical wait-list. For ten

agonizing months, Morris was forced to manage his excruciating pain with

Tylenol 3 and to make repeated visits to the emergency room, with days

that he could only drink Glucerna for his nourishment.

Finally, Morris did undergo surgery on December 23, only to

discover that cancer had been growing in his intestines for the last ten

months. To make things worse, not all the cancer could be removed. Now

Morris’s family is living in constant fear that the cancer may be

rapidly growing and late stage and that he may tragically pass away

before he receives treatment. Morris has been waiting for ten

excruciating weeks for his pathology reports and a specific diagnosis

and medical treatment plan.

Can the Premier finally take responsibility for this catastrophic

failure in our health care system, under his watch, and give Morris’s

family the treatment he needs?

Hon. A. Dix: Of course, when such matters come to people’s families, it has a

devastating effect — not just on Morris, in this case, but on the entire

family. So our hearts go out to them. A diagnosis that’s discovered in

the midst of another procedure is devastating. You’re preparing for

something profoundly difficult, and another diagnosis comes.

The member knows, in terms of the specific case…. I can’t speak of

those specific cases in the House. He knows that. He also knows that I

will follow up with him on the specific issue.

With respect to surgeries and surgical wait-lists, I think the

evidence is pretty clear. B.C.’s surgical renewal commitment is being

followed by the entire country because of the very reasons he states.

It’s so important for people to get the surgery they need when they need

it.

That’s why we’re doing record numbers of surgeries now. It’s

because people, regardless of whether it’s a surgery that involves life

and death or someone’s sight or someone’s ability to move…. All

medically necessary surgery is important. That’s why we’ve expanded the

number of operating room nurses, expanded the number of medical device

processing technicians, expanded the number of surgeons, expanded

surgical hours by 175,000. Still, as the member knows, it doesn’t always

work in that way for everybody. We’re going to continue to pursue those

initiatives.

I’ll be happy to talk to the hon. member about his constituent and

their circumstances, as he would expect me to do and I know the member

has done, because we’ve done this in the past. We’ll work through that

with the family in the most appropriate possible way.

[10:55 a.m.]

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: In the main chamber, I call supplementary estimates for the Ministry of

Public Safety and Solicitor General.

In Committee A, I call continued supplementary estimates for the Ministry

of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: While we await the arrival of the minister, we will just take a short

recess.

The House recessed at 10:57 a.m.

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

PUBLIC SAFETY AND

SOLICITOR GENERAL

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B);

S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

The committee met at 11 a.m.

The Chair: All right, Members. We’ll call this debate into session of

estimates — supplementary estimates, to be clear.

As the Committee of Supply examines the supplementary

estimates for the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, I

would just ask that members remember that the debate shall be

focused on the additional funding request for this ministry.

Consideration of supplementary estimates, of course, is not the

place for an expansive look at ministry operations, in the way that

we do for main estimates, which will be coming up.

Of course, if you have broad questions for the upcoming main

estimates process, I would ask you to use them then and keep your

questions focused on the supplemental funding request. An overview,

if you don’t have it, is provided on page 1 of the supplementary

estimates book.

On Vote 41(S): ministry operations, $150,000,000.

Hon. M. Farnworth: It’s my pleasure to be able to speak today about the supplementary

estimates from our ministry, the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor

General. I’d like to introduce my team, who is here to support me in

this process. First is my deputy minister, Doug Scott. Glen Lewis is the

assistant deputy minister of policing and security programs. As well,

David Hoadley, our chief financial officer, is also here.

From the Ministry of Citizens’ Services we also have, supporting

the assistant deputy minister of connectivity division, Susan Stanford

and Ivan Rincon, the executive director for project

management.

Today, I’m here to outline the investment of $150 million for the

local government next gen 911 readiness fund. The Canadian

Radio-television — CRTC — has mandated national implementation of next

gen 911 and the decommissioning of the current 911 networks by March 4,

If confirmed, this funding from year-end provincial surplus will

meet that mandate and will offset the costs required to set up and

transition to NG911. The fund includes $90 million to flow directly to

E-Comm to offset local government NG911 implementation costs and $60

million to flow to the Union of B.C. Municipalities to be distributed

amongst their members.

This one-time funding covers E-Comm’s software, hardware and

labour costs to connect regions to the network, and system operability

and municipal costs associated with training, education, program

delivery, public outreach and audits. I’m pleased that this investment

is taking place. It’s going to support safer, faster and more reliable

emergency response services in our province. I’m now pleased to answer

any questions.

E. Sturko: Good morning to everyone. Can the minister please answer, for me,

when they first became aware of the requirement for the next gen

911?

Hon. M. Farnworth: This is a project that has been under discussion for a number of

years, ever since the CRTC did the ruling that all provinces need to

move this to the next gen. All provinces are currently engaged in doing

that and in meeting the target of March 4, 2025.

E. Sturko: It was my understanding that the CRTC decision came down in 2017,

and then plans would have been going forward with the service provider

from that time. My question: why wasn’t this part of the 2022-23 budget,

or any of the previous budgets since 2017?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’d like to make a couple of points to the member’s question.

First, this is actually a municipal responsibility. There’s a local

government responsibility. The province, in this case, is stepping in.

We’ve been very much aware of the requirement to move to next gen 911 by

[11:05 a.m.]

We know the work that has been underway in other provinces around

this. Our province has been working closely with local government,

understanding what has been taking place and the pressures that they

have been under. That’s why the province is recognizing this as a

significant cost to them. The province is assisting them in the

implementation, to make sure that it’s done in time for March of 2025.

Every other province is doing the same thing.

E. Sturko: Thank you for that response, again. Were business cases, then,

brought forward by E-Comm and through the UBCM for the individual

services? How was the amount of money that would be provided by the

government calculated, then, based on what the CRTC upgrades would look

like for the individual communities?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, we did consult with E-Comm. The estimates that have resulted

in the final figure are based on the information and the consultation

that we had with them.

E. Sturko: In the business case that was provided by E-Comm, then, or the

consultations that took place, is there a specific breakdown on what

will be for the training for individuals working now with the new

system? As I understand, it has a lot of new technical upgrades,

particularly for operators. Do you have a breakdown on what those funds

will look like?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The $90 million that goes to E-Comm is for the hardware, the

software and the physical upgrading of the system. The $60 million that

goes through the UBCM is for the training, the audits and the whole

range of, in essence, what they call soft services.

Whenever there’s a technological system, you’ve got what they

refer to as hard services and soft services. That $60 million through

the UBCM is for those soft services, which are the training for the

audits and the fact that this is now a brand-new system that has — I’m

not the most tech person — all the associated issues of technology that

those working on it need to know about.

E. Sturko: One of the things, as I understand, with the new system that is

actually quite impressive is their ability to receive things like

real-time video, a lot of new real-time texting and things like that

that would be a significant change for the way that people in British

Columbia currently interact with 911 and emergency services.

Has the province accommodated anything in this budget that would

help the public understand this new upgrade and how people will be able

to use it?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, there is public education and outreach on the new system and

how it will work when it comes into operation. That’s built into the $60

million that goes to local governments through the UBCM.

The Chair: Are there any further questions?

E. Sturko: Sorry, I was just taking some notes.

In a previous question, you responded that in the UBCM, everybody

in the province has this requirement under the CRTC to come up to speed

with the next gen 911, and the province has stepped in, now, to help

roll this out, with some additional funding. Is this indicative of the

province taking responsibility, then, for provincial 911

services?

Hon. M. Farnworth: No, it’s not.

[11:10 a.m.]

E. Sturko: Did each municipality provide input on their specific

requirements, or was this done as an overall esti­mate by your

ministry?

The Chair: I believe it’s the member’s first estimates, and I just want

to make sure that everyone understands that the form of address we

use in this chamber is through the Chair. Instead of referring to a

minister as “you,” it would be to refer to “the minister” and “would

the minister.”

Welcome to your first estimates.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. E-Comm works with the

municipalities in terms of getting an understanding of their costs, and

because they work with them and they have that relationship, they’re

able to understand what the costs are. That’s how they take that and

come up with the figure that was required, in terms of the money that we

provided.

E. Sturko: How long ago did the minister receive any kind of input from UBCM

and the regional districts for upgrades within those areas of

responsibility?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’d say it’s been ongoing for quite a few years that whenever

there are situations like this that are requiring a significant upgrade

or investment in….

It doesn’t just have to be E-Comm. Local government is often

wanting to know if there’s a way in which the province can assist them

with items, issues like this that are going to be very expensive. It

doesn’t matter. It’s like this. You could look at bridges or roads or

schools. It’s the full range of infrastructure. They’re always eager and

pleased to take help if they can get it.

E. Sturko: It’s my understanding that these were a one-time fund. Can the

minister say whether or not there will be any ongoing funding for

operations or maintenance of the new system?

Hon. M. Farnworth: This is a one-time grant in terms of enabling them to do this

transition, and they are aware of this. This is a municipal function,

but it is one-time funding.

E. Sturko: Can the minister tell us when he was aware of the numbers and the

amount of money that would be required to get this project

going?

Hon. M. Farnworth: About a year ago we received from E-Comm that they…. Obviously,

they had been doing work around this in terms of the kinds of numbers

that they were looking at that it was going to cost to implement the

transition. It was about a year ago.

E. Sturko: Can the minister provide any information on what type of review or

planning went in through this government in terms of emergency planning

and looking at emergency services after 2017, when the CRTC decision was

made, and why it was only a year ago that the government would have

started looking into it and making sure that, on such a tight deadline

now…?

It’s only another year from now that the deadline would be for us

to switch our entire systems over to the new digital 911.

[11:15 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I just wanted to

clarify.

E-Comm would have been working on this since 2017, and it is a

local government responsibility. So they’re doing all that work, finding

out what it’s going to require, what it’s going to involve, not just for

E-Comm itself but for the local governments. And it is a significant

cost.

It’s about that year ago they came to us saying: “Look, this is

the work that’s been done. This is what we’re doing. This is what we’re

looking at in the way of expenditure in terms of doing this, and it’s a

significant cost, and help would be appreciated.”

E. Sturko: Can the minister tell me if it’s a provincial responsibility to

make sure that emergency services and 911 services are accessible

throughout the province?

Hon. M. Farnworth: A couple of points. One, 911 service is mandated to local

government.

At the same time, in terms of the providers, the telecoms, they’re

regulated by the CRTC in terms of being able to make sure that they are

able to provide that service. The CRTC has said that they think that in

order to do this transition, provinces are going to need to, which is

why we’re bringing forward the $150 million.

E. Sturko: Knowing that public safety and access to emergency services is a

provincial responsibility, although I do understand that the mandate for

implementing and ensuring that adequate services are in place for

911….

I’m just wondering. Knowing that it’s the responsibility of the

government to ensure that people are safe and do have access, why did it

take the government so long to ensure that this project was adequately

funded for such a significant undertaking?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question, and I would say this. It’s

not a case of the province taking so long. It is an issue of…. The CRTC

made the mandate.

[11:20 a.m.]

Local government — it is their responsibility. They know that.

They have been doing the work over the last number of years to get to

the point that they know what it is in terms of the financial commitment

that’s going to be required, the kind of systems upgrades that are going

to be needed. Every other province is going through the same process.

The work has been done so that we will be ready to do that transition

for March 4 of 2025.

They came and indicated, “Look, this is what it’s going to cost

us,” just about a year ago. This is the way in which the province has

decided to assist them — the block funding, this one-time block funding

grant.

I can tell you that other provinces have chosen a different way of

doing that. They have put a call levy on phones — it’s cell phones, I

believe — to be able to fund it. That’s not something that I think would

have helped, in the sense of…. It just makes cell phone bills more

expensive.

Ontario is doing what we are doing. They are giving a block grant

to ensure that it is implemented.

That was the process by which we decided that we could best assist

local governments in this CRTC-mandated transition.

E. Sturko: Knowing that the request from municipalities and regional

districts and E-Comm came about a year ago, indicating that they could

use some help to get this project underway…. It is a significant

project. It’s crazy. I went through a process like this when I was in

Surrey RCMP. We went from analog to digital. It’s a big job.

I’m just wondering. When did the Treasury Board approve the

release of funds?

Hon. M. Farnworth: It would be the Finance Minister who can answer the questions

around Treasury Board. That’s their responsibility, which they guard

jealously.

E. Sturko: I just have a question about the levies. I understand….

A lot of other provinces have provincial mandates for 911. That’s

not the case here in B.C. You’ve made that clear.

I’m just wondering if the minister would indicate why they’ve

chosen not to go with the levy. A small fee, a nominal fee, had been

placed on land lines. As people no longer have land lines and everybody

texts and uses cell phones, that revenue stream, which would actually

help for the maintenance and the operations of our new digital 911….

That revenue has dried up.

Why are we not going forward with a levy for cell

phones?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’m saying this answer slightly tongue in cheek. I know my

colleague from Abbotsford West will probably appreciate this

answer.

The reason we’re doing a block grant, as opposed to putting a levy

on cell phone bills, is…. That would increase people’s cell phone costs,

even marginally. If we did that, I can guarantee you that he or you

would probably stand up in question period going: “Why are you making

people’s lives more expensive?”

On a more serious side, it is a method that you can use. Other

provinces have done that.

The affordability issue is a real issue for people. It was felt,

at this time, that this block funding grant, similar to what they did in

Ontario, was the easiest way to get the money to local governments in a

timely fashion, and then they’re able to make the transition by March 4

of 2025.

[11:25 a.m.]

E. Sturko: Can the minister…? Does he have any information on whether or not

any projections have been done? Will this actually add costs in terms of

operating and maintenance, then, going forward, given that some of the

new equipment that’s being installed and retrofitted into E-Comm and

other municipal services is expensive? Has there been any consideration

for what…?

Yes. Nobody wants to be the one in question period getting the

finger pointed at them for raising costs. But is avoiding the levy,

then, actually just passing on this increased cost to the

municipalities?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member. I’ll make a number of

points. First, it is new technology, and quite often that does increase

costs. That being said, it also increases efficiency. It also increases

effectiveness. So those things start to balance off of each

other.

This is about the transition to the next system. In terms of the

future, that’s one of those things…. Once everything is up and running

and E-Comm is able to look and say: “Okay, here’s how it’s working.

Here’s how implementation is taking place….” Then they’ll have an

understanding of exactly what things are like going forward.

This, at the end of the day, has been mandated. It is required for

us to do. It’s in the implementation phase right now, and then the

future is just that. But one of the things we always try and do is work

with local governments and E-Comm to ensure that the system is running

properly and that it’s doing everything that it’s supposed to be able to

do.

E. Sturko: How long will it take? There is a deadline, which has been set by

the CRTC, to have communities all across the country come into the next

gen 911. Is there any concern that our municipalities and E-Comm will

not meet this deadline? Is there anything that has been placed in the

budget that may help them with any potential need for expedited

services?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for her question. What I can say about this

is…. E-Comm has been working on this. They have been working with the

individual municipalities on this. They have a plan in place in terms of

how it will be implemented. That’s what they have let us

know.

The expectation is that they will be able to meet the mandated

deadline of March 4, 2025.

E. Sturko: B.C. still has lots of locations where people have to use a

ten-digit phone number to call for emergency services. Are there any

plans to upgrade 911 services in locations that currently don’t have

access to 911?

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’ll say this to the member. There are areas of the province that

do not — she is correct — have 911 service today. That’s a separate

effort, if you like, from what we’re talking about today, which is for

those areas served by 911.

The issue that she’s talking about, those areas that aren’t

connected…. The province’s connectivity initiatives and work that has

been underway are dealing with those areas that don’t have cell service

at the current time.

This just deals with those that do, and the upgrades that are

required for those communities that are served by 911.

E. Sturko: For those communities that don’t yet have that 911 service, do

they fall under that CRTC regulation? Is that a requirement that’s

provincial, that they should? Is it a requirement that they, too, meet

that 2025 next gen 911 deadline?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. No, this only covers those

communities served by 911. It does not cover those that

aren’t.

E. Sturko: What I’ve learned about the next gen 911 is it’s going to be

awesome, with real-time video, things that can really help people here,

not only with crimes but with health emergencies. I think it’s going to

be great. It’s disappointing to know that not everybody is going to have

access to it, particularly in some of our more remote

locations.

Has the government set any timeline or made any budgetary

considerations to have these 911 services in those remote areas

upgraded?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The areas that the member is talking about are covered by our

connectivity work and program, which aims to have all communities not

connected to high-speed Internet connected by 2027. Then, once they are

able to get 911, it would automatically be the next gen 911 service that

they would be accessing.

E. Sturko: Will key highways be connected to high-speed Internet? Will people

be able to, from highways and other travelling locations, connect to

911?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. Yes, that is part of

government’s plan. That work is also being done in a number of other

ministries.

E. Sturko: Are there currently communities that are connected to the analog

911 system that do not have high-speed Internet? Will there be

implications for them? Is there going to be a delay in the rollout of

these next gen services to them?

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: If you have 911 service today, you will have 911 service under the

new next gen 911. Telus has committed to making sure that’s the

case.

E. Sturko: When I went through the CRTC decision, it spoke about having

analog and digital systems running parallel to ensure that there are no

hiccups, I guess, with the system and to make sure that everything goes

smoothly with the rollout.

I’m wondering if there’s going to be a time in our province when

we end up having those parallel systems and if there’s sort of a

timeline or anything you can share with me about the decommissioning of

the analog system.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, they are parallel systems. Then the CRTC will be the one that

decides when one of the systems, the old one, is

discontinued.

E. Sturko: Speaking again about the more remote communities, the ones that

don’t currently have the 911 system and are waiting for more upgrades

for connectivity, a lot of these places have very small tax bases. Will

there be future funding, then, similar to what we have, this $150

million helping E-Comm and UBCM? Are they going to have to fork over

their own cash? Or has there been consideration of a plan to help these

as well?

Hon. M. Farnworth: That is down the road. That is in the future, so those would be

decisions that a future government would have to make. I just think, as

a general principle, you do want to treat people fairly.

E. Sturko: What was the process that you used to determine the allocation of

these amounts, the $60 million and $90 million?

Hon. M. Farnworth: It would be a combination of two things. One, E-Comm coming to us

with the estimates, and then second, the consultation with

UBCM.

E. Sturko: In a previous answer, you had mentioned that, potentially, there

are efficiencies that will come with this upgraded system. I’m

wondering: will there be any vacancies created? Will there be any other

benefits, in terms of the stress and pressures that the human resources

in E-Comm and other 911s are feeling, as a result of this

rollout?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I’ll just say this. I can’t

speak to the day-to-day operations, in an E-Comm and in the dispatch

room.

What I do know, and I think the member would agree, is that

whenever there is an upgrade to a system that allows you to do a lot

more than you have been able to do previously, knowing that you’re

dealing with potentially life-and-death situations, you’re able to give

better information, more timely information, to first responders, and to

know, then, what they’re going into.

[11:40 a.m.]

I think that helps everybody, and I think that makes for…. I don’t

want to say…. Well, yeah, better job satisfaction, but also, it probably

does reduce stress, knowing that you’re doing everything that you can to

assist someone at a time of crisis. I think that’s what I would say in

answer to your question.

E. Sturko: In the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act, one of the

suggestions had been an additional option for 911, to have an option for

mental health. Will the new next gen 911…? Is there any kind of thought,

particularly when we’re talking about this amount of money in this

budget, that will allow for the implementation of that

recommendation?

Hon. M. Farnworth: No, this money is strictly for the implementation of next gen 911

and the hardware, the training and that. But the issue the member speaks

to is one that is very much, I would say, alive within government. It

does involve a number of ministries on a number of the recommendations

in the report that the member is referring to. That’s sort of in a

separate file, but it is one that we’re very much aware of.

E. Sturko: How many municipalities are going to be partaking in this $60

million?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. Literally all municipalities

are able to get it, but I will also check for the member, and we’ll get

back to her in terms of if there are any that aren’t. We’ll let her

know.

E. Sturko: Minister, thank you for that.

So all the municipalities — or assumed to be, at this point, all

the municipalities — are receiving a portion of the $60 million. How is

the division of that municipal funding determined?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. It will be similar to how

E-Comm is funded now. It’s based on a formula that involves population

and number of calls, for example. It’ll be a very similar approach to

that.

E. Sturko: Since 2017’s CRTC ruling made it that everybody in Canada needs to

upgrade to next gen 911…. I think anyone who knows about the program

knows it’s going to really make a difference for Canada’s 911

system.

But when we look across Canada, we can see that, in fact, most

other provinces are way ahead of where we are here in B.C. Can you speak

at all to, in terms of the rollout of our next gen 911, why our province

seems to be so far behind?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for her question. I’d make this observation:

that we’re not all starting from point zero. Different provinces have

different approaches in terms of how their systems are set up — and at

different stages.

What’s important is: are we going to meet the timeline that’s

required by the CRTC? And the answer to that is yes. In this province,

it’s very much a local government responsibility. They have been working

very hard to make sure that they can meet that target line.

One of the crucial pieces, obviously, is the cost of putting in

the implementation. That’s where the province has stepped up and said:

“Yeah, we understand, and we’ll provide that funding for you to be able

to do that.” That’s exactly what’s taking place. It’s: “There’s the

deadline. We’ll meet the deadline.” The province will meet the deadline.

Local governments will meet the deadline. That’s what needs to

happen.

E. Sturko: How was the decision made to include this next generation 911 into

supplementary estimates, instead of…? Knowing that this has been on the

go since 2017, having had it identified by municipalities and regional

districts that this was a significant cost to them, why is this a

supplement and hasn’t been included in previous budgets?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I’ll just say this. This has

been an ongoing project since the mandate from the CRTC. As I said,

local government has been working very hard. E-Comm has been working

very hard. They came just over a year ago to let us know that they

actually had a plan and that this is what it was going to

cost.

[11:50 a.m.]

Subsequent to that, the province finds itself in a position where

we’re able to look at a way of funding this that’s just a straight block

grant, which is an easy way to deliver. So the decision is made to do

that. Because that’s outside of the initial budget tabled last year, it

would be captured by what’s called the supplemental estimates process,

which is what we are doing right now.

They’re extremely happy that they’re getting the funding and that

we will meet the timeline of March 4, 2025. I think that’s going to be

good for the province and the people.

E. Sturko: How does the inclusion of the new funding in the supplementary

estimates impact the ministry’s overall budget?

Hon. M. Farnworth: It doesn’t impact the budget. It is a straight transfer to E-Comm

and to UBCM.

E. Sturko: Does the government have any concerns and a strategy to increase

awareness of the vital role of 911 operators to provide assistance and

to ensure, actually, that we have adequate human resources available for

the rollout?

Hon. M. Farnworth: This funding is for the technology, the hardware and the software.

But I’m aware that E-comm does have a plan in place for that

implementation, in terms of staff. As I said earlier too, within the $60

million, part of that $60 million is to raise awareness, is to let

people know about what is happening. That will be within the

province.

I fully expect, as well, that you’ll see a national approach,

because this is a big deal right across the country. So I think there

will be a fair amount of public awareness when the implementation takes

place, when we hit that 2025 date.

E. Sturko: You have your supplemental funding, which is covering, of course,

the technological rollout, some training that’ll be delivered through

the UBCM, municipalities and regional districts. Is there any funding

within the budget for 911?

We’re talking about significant changes to the way that people

interact with emergency services in British Columbia, and although it’s

coming in 2025 — that’s when the deadline is — as different types of

dispatch centres make this change, the public will need to be educated

on what services are actually being provided.

Is there anything in the budget beyond this supplement — which,

you stated, does not cover that kind of public education — that will

help ensure that British Columbians know how to interact with their

brand-new 911 system?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I’ll make two

points.

First, the question is actually about future budgets down the

road.

That being said, as I’ve said in some of the answers to the

questions that you’ve asked, the $60 million that goes to UBCM goes out

the door by the 31st of March. That, then, is directly to UBCM. Within

that funding are moneys for education, for raising awareness, for

communicating those changes that are taking place.

With that, hon. Chair, noting the hour, I ask that the committee

rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:55 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1 p.m.

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES:

MINISTRY OF

INDIGENOUS

RELATIONS AND RECONCILIATION

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); F. Donnelly in

the chair.

The committee met at 11:04 a.m.

The Chair: Good morning, everyone. I call Committee of Supply,

Section A,

to order.

We’re meeting today to continue the discussion on the

supplementary estimates of the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and

Reconciliation.

On Vote 34(S): treaty and other agreements funding, $75,000,000

(continued) .

[11:05 a.m.]

M. Lee: I appreciate that, with the time we have remaining, we can pick up

the discussion from yesterday.

The minister, just before we adjourned the committee review, made

a response, which I’d like to respond to, relating to the Northern First

Nations Alliance and their proposal for a detox and wellness centre,

including a facility in Terrace.

Just to clarify, my focus on the Tahltan was…. As the minister

points out, currently the alliance membership includes four First

Nations — the Gitxsan, Haisla, Nisga’a and Tsimshian — representing nine

Indigenous communities. We talked in brief about those communities in

the northwest of B.C. that are involved in terms of the area of coverage

for these nations.

If I had the opportunity yesterday…. I’ll say it now. I will point

out that the feasibility study, which the minister does have a copy of,

does include the centre’s greater…. This is the health and wellness

detox centre to be located in Terrace. It does have a greater scope to

it in terms of nations. In particular, it refers to ensuring…. It will

reinforce the cultural protocols of the Tsimshian, Nisga’a, Haisla,

Gitxsan-Wet’suwet’en, Haida and Tahltan.

As I understand it from the health and wellness committee of the

Northern First Nations Alliance, they have had discussions with the

Tahltan Nation, and they’re showing significant interest in being

involved. In fact, there have been ongoing discussions, as well, with

the Kaska and the Taku River Tlingit, the other two members of the

3Nations Society, which is the subject matter of the fifth agreement

that we’re reviewing here. That is the 3Nations B.C. regional

partnership agreement.

I believe that the reason for that, of course, for the other

involvements, is the greater understanding of the need in the northwest,

which is connected to all of these nations. So we do have an

opportunity, where the nations are coming together, to focus on the need

for a health and wellness and a detox centre here, to be located in

Terrace, which is accessible to all the northern communities.

Working in partnership with the municipalities, Northern Health

and the FNHA…. As the minister did cite, FNHA, the First Nations Health

Authority, did provide the funding, $100,000, to fund the feasibility

study, copies of which have been provided to the Premier and the

Minister of Mental Health and Addictions as well.

I wanted to just take this opportunity, though, before I ask the

minister to respond to that clarification in terms of the involvement of

the other nations, to read into the record….

I did receive a communication from the co-chair of the health and

wellness committee, Linda Morven. She sent a personal note. I just

think, under the circumstances, recognizing the focus that we all have

in this chamber on the importance of mental wellness and addiction

recovery….

She says:

“I strongly believe that we need to stress the significance of the

need for the detox and wellness centre in northern B.C.”

She speaks from her personal experience.

“We lost one of our granddaughters in December from an overdose and

lost another granddaughter this month from an overdose. Both were in

their early 20s, and both of them wanted to live and get well. One of

them left two children.”

She sent me photos of the children, who are very cute.

“Both strived to get well and couldn’t begin due to the lack of

resources in northern B.C., in our area. They waited, like many of our

loved ones who waited, and time definitely was not on their

side.

“Yes, this is personal for me. It’s personal for all of us and our

families and communities who have lost loved ones due to addictions. We

are losing many family members. The system is failing us. We can’t lose

another family member to this crisis.

“I am so scared for another one of our granddaughters, who is

addicted to heroin and has been for a number of years. The good news is

that she took it upon herself to get clean and has been for over four

months. She detoxed on her own. She lives in Terrace, B.C., which is

where this regional centre is to be located, but won’t go to treatment

as she doesn’t want to leave her daughter. I’m so proud of her, but I’m

also so scared for her. She needs treatment.

“We need detox and treatment in our area. How many more of our loved

ones are going to lose their lives before our province helps us? We’re

their voice, and we need this heard and supported by B.C.

“Thank you again. I hope and pray our project is funded.”

[11:10 a.m.]

This project is the proposal by the Northern First Nations

Alliance for this detox and wellness centre in northwest B.C.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for allowing me the opportunity to read

that. I do think her ending statement is important. When we talk about

hearing voices from First Nations leaders, that’s what we pay respect to

in this House. Thank you for giving me that opportunity to read it to

the House.

I know the minister understands the need. I know that. I know he

recognizes the importance of this feasibility study. He commented on

that yesterday.

Let me just stop there. I’ll give the minister an opportunity to

respond. Then I do have a follow-up question relating to how this fits

with the 3Nations-B.C. regional partnership agreement.

Hon. M. Rankin: Before I begin, I’d like to acknowledge again that we are

conducting this work on the territory of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking peoples,

the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations.

I just want to respond, if I may, to the member for his advocacy

and his compassion for what Linda Morven shared with him and now through

to the Legislature through his reading into the record of the tragedy of

the loss of her two grandchildren. It’s unimaginable. We, obviously,

empathize on this side of the House, as I know the member does, as well,

with that terrible loss.

We also are pleased that the member pointed out that there are

discussions underway with the Tahltan, who aren’t part of the existing….

The Tahltan Nation…. Indeed, he mentioned the Taku River Tlingit, I

believe, and the Kaska interests.

I am pleased to have had an opportunity to review the feasibility

study last night. It, indeed, is an extraordinarily powerful piece of

work, well regarded by those who look at these studies, I’m told. I’m

pleased that the First Nations Health Authority saw fit to provide

funding to create such a powerful document, such a thoughtful and

thorough document.

Of course, I’ll be working with my colleagues in other ministries

and, indeed, with the Indigenous Services Canada department to see

whether some of the things that are sought and so urgently needed can be

created.

I think I’ll leave it at that at this point. I believe the member

has a subsequent question.

[11:15 a.m.]

M. Lee: I appreciate the minister’s response and his care and attention to

look at the feasibility study again. I agree with him. The work that was

done to put that together by Manon Joice and others with the health and

wellness committee, members of which I read into the record yesterday,

with Linda…. It is remarkable to try and pull all these aspects

together.

In the context of the challenge, of course…. And the minister

commented on that. We are talking about the continued need to support

remote Indigenous communities, some of whom have greater opportunities,

let’s say, to move forward with economic reconciliation. But some of

them do not.

I think the nations, working together, can, hopefully, support

each other to increase the access to much-needed mental health and

addiction recovery-type facilities like the ones proposed in

Terrace.

My question is back to this fifth agreement that we’re looking at.

I do appreciate the minister’s second part of his response, in terms of

potential next steps as to the discussions that he is willing, let’s

say, to take up with his colleagues and to look to his federal

counterparts, as well, for this important project, recognizing that

under this supplemental estimates process, the accelerated payment under

this fifth agreement, the $10.99 million, is being accelerated from four

years to this year, in effect.

My point, which I was making yesterday…. I asked the minister to

consider this a little further in response.

We have a situation where this government has determined that

there is a surplus. It has made certain decisions, with the minister’s

input and his team, to put $75 million towards accelerated payments

under six agreements.

This fifth agreement, though, as I was trying to work through

yesterday with the minister, includes references to supporting wellness

for the communities and emerging social priorities. I believe, when I

look at this agreement, that the important work that the three nations

are doing — the Tahltan, the Kaska and the Taku River Tlingit…. They are

all moving in the same direction.

I appreciate that there are other nations and other communities

and municipalities, Terrace itself…. We had the mayor of Terrace here

last week, the new mayor, talking about the importance of the resource

benefits alliance, as well, the RBA arrangement.

There’s lots of need, of course. As we look at the First Nations

and the role that they play in leading in areas, there’s a certain

amount of coordination that is necessary here.

In the face of the fact that the government did receive this

feasibility study back in November, or earlier, and did write back to

this health and wellness committee about going to the First Nations

Health Authority….

Does the minister not see a path here, for this proposal, to work

together with these nations, as it looks further to its own strategic

path, which is being reported on, recognizing the agreement was only

entered into — and I’m sure there was work leading into it — in

September of 2022? I’m suggesting that there are combined efforts going

in the same direction, an area of great need and an emerging social

priority, to say the least.

Linda’s words are important. It’s more than emerging. We all know

this. It’s generational, especially with Indigenous peoples and their

children, their daughters, their granddaughters, as Linda

underscored.

My question and suggestion to the minister. Is there not a path,

under this agreement, for the Northern First Nations Alliance to come

together with these three First Nations, under their partnership

regional agreement, to find a path and, perhaps…? What I’m, obviously,

looking at is access to some, if not a good portion, of that funding

that this government is making available, on an accelerated basis, to

meet a need that is clearly more than emerging.

[11:20 a.m.]

Hon. M. Rankin: I want to just start by agreeing with the member about the power

of nations coming together. That is what he refers to in the context of

the Northern First Nations Alliance. Also, of course, the 3Nations

agreement that we’re talking about is the product of three nations — the

Tahltan, Kaska, Taku River Tlingit — coming together, and it’s that

which we really welcome and support. Therefore, under the agreement

that’s at issue, there is, as I mentioned yesterday, a strategic

pathways workplan in which the nations will be determining their

priorities.

I’m sure that these discussions are underway, and the

opportunities will be there to assess and discuss many of these

projects, perhaps including the one that’s before us. It’s for the

3Nations, in application of that workplan, where resolution of this

issue may occur. I wouldn’t want to be seen as suggesting that it is for

us to do. This is, as it says in the very title of the agreement, a

regional partnership agreement with the 3Nations and the province of

British Columbia.

M. Lee: I appreciate the time that the minister has taken in this process

to address this particular project. It’s an important one, but it’s only

one important project in the province, of course, to some

nations.

I wanted to come back, though. Yesterday we were talking at length

about the process in terms of the determination of the allocation of a

surplus by this government to these particular nations themselves. I

wanted to talk through some of those points as to how this came

together.

So let me ask, first: in terms of these six accelerated payments

under these six agreements, were any of these accelerated payments any

of the six? In which case, which ones were reviewed or approved by

Treasury Board?

Hon. M. Rankin: I can confirm for the member that, indeed, all six of the

agreements at issue were the subject of Treasury Board

approval.

[11:25 a.m.]

M. Lee: I appreciate the response. I’m referring to the decision to

accelerate the payments, which is a new $75 million expenditure under

each of the six agreements in total. That’s what I’m referring to: the

accelerated payments themselves, not just the agreements reviewed and

approved by Treasury Board.

Hon. M. Rankin: Of course we had extensive discussion of this very question

yesterday, and I’ll try to do my best to say what I said yesterday,

perhaps in different terms.

This ministry and others were asked to identify items for

supplementary estimates based on government priorities. The Premier made

it clear that the government would seek to use the 2022-2023 revenue

improvement to help British Columbians as opportunities became

available. Therefore this ministry identified, as I indicated yesterday,

candidates where that could be done, namely the accelerated payments

under existing agreements, and that was the process that was

followed.

I’ll defer the question about the supplementary supply process to

the Minister of Finance.

[11:30 a.m.]

M. Lee: When I hear that response from the minister, and in the background

of the previous responses he gave yesterday on similar questions, I

didn’t hear an answer directly back about the Treasury Board approval

process, but I’ll take that as not addressing it. Presumably the

minister would say: “Well, take it up with the Minister of Finance.” So

we’ll just park that. I’m sure my colleague, the shadow minister for

Finance, will have that opportunity, maybe even as early as his review

on other matters this afternoon.

priorities. But of course, as we know, under UNDRIP and the relationship

that we continue to try and forge and move forward in this province

around reconciliation, we need to hear from First Nations as well,

nation to nation. The nation-to-nation priorities that are expressed

under the overall framework, including the DRIPA action plan and the

other alternatives and other priorities, let’s say, that we collectively

need to have in this province.

With that in mind, and with that view in mind, I’d like to ask the

minister: were there other priorities of this ministry that were

considered as alternatives to accelerated payments under six existing

agreements? What I’m referring to is this.

The minister did take us through the agreement process yesterday

and how these six agreements fit within the criteria that the minister

spelled out. Just stepping back from that. When the Minister of Finance

and the Premier came to this ministry to ask for those priorities to be

reflected in the expenditure of a surplus, were there other ministry

priorities, recognizing what I said about First Nations, considered as

an alternative to accelerating payments to select chosen First

Nations?

Hon. M. Rankin: I can answer the member as follows. This of course is the limited

scope of the supplementary estimates process that’s before us. And in

that narrow compass, we concluded that the priorities for these nations

reflected in these agreements was where this ministry wished to provide

the limited funding available, the circumscribed process before us in

supplementary estimates.

[11:35 a.m.]

I put it in that context because of course we will have ample

opportunity through the main estimates process coming up later this year

to go through the entire array of priorities and serious issues that

face our ministry at any given time as we work toward reconciliation, on

so many fronts, with the 203 First Nations in our province and, of

course, Métis Nation B.C. as well. I think I’d frame the answer in that

way.

M. Lee: I’m conscious that we’re getting close here in terms of the

timing, but let me just say this. To be clear, certainly as members of

this House and members of the official opposition, all members respect

the nations who are entered into these agreements. We talked yesterday

about the work that was done in the previous B.C. Liberal government

with the Cheslatta Carrier Nation, for example. That’s one of the six

agreements. We obviously recognize and respect the importance of that

work.

But I have to say that in successive rounds of questioning through

yesterday and this morning, there is a real lack of clarity and

transparency as to the government’s process. We have what’s remarkable —

that the Minister of Finance would come to this minister and say, with

no limits, no allocation: “What do you want to spend money on?” That

does invite a question as to all the other pressing priorities of

government, nation to nation, with the nations in our

province.

It’s been three and a half years since UNDRIP was adopted. The

member for Saanich North and the Islands yesterday highlighted…. There

are many important leaders in our province. They all are. But Khelsilem,

of the Squamish First Nation, in talking publicly in response to this

budget, talking about the importance of capacity funding under

section 3

of the DRIPA act, the overload that government is presenting to

nations…. That is clearly a priority of government, if not of the

nations themselves.

I talked about the Northern First Nations Alliance, and the

minister has responded in a good way, in the way he is able to in the

confines of supplementary estimates, as he points out. I understand

that. But there are clearly other priorities that this government could

have, should have — maybe they did — considered and

dismissed.

They came to six agreements, which are obligated by this

government, this province. They’re legal agreements that have funding

requirements to them, and this government has decided to accelerate the

payments. I appreciate, again, for example, that in the case of the

Cheslatta Carrier Nation, it’s long overdue, long overdue through

successive governments. I understand that.

But we have choices that this government is making, and I’m not

getting any clarity from this minister or this government as to the

manner in which they made these choices. This causes me a lot of

concern. When we talk about ensuring that there are results and outcomes

for how government expends taxpayer dollars, when we talk about the

reporting and accountability measures that are set out in this fifth

agreement, measures that have not yet been tested….

I appreciate, again, the reputation that the minister cited of the

three chiefs, and I have respect for them as well, certainly. But we

haven’t seen anything come back in terms of the report. In round

numbers, $5 million has gone out to that 3Nations society agreement. Now

we’re talking about another $10.9 million going out.

We’ve had no reporting, as far as I can determine, accounting and

coming back. So when I ask questions about “What’s the identification of

emerging priorities under that important work?” it’s not yet there. Yet

the government is choosing to accelerate four years of payments in one

year, not even getting a progress report back because it’s not called

for in the agreement yet.

We haven’t gone through the full fiscal year — I understand that —

by the terms of the agreement. But surely this government would ask for

a report prior to spending more dollars. We know the need is so great

for Indigenous nations and First Nations, including Métis Nation

B.C.

[11:40 a.m.]

I have real difficulty with this process, what’s been presented.

We were presented six agreements without any notice. We did have some

support in getting copies of these agreements. We are not having the

time to turn to the sixth agreement, the Gitanyow agreement, because

it’s confidential. I understand that in the minister’s response

yesterday, but it’s very difficult to talk about acceleration of payment

terms under an agreement that I have not seen, that this government has

not been in position to share.

Even when we’re talking about the Cheslatta Carrier Nation, when

the minister yesterday turned me to the website, A to Z…. There are many

agreements, of course, under “C” for Cheslatta Carrier. The third

agreement, that had the payment obligations, wasn’t even on the website,

meaning we were going around a bit, let’s just say, in fairness to me

and the role that I can play, in terms of: how can I properly address

the payment obligations that this government has under that agreement,

that has been accelerated under the supplemental estimates?

I’m very concerned as to the message that this government is

sending through this minister to the other nations. So let me ask this

minister, who I respect: what is the message to the other First Nations

that were not included in the accelerated payments under these six

agreements? What is the message that this minister and this government

expects them to be receiving from this supplemental estimates

submission?

Secondly, were any First Nations invited to be considered? When

this government determined that there was a surplus, did they invite any

First Nations to submit and request funding?

We know there was a feasibility study on the table of this

government for the Northern First Nations Alliance, but I know there are

so many other worthwhile and meaningful and important projects, apart

from capacity funding. We know there’s a great challenge out there, so

were there not any other First Nations, AFN-BC…?

First Nations leadership summit — I was up there ten days ago. The

Minister for Water, Land and Resource Stewardship spoke at that

conference in person, talked about the challenges of ensuring consulting

about the Emergency Program Act that’s coming forward and the Mineral

Tenure Act review. These are important considerations of legislation

that we’re hearing are coming from this government and we have not yet

seen. There are certainly needs to support First Nations as they address

and consider those important pieces of land-based legislation, which is

the point that the minister made — the Minister for Water, Land and

Resource Stewardship.

Again to the minister: what message is this minister and this

government sending to those other First Nations on these important

projects and important needs for funding for surplus, if this is what

the government wants to call it, that it’s making available? Why did

they choose these particular nations to do this, political or otherwise?

Were other nations invited to submit for access to the surplus

funding?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. M. Rankin: I appreciate the question from my colleague. I have enormous

respect for the member. We endeavoured, over four hours yesterday and

today, to draw the line, as we must, between the supplementary estimates

process, which is before us, and, of course, the opportunity that the

member will have to talk about the general budget of our ministry. If

the $75 million at issue today were to be approved by the Legislature,

our budget would be over $750 million.

Mr. Chair, I’m sure you would realize the number of priorities

facing a minister of Indigenous relations and reconciliation in the 21st

century. It’s just an enormous list. The member has listed two or three

priorities that he believes are important. I would agree with those

priorities, but there are so many more.

It was our process…. The member may not like the process. I’ve

tried my best to articulate it on at least three occasions, describing

how the Minister of Finance and our ministry and all ministries worked

together to deal with an unprecedented surplus situation. We were asked

to iden­tify things that we thought, in the circumscribed time

frame available, could make a real difference to nations.

We chose the priorities. A choice was indeed made. We’ve applied

the criteria — which I can read again into the record; I think criteria

that the member does not seem to quarrel with — that would allow us to

make progress in areas where First Nations have agreements underway and,

by advancing the funding, could make even better progress, more

accelerated progress. That’s what we’re doing.

Now, specifically in the context of the 3Nations agreement, I

explained to the member and I think he acknowledges that that was signed

in September of last year. It would be unreasonable to think we would

have…. I think he used the term “progress reports,” at this

point.

We are now in March. We haven’t had a progress report to date. We

believe, however, based on the leadership of the Chiefs that I named

yesterday and the work that we’re doing on the ground, that our

relationship will allow the important priorities that the 3Nations

regional partnership agreement is designed to address…. Enormous

progress will be made going forward. That is why we were comfortable

applying that of one of the six before us today.

I’m happy to speak again about each and every one of those

agreements. I cannot do any more than repeat what I’ve said earlier

about the nature, the sort of unusual process that we’re in today,

dealing with supplementary estimates, as distinct from the main

estimates process, in which we can address all the priorities and many

more that the member has addressed.

The Chair: Minister, I’ll ask you to move the motion.

Hon. M. Rankin: I move the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit

again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:49 a.m.

Copyright © 2023 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

The Official Report of Debates (Hansard) and webcasts of

chamber proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca .

For inquiries contact:

Hansard Services

612 Government Street

Victoria, BC V8V 1X4

Telephone: 250-387-3681

Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca

Published by Hansard Services under the authority

of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.